Ron Paul Campaign Pushes Back Against Former Staffer's Report

I've commented pretty heavily on all of this already, but there's more news out today on the Ron Paul racism controversies.

National Journal reports that the Paul campaign is going ballistic over Eric Dondero's hit piece out today, "Ex-Aide: Ron Paul Foreign Policy is 'Sheer Lunacy': Eric Dondero says Paul is an anti-Israel 9/11 truther."

Dondero's report is at Right Wing News, "Statement from fmr. Ron Paul staffer on Newsletters, Anti-Semitism."

I saw it earlier at Althouse's, where she lasers in on the intensity of Dondero's descriptive language, "Ron Paul is not an anti-Semite, but he is 'most certainly Anti-Israel, and Anti-Israeli in general'." She also calls out Dondero for astonishingly bad writing, and commenter Deb provides this observation: "Dondero sounds a bit clueless too in his assessment of what is/is not anti-Semitic and homophobic." I agree. Because according to the report, Paul is vehemently, viciously anti-Israel --- and pro-Palestinian to boot. And combined with the statements Dondero says Paul made on Nazi Germany --- that the U.S. had no business fighting World War II --- there literally is no other conclusion to make. It's a devastating indictment. Pamela Geller picked up on that last bit big time, "RON PAUL: U.S. SHOULDN'T HAVE FOUGHT HITLER JUST TO SAVE JEWS FROM HOLOCAUST."

And in an epic example of trying to have your cake and eat it too, the New York Times has this, "Paul Disowns Extremists’ Views but Doesn’t Disavow the Support."

There's lots of links at Memeorandum as well.

I won't be surprised by a Herman Cain type meltdown for Ron Paul anytime now. And if it happens, credit bloggers for doing the heavy lifting.

VIDEO: Ron Paul's Keynote Address to the John Birch Society 50th Anniversary Gala

Well, there you go.

Is that strange, or what?

When I was a kid growing up in Orange County, folks attacked my home turf as the stronghold of the "racist" John Birch Society. When it was announced that the Society was a sponsor of the 2010 meeting of CPAC, progressives had a field day bashing conservatives as unreconstructed white supremacists. There's a bad reputation there that's not going away, despite the organization's best efforts to come out from the cold. See the New York Times, "Holding Firm Against Plots by Evildoers."

That's why it's revealing that Congressman Ron Paul decided it was perfectly fine to speak at the organization's 50th anniversary celebration in September. That's not the first time Paul has spoken at the Society's events, and his questionable ties to the group, obviously, haven't had a noticeably negative impact on his political fortunes. Perhaps that will change with Paul still leading in the Iowa polls. Jamie Kirchick focused explicitly on Paul's ties to the Birchers the other day: "Why Don’t Libertarians Care About Ron Paul’s Bigoted Newsletters?" And just out is this devastating indictment of Ron Paul at Bleeding Heart Libertarians, "How Did We Get Here? Or, Why Do 20 Year Old Newsletters Matter So Damn Much?" (via Memeorandum and Reason). The author, Steve Horwitz, speaks of the "Rothbard-Rockwell strategy" of appealing to the "paleo-libertarian" base to build a movement fighting "the collapse of Western civilization at the hands of the blacks, gays, and multiculturalists." And to quote Horwitz at length:

The paleo strategy was a horrific mistake, both strategically and theoretically ... The explicit strategy was abandoned by around the turn of the century, but not after a lot of bad stuff had been written in all kinds of places. There was way more than the Ron Paul newsletters. There was the Rothbard-Rockwell Report, which was another major place publishing these sorts of views. They could also be found in a whole bunch of Mises Institute publications of that era. It was the latter that led me to ask to be taken off the Institute’s mailing list in the early 1990s, calling them “a fascist fist in a libertarian glove.” I have never regretted that decision or that language. What the media has in their hands is only the tip of the iceberg of the really unsavory garbage that the paleo turn produced back then.

