Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

October 30, 2008

OF COURSE IT'S ABOUT RACE.... Following up on an item from yesterday, John Judis made the case that the McCain campaign's argument about "spreading the wealth," "socialism," and "redistribution" is ultimately about race.

The argument, Judis said, "is aimed ultimately at white working class undecided voters who would construe "spreading the wealth" as giving their money to blacks. It's the latest version of Reagan's 'welfare queen' argument from 1980. It if it works, it won't be because most white Americans actually oppose a progressive income tax, but because they fear that Obama will inordinately favor blacks over them."

I perceive the rhetoric the same way. When McCain tells white working class undecided voters that Obama wants to "take your money and give it to someone else," he doesn't say who "someone else" is, but he probably hopes he doesn't have to.

Matt Feeney calls this approach "a bit loony," insisting that if McCain were really trying to engage in race-based fear mongering, the Republican campaign would "use the word 'welfare.'"

But that only helps to prove my point -- McCain has been using the word "welfare." He's used it in his stump speech (Obama, McCain says, wants to turn the IRS into "a giant welfare agency"), and he's used it in his television ads.

And why would McCain tell white working class undecided voters that Obama's tax policies constitute "welfare" and "take your money and give it to someone else"? Here's a wild guess -- it has something to do with exploiting racial fears.

Michael Crowley pointed to this exchange from CNN last night between McCain and Larry King:

KING: Concerning spreading the wealth, isn't the graduated income tax spreading the wealth? If you I and pay more so that 'Jimmy' can get some, some for him -- or pay for a welfare recipient, that's spreading the wealth.

MCCAIN: That's spreading the wealth in the respect that we do have a graduated income tax. That's a far cry from taking from one group of Americans and giving to another. I mean that's dramatically different.

Actually, it's not different at all. McCain's argument is incoherent.

Put it this way: either McCain is deliberately trying to exploit racial fears or he hasn't the foggiest idea what he's talking about. I'm afraid it's one or the other.

Steve Benen 12:33 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (82)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

If Obama was a white guy named John Smith, this election and his victory would make Reagan's landslide over Carter look like FLA in 2000.

Bottom line: It IS about racism. There are simply way too many people out there that will not vote for a black man.

It really is sad. Obama has worked harder with less and accomplished more than all of these dumbfuck rednecks combined.

Oh well, get at 12 pack of some Pabst Blue Ribbon, tune into some Wrastlin' or maybe a rodeo, get shitfaced drunk, and keep wondering why you're unemployed and live in a rusted out double wide trailer off route 152.

Posted by: citizen_pain on October 30, 2008 at 12:39 PM | PERMALINK

it's also no accident that "joe the plumber" is a white guy.

Right-wing hate radio has been talking about reparations for days now- so giving "your money" to "other groups" is easily tied to that fear that far too many whites seem to have.

Posted by: zoe from pittsburgh on October 30, 2008 at 12:41 PM | PERMALINK

could be both. McCain has no idea what he is talking about and his handlers are trying to exploit racial fears. McCain might be too but he is willfully ignorant.

I've come to see McCain in this light. A crappy thinker promoted way above his station first because of family ties but then because those that wanted power and wanted to exploit power saw McCain as a willing trojan horse. When McCain says that Palin is his soulmate he's not lying, she is. She and he are just a canvases for right wingers to paint on and prop up before the electorate to vote for the pretty picture.

Posted by: on October 30, 2008 at 12:45 PM | PERMALINK

Re: final sentence,

It's both, of course.

Posted by: henry lewis on October 30, 2008 at 12:46 PM | PERMALINK

"Put it this way: either McCain is deliberately trying to exploit racial fears or he hasn't the foggiest idea what he's talking about. I'm afraid it's one or the other."

Steve - On what basis do you believe that these two factors are mutally exclusive?

Posted by: SadOldVet on October 30, 2008 at 12:47 PM | PERMALINK

The working folk just can't seem to figure out that they are currently being ripped off by the most massive redistribution (read concentration) of wealth in recorded history.

Ignorance = power for the elite... and there seems to be plenty of ignorace to go around in the USA.

Posted by: Buford on October 30, 2008 at 12:48 PM | PERMALINK

I got into this whole argument with somebody on another thread here. I don't think that every person who falls for this line of attack is a stone-cold, cross-burning racist, but it is at its base a racist attack and trying to deny that is sticking your head in the sand.

