Rush Limbaugh’s NFL Gambit; What’s Really Going On?

Posted in US Politics, White Supremacy with tags , , , on October 17, 2009 by marcg

rush-kkkThere has been a lot of ink, most of it male and liberal and white, about Rush Limbaugh’s failed attempt at becoming a National Football League franchise owner. Though I agree with many of the commentaries and critiques I think they are missing the point in all of this. Like this piece by Dave Zirin breaking down what he calls Limbaugh’s ‘defeat’ at the hands of Limbaugh’s “compadres on the right”. True, but I smell a rat. While I don’t agree with Limbaugh and the point of view he advocates, it doesn’t sound as if he is an unintelligent man. Despicable? Yes. But he’s not stupid. He had to know this NFL franchise ownership thing wouldn’t go. He didn’t actually lose any money in this scheme and his ratings will go up at least temporarily from it for sure. So what is really going on here?

Rush Limbaugh knew this deal would fall through, as it has. And this scheme fits right in perfectly with the way the ruling class handles the right wing populace of the United States. Constant victimization by liberals/nonwhites/feminists, you get the picture. Limbaugh knew this would be shot down and then he would turn around and… Well, he doesn’t have to actually say anything much. The right wing impulse to search for an angle of victimization runs deep enough that the script already runs inside their heads. This kind of stirring up of the right wing base is what the endless so-called fight to end abortion is all about, the ten commandments in public buildings and things like that. Fights that will last forever and keep alive the idea of being oppressed and victimized by various groups even as the right wing consolidates more and more national and international power. Forever a victim.

I see this as a particularly dangerous moment. Perhaps not but it does seem to signal a shift in the scale of gimmicks and tactics employed by the right wing in stirring up their people. Sports is a very large stage for sociopolitical messaging. And the NFL is the largest of the Big 3 pro sports messaging vehicles. I guess we will see how this continues to unfold but it doesn’t add up to me that this was a misstep by Limbaugh, that he didn’t predict the pushback and striking down of this effort. These things were certainties.

White supremacy, always the prime political mover in this country, has been on the upswing in the United States since the candidacy of Barack Hussein Obama gained momentum. It continues to arc upwards and this Limbaugh stunt just appears to be another episode in what may turn out to be a particularly sordid, and maybe violent, chapter in this country’s white supremacist history.

Does Mary Norwood Care About Black People?

Posted in Atlanta Politics with tags , , , , on October 14, 2009 by marcg

MARTA, Atlanta’s public transportation system providing about 400,000 rider a day is in the deepest financial crisis in its 40 year history. On Saturday August 15, 2009 service cuts went into effect reflecting MARTA’s deepening fiscal crisis and on Thursday October 1, 2009 a fare increase went into effect. The service cuts and fare increase have affected hundreds of thousands of Atlantans but if you were watching the mayoral debate that aired yesterday, October 13, 2009 you would not have known it.

Do you know how much MARTA costs? I know how much it costs. I live in Atlanta and use the service everyday. Let’s assume you, like me, know how much a bus ride costs in Atlanta. Mary Norwood does not know how much a MARTA bus fare costs.

Doesn't ride MARTA or read about it apparently

Doesn't ride MARTA or read about it apparently

There is a difference between me and you and Mary Norwood not knowing this bit of information. A big one. There is an election coming up soon here in Atlanta. In 20 days, in fact. And according to polls, if that election were today, of us three, the one of us that doesn’t know how much it costs for transit-dependent Atlantans to catch a bus would be the mayor of Atlanta. MARTA stands for Metro Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority. It also known as ‘moving Africans rapidly through Atlanta’ due to the highly skewed racial demographic of the ridership.

What is going on inside Mary Norwood’s campaign for mayor? What is going on inside Mary Norwood’s head? How is it possible that mayoral candidate could be ignorant about such an important piece of policy at such a critical time for MARTA and for its cash-strapped, mostly Black ridership?

I view this foot in mouth incident as a sneak-peek into what a Norwood administration might be like for people like myself who rely on something like MARTA. She doesn’t care and doesn’t seem to see it as a problem not caring. Every other candidate attempted to answer the question of the cost of a MARTA fare. Norwood simply said she didn’t know, making it appear that she doesn’t even care that she doesn’t know. It also appears that she and/or her campaign don’t think it matters much that she doesn’t know. All of these things are worrisome to me and they should be worrisome for Norwood. That they don’t seem to be is even more worrisome for me.

Many people have expressed concern about this majority Black city, with its sordid history and present-day white racism problems, having a white mayor. This clear and present expression of either dullness, disdain or disinterest does nothing to allay the concern and much to validate it. Shame on you, Mary.