Through it all though, Ron Paul was a constant. He kept plugging away, first at the center of the paleo strategy as evidenced by the newsletters. To be clear, I am quite certain he did not write them. There is little doubt that they were written by Rockwell and Rothbard. People I know who were on the inside at the time confirm it and the style matches pretty well to those two and does not match to Ron Paul. Paul knows who wrote them too, but he’s protecting his long-time friend and advisor, unfortunately. And even more sadly, Rockwell doesn’t have the guts to confess and end this whole megillah. So although I don’t think Ron Paul is a racist, like Archie Bunker, he was willing to, metaphorically, toast a marshmallow on the cross others were burning.

Even after the paleo strategy was abandoned, Ron was still there walking the line between “mainstream” libertarianism and the winking appeal to the hard right courted by the paleo strategy. Paul’s continued contact with the fringe groups of Truthers, racists, and the paranoid right are well documented. Even in 2008, he refused to return a campaign contribution of $500 from the white supremacist group Stormfront. You can still go to their site and see their love for Ron Paul in this campaign and you can find a picture of Ron with the owner of Stormfront’s website. Even if Ron had never intentionally courted them, isn’t it a huge problem that they think he is a good candidate? Doesn’t that say something really bad about the way Ron Paul is communicating his message? Doesn’t it suggest that years of the paleo strategy of courting folks like that actually resonated with the worst of the right? Paul also maintained his connection with the Mises Institute, which has itself had numerous connections with all kinds of unsavory folks: more racists, anti-Semites, Holocaust deniers, the whole nine yards. Much of this stuff was ably documented in 2007 and 2008 by the Right Watch blog. Hit that link for more.

Those of us who watched all of this happen over two decades knew it would come back to haunt us and so it has, unfortunately just as Ron Paul and libertarianism are on the cusp of something really amazing. And that only goes to show what a mistake the paleo strategy was: imagine if the newsletters were not an issue and Paul were to win Iowa. Yeah, he might get ignored, but he would not be the easy media target he is now, nor would all of libertarianism pay a potential price. The legions of young people supporting Paul did not come in via the paleo strategy; they came because libertarianism in general is on the rise in all kinds of venues (and yes, the Mises Institute’s post-paleo influence is important here, but it’s hardly the only institution that matters). These young people, for the most part, are surprised by all of this dirty laundry. That, in my view, is the real tragedy: I think libertarianism could have got to this point just as fast, maybe faster, without the toxic baggage of the paleo strategy.

So why deal with this now, when libertarianism is so hot? Because those newsletters are not what libertarianism is and the sooner and louder we make that clear, the better. There are too many young people who don’t understand all of this and who we need to help see the alternative liberal vision of libertarianism – and to understand that “liberal libertarianism” is radical, principled, and humane and not “beltway selling out.” To do that, we need to confront the past and explicitly reject it. That doesn’t necessarily mean rejecting Ron Paul in electoral politics, but it does mean that we cannot pretend the past doesn’t exist and it means that Paul and the others involved need to do the right thing and take explicit responsibility for what they said two decades ago. That has not happened yet. Then we need a complete and utter rejection of the paleo world-view and we need to create a movement that will simply not be attractive to racists, homophobes, anti-Semites etc., by emphasizing, as we have done at this blog, libertarianism’s liberal roots.

Read the whole thing at the link.

That's an admirable essay, and as an ideological initiative it's something that principled libertarians should be proud to embrace. The opposite is something like this, a particularly vile piece of paleo-bullshit propaganda: "Who Leads the Attack On Ron Paul?"

Newt Gingrich Goes After Ron Paul on Newsletters

At New York Times, "With Paul on the Rise in Iowa, Gingrich Takes Aim":

COLUMBIA, S.C. — Newt Gingrich turned his fire on Representative Ron Paul of Texas on Friday, saying that his Republican opponent had to answer for political and investment newsletters that included racist, anti-gay and anti-Israel passages that Mr. Paul has disavowed.

Mr. Gingrich also sharply criticized Mr. Paul for what he said were his isolationist views on foreign policy. The pointed comments suggested a new dynamic in the presidential primary race, with Mr. Paul as a new and enticing target. His fortunes have risen in Iowa, scrambling the field as some polls suggest that Mr. Paul could pull off a victory in the caucuses on Jan. 3. But in recent days, he has come under increasing scrutiny for offensive passages in newsletters that bore his name, although he has denied writing or approving them. 

“These things are really nasty, and he didn’t know about it?” Mr. Gingrich said to reporters after a town-hall-style meeting here.

At the same time, Mr. Gingrich refrained from criticizing Mitt Romney, with whom he has frequently sparred, calling him, at worst, “a Massachusetts moderate.”

Speaking to a large and enthusiastic crowd outside the Blue Marlin restaurant here on a warm and sunny day, Mr. Gingrich mainly framed his candidacy in opposition to President Obama. But he strongly criticized Mr. Paul’s foreign policy positions. Mr. Paul’s criticism of American military involvement overseas is at odds with the views of many Republican voters who may otherwise be attracted to his strong antigovernment message.

“The only person I know who is for a weaker military than Barack Obama is Ron Paul,” Mr. Gingrich said.

“His positions are fundamentally wrong on national security,” he added. “I do not agree with him that America is at fault for 9/11, I do not agree with him that we can ignore an Iranian nuclear weapon, and I do not agree with him that it’s O.K. if Israel disappears.”

A top official with the Paul campaign, Jesse Benton, suggested that Mr. Gingrich’s comments were slanderous and an overreaction to the possibility that Mr. Gingrich might not have collected enough signatures to get on the nominating ballot in Virginia — a matter not yet resolved.

“Today was a bad day for Newt Gingrich,” Mr. Benton said in an e-mail, adding that the former House speaker had “jumped the shark trying to slander Dr. Paul.”

Continue reading.

And notice at the video how Rachel Maddow and Melissa Harris-Perry are using Paul's racist newsletters to smear not only the American right, but American society all together!

Ron Paul won't be the nominee --- indeed, he's probably in a situation akin to Herman Cain's: caught in the headlights upon emerging as the frontrunner, and even if he wins Iowa it's going to be a long primary process and Paul's scrutiny will only intensify. He'll have to answer and answer decisively at some point. But as noted, there's something of a nativist and isolationist trend that animating the primary process. That's something quite different from the small-government conservatism that drove the tea parties in 2009. All this together is extremely fascinating. And how some of these tensions are resolved over the next few months will go a long way towards determining the GOP's chances in defeating the Democrats next November.

Ron Paul Has a Lot of Disqualifiers That Make It Impossible for Him to Be the Next President of the United States

From John Hawkins, at Right Wing News, "Liberalism In 120 Seconds: Ron Paul’s Fans Can’t Have It Both Ways":

Also, from Jamie Kirchik, at The New Republic, "Why Don’t Libertarians Care About Ron Paul’s Bigoted Newsletters?" (via Eric Dondero).

Ron Paul Portrays Himself as Champion of Minorities in Interview on Fox News' Neil Cavuto

He still doesn't address the core issue: Why would Ron Paul permit such inflammatory newsletters go out in his name? Paul says it's ironic he's getting hammered on this, since he's the biggest "civil libertarian" in the race, who backs the rights of minorities against government. That's chutzpah, I'll tell you. And he goes on to blow off the more incendiary charges as perhaps a failure of management. By now most people don't buy that Paul had no clue of these things, and the candidate simply keeps the discussion away from the clearly racist statements by saying that the "race war" stuff was less than 1 percent of what was published in what was basically a "hard money newsletter."

See also New York Times, "Gingrich Criticizes Paul on Newsletters and Foreign Policy."

And Robert Stacy McCain has a limited defense of Paul, seeing the newsletters as fringe fundraising classics of the pre-Internet era, "Classics of the Golden Age of Fringe, Or: Ron Paul Digs the Beatles’ White Album."

EXTRA: Ta-Nehisi Coates has a sick obsession with finding racism in every crack or crevice under the sun, so it's no surprise that the Paul letters have been a bonanza for his blogging. That said, I can't really disagree with this:

Yesteday [sic] Ron Paul claimed on CNN that he'd never read the newsletters that went out in his name. Here is Ron Paul in a 1995 video discussing the very newsletters he claims to never have read.

If you can find away to explain away a hateful newsletter written in someone's own name, it's likely you can find some way to explain this video away too. There's always a path to make yourself right, if that's your intent. Indeed, at this point it probably behooves me to stop arguing.