Obama Shuts Down Pittsburgh For His Rich Friends

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , on September 8, 2009 by marcg

If China were banning train service into one of its cities in preparation for the G20 in order to limit public speech and dissent what would the US press say? The same racist and xenophobic garbage they always come up with in relation to China. Of course nothing when Obama does it? Obamamaniacs will say Obama didn’t do it, Amtrak did it. Or the mayor of Pittsburgh. Or the governor or whatever. Orders like this come from the top. Perhaps as ‘suggestions’.

http://www.examiner.com/a-2168305~Amtrak_suspending_Pittsburgh_service_for_G_20.html

Whitney’s Failed Comeback

Posted in bias with tags , , , on September 2, 2009 by marcg

Drag em through the mud. Predictably, the white dominated press presents the worst possible spin on Whitney Houston’s so-called comeback. I liked Whitney back in the late 80s and 90s. I’ve got no particular love for her lavish lifestyle and the drug use and associated drama. But I have no special love for anyone that engages in that lifestyle. However, the white press seems to miss opportunities to drag white drug celebs through the mud in the same way. It’s probably just my paranoia though….

<object width=”420″ height=”356″><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.comcast.net/ve/1.0/1236938260/420/356/”></param><param name=”wmode” value=”transparent”></param><param name=”allowScriptAccess” value=”always”></param><param name=”allowfullscreen” value=”true”></param><embed src=”http://www.comcast.net/ve/1.0/1236938260/420/356/&#8221; allowScriptAccess=”always” allowfullscreen=”true” width=”420″ height=”356″ type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” wmode=”transparent” pluginspage=”http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer”></embed></object&gt;

Republican Healthcare Disruptions Working

Posted in Healthcare, US Politics with tags , , , , , , , on August 10, 2009 by marcg

CNN and the entire network of corporate news outfits are all talking about the Republican effort to disrupt the so-called healthcare town hall meetings. There is a lot not understood about this effort.

First off, this isn’t about Obama’s plan. This is all about single payer healthcare and finding ways to keep it off the table. The first strategy was to simply ignore those in favor of single payer and in left opposition to Obama’public option plan. But the single payer activists made enough noise and managed to get enough support in the House of Representatives that the ignorning tactic wasn’t going to work. Now we are looking at the second act of a plan designed to keep single payer off the menu.

The US population want’s healthcare reform. When polled, one discovers, unsurprisingly, that we also want single payer healthcare reform. Therefore the choice has to be removed from the table where it has been presented and hidden from the view of those who don’t yet know about it. To achieve this, we are seeing a tactic we should get used to: loud racist attack from the right wing, followed by tenacious defensive response from the liberals. All accompanied by around the clock TV/radio/internet coverage. All working to keep the attention of viewers/listeners/readers focused on the ‘main event’ and keeping activists feeling that there duty is to battle racist conservatives. This is the first time we’ve seen this regarding a major policy initiative since Obama was elected but not the first time this strategy has been deployed. The first instance was the 2008 presidential campaign.

Last year when Obama was backing off all the promises and positions that allowed him to gather speed and momentum as a contender he began getting significant pressure from McKinney voters and former supporters of Dennis Kucinich. When this pressure, like the single payer pressure, became too much to simply ignore, out came the racist canards from first the Clintons then the McCain campaign. The intention was the same in both cases-to decrease support for left pressure and redirect it towards defending against racist attack. This is what we are seeing now with the Republican townhall meeting disruptions CNN is so eager to cover everyday.

White liberals elected Obama because he was better than the Republican alternative. But the selected Obama over Clinton because of their racial insecurities. It is these insecurities that will be exploited to push back against left opposition for the next three and a half years of this administration. If not longer.

The US must find a way to counter this strategy or it will see nothing come of healthcare reform, the Employee Free Choice Act or any legislation we hope to affect progressively.

Kennesaw State University and Corra Harris

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on July 16, 2009 by marcg

Corra Harris was a white supremacist. Read her 1899 letter to the editor of the Independent defending the lynching of Sam Hose and, if nothing else, that is clear. But it isn’t 1899. It’s 2009 and we all know that the Earth rotates around the sun and viruses are real (we can see them under microscopes). But still in 2009 whites don’t think, still don’t think, that the white terrorism and attempted genocide of Black southerners is a big deal. Those who do think what happened was and still is a big deal are called ‘racists’, ‘politically correct’ and other slanders in what should be termed the new 21st century vernacular of white supremacists. This is the terrain upon which the battle over the memory of Corra Harris is being waged.

The story goes that this started when Kennesaw State University was approached and offered this land in 2008 by DeKalb County businessman Jodie Hill. But that story doesn’t really make much sense. Remember, 2008 was the year of the real estate and mortgage industry meltdown. Thus starting with the offer by Hill to KSU is prolly more than a little bit dishonest. It’s difficult to know the real deal because KSU isn’t fessin up on all it knows and what it knows is likely just half the story. There are serious questions that haven’t been answered. And some haven’t even been asked.

  • Hill is attempting to liquidate this asset now-why?
  • Hill is being credited for a three million dollar donation to KSU. How much could Hill have gotten in the private sector for this undeveloped 56 acres in the middle of the subprime meltdown? Three million? Haha.
  • Were all professional and familial conflicts of interest between KSU and Hill disclosed before the deal was done?
  • Does the contract between Hill and KSU stipulate that the Cora Harris landmarks must be maintained by KSU?
  • Is it ethical for an institution serving Black and white students to maintain a memorial for a Jim Crow white supremacist?

These are a few questions that need to have a public forum. And not the public forum administered, faciliated and controlled by the KSU president but a forum with the KSU administration, faculty, staff, students as well as community-at-large present and controlled democratically. A democratic forum would be controlled and faciliated democratically, meaning by students, staff and community members primarily, with administration and faculty playing a minor role in line with their representation.

This hasn’t happened and that is part of the reason key questions haven’t been asked or answered. None of this even begins to deal with the moral and political problems raised by this situation. Problems and issues like this need to be dealt with in order for this land deal to be understood properly but it’s also larger than this piece of land. Whites tend to refer to problems in this realm as ‘racial’ problems. But this doesn’t accurately describe what we’re dealing with. The problem is white supremacy. When we don’t understand or acknowledge that our chances of moving forward narrow considerably.

As we prepare for the opening of the 09-10 academic year, we shouldn’t hope for genuine participatory dialog with all the aforementioned constituencies. It can happen but unfortunately hope won’t do it. We have to organize it. Then and only then will we see real questions asked, real answers provided and finally some light shed on actual machinations of this racist land deal.

Mousavi Probably Didn’t Win

Posted in Iran on June 18, 2009 by marcg

I’m in support of fair elections in Iran. That’s pretty easy to say, I know.

But I’m not particularly for Mousavi or Ahmadinejad.  And I’m slow to believe anonymous articles coming out of Iran claiming the election to be fraudulent. My reasoning here i s that there are lots of international interests in Ahmadinejad being removed from power and anonymous internet traffic denouncing the election results fits right in with what one would expect from US intelligence.

All that said, Ahmadinejad is an authoritarian who isn’t in support of things the majority of Iranians want. Such as the right to vote for the Supreme Leader instead of the holder of that post being dictated to the population. Mousavi doesn’t support this either however.

Another thing that bothers me is the lack of recognition in the Western press of the internal dynamics of Iran. This election is being written about as the people vs the government. This is how US politics is often written about as well and that version of events is often a smokescreen for ruling class fights.

  • What are the dynamics of the Iranian ruling class?
  • What are their interests in this election?

The NYTimes hasn’t made those questions a central point in their analysis and that is worrisome. Instead they have written more about the use of Twitter by wealthy Iranian college students. This kind of perspective skewing yellow journalism raises flags for me.

And finally, I have read that polls indicate only a third of Iranians have internet access. I would assume that this is the upper class layers of the population. It is known that Ahmadinejad has done significant wealth redistribution. This is never popular in countries with significant class divides. Therefore, to see lots of anti-Ahmadinejad information coming out of Iran on the net is predictable and because of the digital divide that exists there, not a good litmus for judging what is actually happening on the ground. Unfortunately, most folks outside Iran depend on the net for information on the situation. And in this case, as in many cases, the net opinions will have a very high class bias and the class realities of this political situation must be honestly taken into account and not simply dismissed as most seem to be doing. Here in the US, liberal political discussion is dominated by the middle and upper-middle class that has easy and frequent internet access. Those liberals are far more conservative than those with less wealth and less access to the discussion. If you were to only watch the US political discussion by way of the internet you would have a very biased and inaccurate view of the political situation here. You would likely not understand the political views of Black, Latin or poor Americans generally because of the way the digital divide acts as an economic censor to so many millions of political voices. As a Black person in the US I understand this dynamic quite intimately and am very wary of the political narrative we are being fed in regards to Iran. I don’t feel that the net saavy student movement in Iran represents the masses of poor people at all. Because it is reported that they are young and using Twitter, the story appeals to naive whites here who like to fetishize nonwhite people who accept the use of technology similar to white populations in the US but it really doesn’t make sense that these Iranians would be the group representative of the popular base in Iran. They are largely college students and business elements with far more resources than it appears most of the population. My point in all of this is that we need to be far more discriminating and discerning about information coming out of Iran and use our common sense (which apparently is all too uncommon in the West).