Ron Paul Walks Out of CNN Interview

You know, Gloria Borger's been in the business a long time, and she's not haranguing the candidate. And she's apologetic as he pulls the microphone off of his lapel. But Paul is very defensive and his answer is too pat considering his status as the Iowa frontrunner.

The CNN report is here, with video in case this one gets pulled: "Ron Paul defensive over past newsletters."

And today's Los Angeles Times made a serious effort to accept Paul's explanation, saying that:

Paul has disavowed the ranting of the newsletter published under his name (just as he did when the subject came up in 2008) and his spokesman says that Paul didn't write it and "disagrees with it totally." That's comforting. Sort of. It helps distance Paul from these lunatic scribblings, but it fails to answer the question of why he allowed them to be published in the first place. He and his admirers complain bitterly when he's ignored, then protest when he's scrutinized. Paul should answer for these writings.

That sounds reasonable.

See also, Saberpoint, "Solving the Problems of Race in America."

Claire Potter, Radical Lesbian History Professor at Wesleyan, Can't Comprehend Shot of 'Veritas' Between the Eyes

This lady broadcasts her proud lesbianism, which is used to explain how she failed to "comprehend" this epic one-liner from Althouse's comments:

The commenter who wins the prize (trigger warning for real this time!!!) also lets you know — in case the others on Althouse allow you to forget — why we still need feminism. Here goes: “There is the question of whether one would want someone like Claire Potter for a friend, unless of course there’s a prospect of sex as a reward for mutely enduring the unendurable. The solution is to wait for the full and complete BJ then give her the unvarnished veritas right between the eyes.” It took me a minute to comprehend this, me being a gold star lesbian and all, but this commenter is fantasizing out loud about taking a money shot in my face. Nice, Althouse. Nice. Love your friends.

Now, what's interesting is the post is published at the "Tenured Radical" blog at the Chronicle of Higher Education. I didn't know they had a "Tenured Radical" blog! And boy, they don't kid around with their radicalism! Here's the biographical info for Professor Potter:

I am Claire B. Potter, Professor of History and American Studies at Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT. My specialties are feminism, political history and cultural criticism.

Translation: "My specialties are racism, sexism, post-colonial gender studies, Marxism, and cultural relativism." It's a wonder if any Wesleyan students actually learn American history. (And a quick Google search confirms it.)

Althouse has the response, and she's not pleased with this "sister": "'But why would anyone — much less a law professor — leave a comment like that up on her blog...'"

And here's Althouse's original post with the offending comment, which she has now removed: "'Feminist blogging is definitely not for wimps, which is why the vast majority of us do it pseudonymously'."

And note something: Althouse hadn't read the ostensibly offending comment, but she removed it when she found that Professor Potter thought it offensively sexist. And that's because Althouse is a good and decent woman. Progressives, on the other hand, are not decent. These sick f-king racists routinely attack conservatives with the most vile bigotry, and they twist contortions to deny the patently obvious racism spouted in their own comments. They sponsor racism, hatred, workplace harassment and intimidation, and make personal threats against those whom they despise. Yeah, progressives suck like that, and the news is spreading.

Republicans Will Destroy Ron Paul If He Wins Iowa

From Timothy Carney, at Washington Examiner, "GOP will take off the gloves if Ron Paul wins Iowa":

The Republican presidential primary has become a bit feisty, but it will get downright ugly if Ron Paul wins the Iowa caucuses.

The principled, antiwar, Constitution-obeying, Fed-hating, libertarian Republican congressman from Texas stands firmly outside the bounds of permissible dissent as drawn by either the Republican establishment or the mainstream media. (Disclosure: Paul wrote the foreword to my 2009 book.)

But in a crowded GOP field currently led by a collapsing Newt Gingrich and an uninspiring Mitt Romney, Paul could carry the Iowa caucuses, where supporter enthusiasm has so much value.

If Paul wins, how will the media and the GOP react? Much of the media will ignore him (expect headlines like "Romney Beats out Gingrich for Second Place in Iowa"). Some in the Republican establishment and the conservative media will panic. Others will calmly move to crush him, with the full cooperation of the liberal mainstream media.

Well, it's certainly going to be interesting.

Continue reading at the link.

IMAGE CREDIT: Conservative Network, "Who Wrote The Ron Paul Newsletters? Ron Paul Wrote Them – Clear Proof." Also, "Ron Paul Is A Lying Scumbag Politician With Borderline Sociopath Tendencies."

Taking Ron Paul Seriously

Jeffrey Lord has this at The American Spectator, "The Ron Paul Newsletters" (via Memeorandum). And from Dan Riehl as well, "Ron Paul Can't Withstand the Scrutiny of Being a Frontrunner."

But don't miss especially Ace of Spades HQ, "Only Ron Paul Can Restore America to Its Former Greatness*." Check that link for what follows after the asterisk. The post is a devastating indictment of what looks like a blatantly racist newsletter program of pandering ggressively to paleoconservatives and "libertarians and old-time neoconfederates and former Klanners."

And according to Ace, "it wasn't just the newsletters." Here's the block quote from the post:

Paul is closely con­nected to the Lud­wig Von Mises Insti­tute, founded by the lib­er­tar­ian con­ser­v­a­tive Mur­ray Roth­bard and cur­rently run by Lew Rock­well. Rock­well was for­merly Paul’s chief of staff.
...

For Roth­bard, free­dom was best when it wore pants: he blamed the “ori­gins of the Wel­fare State” on “the legion of Yan­kee women, in par­tic­u­lar those of mid­dle– or upper-class back­ground, and espe­cially spin­sters whose busy­body incli­na­tions were not fet­tered by the respon­si­bil­i­ties of home and hearth.” He regret­ted the Con­sti­tu­tional amend­ment that had “imposed” women’s suf­frage on the nation.

In 1963, for exam­ple, at the height of the Civil Right move­ment, Roth­bard warned about “the negro cri­sis as a rev­o­lu­tion.” “Demon­strat­ing Negroes,” he said, “have taken to a favorite chant: ‘What do we want? Free­dom! When do we want it? Now!’” One might expect a lib­er­tar­ian to like such a chant, but Roth­bard found the idea of free­dom for negroes alarm­ing: they did not under­stand it prop­erly. Free­dom was a “hope­lessly ambigu­ous word as used by the Negro move­ment,” and “the very fuzzi­ness of the goal per­mits the Negroes to accel­er­ate and increase their own demands with­out limit… it is the very sweep and vague­ness of the demands that make the move­ment insatiable.”

An insa­tiable desire for free­dom usu­ally stands in lib­er­tar­ian accounts as the most praise-worthy of human attrib­utes, but Roth­bard found the African Amer­i­can free­dom strug­gle alarm­ing. Roth­bard wor­ried not just about “insa­tiable” negroes, but also about King and his non-violent protests against “pri­vate cit­i­zens as store-keepers or own­ers of golf courses; their rights are already invaded, in a “non-violent” man­ner, by the estab­lished Negro ‘Cen­ter’.” Roth­bard explored ways to stop “the negro rev­o­lu­tion:” his words are worth quot­ing in full.

There are two ways by which it might be crip­pled and defeated. First, the retal­ia­tory cre­ation of a white counter-revolutionary mass move­ment, equally deter­mined and mil­i­tant. In short, by the re-creation of the kind of Ku Klux Klan that smashed Recon­struc­tion and the Negro move­ment in the late 19th cen­tury. Since whites are in the major­ity, they have the capac­ity to do this if they have the will. But the will, in my opin­ion, is gone; this is not the 19th cen­tury, nor even the 1920’s. White opin­ion, as we have seen, has dras­ti­cally shifted from racism to egal­i­tar­i­an­ism; even the South­ern whites, par­tic­u­larly the edu­cated lead­er­ship, con­cede the broad merit of the Negro cause; and, finally, mob action no longer has respectabil­ity in our soci­ety. There have been attempts, to be sure, at mass counter-revolutionary white action: the Ku Klux leader in Geor­gia told a rally that “we must fight poi­son with poi­son,” armed con­flict between white and Negro mobs has bro­ken out in Cam­bridge, Mary­land, and white hood­lums have repeat­edly assaulted Negro pick­ets in the Bronx. But all this is a fee­ble replica of the kind of white action that would be nec­es­sary to defeat the rev­o­lu­tion; and it seems almost impos­si­ble for action to be gen­er­ated on the required scale.
...

Not sur­pris­ingly, the Von Mises Insti­tute he founded and ran is allied with the “League of the South,” which views the Civil War as a cri­sis over state’s rights and calls for an inde­pen­dent south­ern repub­lic and wants, yes, “to return to a sound cur­rency” based in gold. The League of the South laments the fact that “aliens” now gov­ern the for­mer Con­fed­er­acy. It wants to return rule to the heirs of the “Anglo-Celtic tra­di­tion.” Roth­bard and the Von Mises Insti­tute sim­i­larly describe the Civil War as an unjust inter­ven­tion, and claim slav­ery would have van­ished on its own. The North, they argue, cre­ated racism in what had been a benign nat­ural hier­ar­chy

That sounds pretty nasty.

But Ace has lots more. For example, to quote Ace himself:

Another thing I don't believe is that Ron Paul's thick-as-thieves relationship with fringe lunatic crank and Truther Alex Jones is just some kind of coincidence, given that Paul can't seem to stay away from the ghastly paranoid Here's Alex Jones following around Michele Malkin, shouting at her for being a "neocon" (he has referred to her as a "monster" and "Marxist"). One of his little goon squad there shouts "Kill Michelle Malkin!"

When I say Alex Jones is Truther, I don't mean he flirts with it. I mean he says the United States government loaded the buildings with explosives and detonated them.

And that's not even the craziest thing he believes. He happens to believe that this is just one of many attacks on citizens by the global cabal that runs the world.

But continue at the link.

It's pretty devastating all around, and it needed to be said.

And some bonus video:

Orange County Chick-fil-A Cashier Fired for Racist 'Ching' and 'Chong' Receipts

At Orange County Register, "Chick-fil-A fires cashier who mocked Asians":

A Chick-fil-A restaurant in Irvine has fired a cashier who typed the names "Ching" and "Chong" onto the receipts of two Asian customers – an affront that has flashed through the blogosphere in recent days.

The company quickly issued a media statement distancing itself from the "inappropriate and unthinking behavior" of its employee. The woman, identified only as Lia on the undated receipts, was immediately dismissed, according to the statement.

A UC Irvine student posted a picture of the receipts on his tumblr blog late last week. He wrote that the cashier never asked for the names of the two men when she took their order, and instead typed "Ching" and "Chong" into the "Guest ID" field on their receipts.

"Racism is still alive these days, people," wrote the blogger, who identifies himself only as Kelvin on his tumblr page.

The "angry asian man" blog picked up the story. Then the OC Weekly did. By Tuesday, national media were reporting on the "Ching" and "Chong" receipts.

Continue reading. Continue reading.

I can't believe people like that. But you have to stand up against that kind of racism and bigotry. Unfortunately, progressive racism of the same stripe is pretty common online. I discussed it at Zilla's in the comments regarding the disgusting bigotry of Walter James "Racist" Casper III.

Multicultural Etiquette

Living in the U.S. I've said and done offensive things that I didn't know where offensive until I got in trouble. Here are a few things I've learned.

1. It's okay to speak the language of another culture.
2. It's okay to eat the food of another culture.
3. It's okay to use the technology of another culture. 
4. It's okay for actors to dress in the clothes of another culture.
5. It's NOT okay for you to dress in the clothes of another culture on Halloween. 
• Students Teaching About Racism in Society
• A 'Spirited' Discussion About Halloween and Appropriation
• Racist Halloween Costumes {Podcast}
6. It's NOT okay to tell an African American that they sound like a 'White' person - even if you're joking.

Notice which ethnicity is missing from the photos above. Please share your thoughts. 

Tim Tebow Powers Broncos to 16-13 OT Win Over Chargers: Hardest Hit — TBogg, Racist Anti-Christian Bigot at Firedoglake

I rarely check out racist TBogg's progressive stinkhole, but the mofo's ramping up the bigoted bashing on Christians, not to mention racist attacks on black conservatives.

Turns out Tim Tebow, the Broncos' evangelical quarterback, is working miracles at the starting spot, as noted by Bill Dwyre, at Los Angeles Times, "Broncos have a prayer with Tim Tebow":

From San Diego -- The premise that a higher being doesn't really care about football games continued to be challenged Sunday.

Tim Tebow won another one. He led the Denver Broncos to a tie in regulation and a win in overtime. We aren't sure whether he is magical or mystical. We don't know when, or if, he will start multiplying loaves and fishes. Right now, we just know he wins.

This time, at the end of five quarters of National Football League action — well, that's too strong a word, but more on that later — it was the San Diego Chargers who had to genuflect before him.

These days, when Tebow takes a knee, it isn't a football term.

After the 16-13 win, completed when Tebow led his team from its 43-yard line with 2 minutes 31 seconds left in overtime, to the San Diego 19, from where kicker Matt Prater could end the game from 37 yards, Tebowmania was even more alive and well. Picture a snowball rolling downhill.

There is an aura of the surreal to this. Is he real or is he Memorex?

Tebow has won five of his six starts, and the Broncos are now 6-5. Sunday's success meant that Tebow has led Denver on scoring drives in either the fourth quarter or overtime 11 times in the Broncos' last seven games. The most frightening sight for NFL opponents now is Tebow with the ball, the score in reach and the clock ticking down.

Also, from Kate Shellnutt, at Houston Chronicle, "Tebow popularity fueled by football fanatics, evangelical faithful."

Yeah, that evangelicalism bugs the shit out of progressive dirtbag racist Tom Boggioni of Jane Hamsher's communist Firedoglake. See: "There Will Be Teblood – The Chargering":

Now that Kyle Orton has been cast from DenverEden, God will be particularly protective of Timmy because, Notre Dame or no Notre Dame, nobody wants to see Brady Quinn placing his hands near another man’s manparts. Not even Touchdown Jesus.

Oh, hilarious, right? Well not as "funny" as racist TBogg's racist black sexual stereotype slam on Herman Cain as a "jungle boogie black stud" who has "Sexed Up Every Woman In America Including Your Mom." Racist TBogg spices up the post with some white go-go boot betties looking to go down on a big bad black Cadillac-drivin' Shaft-style mofo. And of course the URL there is "Herman Cain's Business Card."

And remember, TBogg was the first to blame Sarah Palin for Gabrielle Giffords' shooting last January: "Fuck it, I'm going there."

Progressive racists and anti-Christian bigots. All too ready to smear the tea parties as racist gun-totin' rednecks, when folks like racist TBogg are the most vile scum this side of the Ku Klux Klan.

UPDATE: Linked at Instapundit! Thanks!

Norway School Segregates Students by Race and Ethnicity, Sparking Outrage Over 'Apartheid'

Oops!

A little problem with that multicultural diversity thing, eh?

At London's Daily Mail, "Apartheid row at Oslo school as teachers segregate ethnic students so white children don't feel 'in a minority'." And Telegraph UK, "Apartheid row at Norwegian school after it segregates ethnic pupils":

Bjerke Upper Secondary School in Oslo filled one of the three general studies sets solely with pupils with immigrant parents, after many white Norwegians from last year's intake changed schools.

The controversy over the decision has highlighted the unease in Norway over how to integrate the 420,000 "non-Nordic" citizens who immigrated between 1990 and 2009, and who make up 28 per cent of Oslo's population.

"This is the first time I've heard about this, and it is totally unacceptable," Torge Ødegaard, Oslo education commissioner, said on Friday, before pressuring the school to inform parents that the three classes would now be reorganised. The letter to parents read: "Such a division of the students is not in accordance with the requirements of the Education Act. The school regrets this error."

But Robert Wright, a Christian Democrat politician and former head of the city's schools board, struck back, arguing that the authorities had been wrong to block the move. He also said that other Oslo schools should start to segregate classes to prevent a situation of "white flight" developing.

"I think we have to try this to see how it's functioning," he told The Daily Telegraph. "Bjerke School has come up with a radical solution to a real problem, but the politicians have just said 'no'."

White Privilege in relation to the Pathology of White Supremacy

by: Glenn Robinson

Most people are familiar with white privilege, but how does it relate to white supremacy?

Steven Riley from Mixed Race Studies let me know about this Dr. Yaba Blay article titled Skin Bleaching and Global White Supremacy: By Way of Introduction


Below I have quoted from her section on "white supremacy" where she gets straight to the point about the odd false dichotomy culture that the U.S.has been morphed into - and apparently other countries have some of the same false dichotomy issues woven into their culture as well.

Humans like to oversimplify to make the world easier to understand; however, humans themselves should not be oversimplified and we are not as simple as black and white / good and bad.

"White supremacy has been constructed by Whites for the benefit of Whites."

-Yaba Blay

European man who INTENTIONALLY drove into 2 people was NOT arrested!

"From the egomaniacal standpoint of White supremacy, given the self-assigned superiority of Whiteness, White people have the moral right to exact brute force whenever White interests are threatened, while those classified as “non-White” have no equivalent moral right to defend themselves against White aggression, especially when such aggression is enacted in the name of “democracy” (L. Ross, 1995)."

"White supremacy is routinely interpreted as a code word for White people. However, White supremacy is more than a collection of White people. As a system, many people participate in, and as an ideology, many people think, feel, behave, and operate according to it, and in many ways defend and uphold it -- White and 'non-White' alike. The institution of colorism exemplifies how “non-Whites” serve to uphold White supremacy." -Yaba Blay

"In his discussions of the psychology of the oppressed/colonized, Fanon  (1963; 1967) used the term “Manichean” to describe the world of the oppressed/colonized. Of or relating to Manichaeism, “a doctrine based on the ideas of the Persian philosopher Manes, which saw the world as polarized between forces of absolute good and evil, symbolized in the oppositions of light and darkness, black and white” (Dyer, 1997, p. 225), a Manichean view is one that not only divides the world into dualities, but sees those dualities as irreconcilable oppositions:"

"Its logic is a categorical  either/or, in which one of the terms is considered superfluous and unacceptable. Yet in reality, this duality of opposites in the Manichean outlook are interdependent. Each is defined in terms of its opposite and each derives its identity in opposition to the other. Yet in such a perspective, it is necessary to keep the line of demarcation quite clear or else the Manichean [world] collapses." (Bulhan, 1985, p. 140) 

"In this way, the Manicheans conceived of darkness, or black, and things associated with it as evil, while light, or white, symbolized those things that were good." -Yaba Blay

Read the entire article here.

Tim Wise - The Pathology of White Privilege

===

Glenn is a European-American married to a Mexican-American. They have two children. Glenn is interested in progressive immigration reform, and desegregation within schools and communities. He is a life long learner with interests in sociology, anthropology, psychology, history and politics.

Connect to Glenn at CommunityVillage.us

The Moth - Ernest Quiñonez

Ernesto Quiñonez remembers his 7th grade self and realizes it's a slippery slope from victim to

victimizer.

Anti Defamation League - We Are a Nation of Immigrants

Video of Deborah Lauter, ADL Civil Rights Director, speaking about the dangers of ethnic profiling and the need for comprehensive immigration reform.

 

ADL reaches out to kids.

More:
Code Words of Hate

Ignorance leads to fear. Fear leads to hate.

Degrees of Us vs Them / Gloria Yamato's Degrees of Racism

Click graphic to enlarge

^ click graphic to enlarge ^

Click below words for definitions.

tribalism / patriotism / bias

tolerance / self-righteous

indifference

angst

discrimination / ethnocentrism

prejudice / covert

xenophobia / homophobia / bigotry / blatant
animus

racism / sexism / chauvinism / ageism

misogyny

hate crime

genocide

For more nuanced definitions please see Definitions and Semantics at the TheStudyOfRacialism.org

Love can morph into Hate

Love of self (pride) can morph into Arrogance

Arrogance includes a dislike / disrespect for others not like you.

Dislike and disrespect leads to hate.

Many in the U.S. are blatantly xenophobic and/or homophobic.

Homophobia is evident in our nation's attempts to prevent the LGBT community from marrying.

Xenophobia is evident in our nation's willingness to spend tax dollars erecting fences and maintaining outdated immigration quotas that do not meet our county's needs.

My votes are for freedom of movement, and freedom for LGBT civil unions.

Chiggity-check yo self before ya wriggity-wreck yo self.

-Das EFX on Ice Cube's Check Yo Self