I'll put it this way: when the Republicans start talking about "welfare" and giving your money away to people who don't deserve it, are you picturing your money going to a white meth addict in the Appalachians, or is it somebody else?

Posted by: Mnemosyne on October 30, 2008 at 12:50 PM | PERMALINK

I'm sick and tired of hearing from all kinds of folks out there that John McCain isn't a racist, but..... Of course, he's a racist. His campaign rhetoric, his case (such as it is) for why he should be president, and his personal demeanor toward both Obamas reek of racial superiority and resentment. He virtually screams, "How dare this uppity n***** run against me!"

Posted by: Stacy on October 30, 2008 at 12:54 PM | PERMALINK

McCain: "Barack Obama is going to take your money and give it to someone else!"
The Electorate: "What money?"

Posted by: pbg on October 30, 2008 at 12:55 PM | PERMALINK

could be both. McCain has no idea what he is talking about and his handlers are trying to exploit racial fears.

That's waht I was going to say but you beat me to it. Great minds etc etc.

McCain's entire campaign at this point is based on fear and innuendo.

What worries me most is what some of the people who support McCain will do if (I'm going to continue to say if until its official (VOTE!!!!)) Obama wins. McCain really has pushed for a divided nation. And he and Palin have gone even further not only saying Obama would be a bad President but strongly implying that he would destroy America.

I fear we will see violence in segments of this country.

Posted by: thorin-1 on October 30, 2008 at 12:55 PM | PERMALINK

I've often wondered why it was that American never adopted many of the same 'socialist' policies that did most of Europe (National health care and pensions, et alii) and came to the conclusion that we never came so close to honest to goodness fascism. Your post makes me wonder if there is a racial element to it (I guess I should have thought of this before, as there seems to be a racial element to everything in this country). Put another way, would Europe have adopted its social policies w/o such heterogeneous populations?

Posted by: jhm on October 30, 2008 at 1:01 PM | PERMALINK

The 'socialist' argument is so silly on it's face, that it has to be about something else. For me, it's intent becomes obvious when coupled to the 'real America' rhetoric that's been coming from the campaign.
Obama wants to take money from hard working 'real Americans' (white, rural) and give it to someone else - presumably not real American (lazy, inner city blacks).
It may be the most racist tactic I've seen from a national campaign. Willie Horton may have been a scary black criminal, but he was a criminal. There is no side issue to McCain's tactic here. It's race and nothing else.
I don't know what's in shorter supply with McCain; honor, or simple dignity.

Posted by: JoeW on October 30, 2008 at 1:04 PM | PERMALINK

it's also no accident that "joe the plumber" is a white guy.
Posted by: zoe

Why, don't they have black plumbers?

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 1:07 PM | PERMALINK

Why, don't they have black plumbers?

They do, but they're smart enough not to vote against their interests--unlike "Joe" the Republican hack and campaign prop.

Posted by: Allan Snyder on October 30, 2008 at 1:13 PM | PERMALINK

I think when you reach the point where Larry King understands something better than you do, you really do need to go home and lie down.

Posted by: gradysu on October 30, 2008 at 1:15 PM | PERMALINK

channelling the ghost of lee atwater... "you just can't come out and say the word ni@@er, like in the good 'ol days...."

Posted by: dj spellchecka on October 30, 2008 at 1:18 PM | PERMALINK

Why, don't they have black plumbers?

Of course. So why isn't Joe the Plumber who's so worried about who his tax dollars are going to black?

Posted by: Mnemosyne on October 30, 2008 at 1:19 PM | PERMALINK

Obama wants to take money from hard working 'real Americans' (white, rural) and give it to someone else - presumably not real American (lazy, inner city blacks).

I see it striking a nerve with Objectivists and people that think that way. People think that they can get ahead in America through hard work, and get further ahead through harder work, and tend to despise the idea that someone could coast along not working as hard but then say, "Share the wealth."

It's that simple.

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 1:19 PM | PERMALINK

From what I am reading here, there must not be many or any 'blacks' in McCain's audiences, otherwise, how would he get away with this line?

I agree with Mnemosyne on this thread and the 'Catalyst' thread of yesterday. What is so interesting is that, except for the actual color of his skin and 'negroid' features, Obama's life is a classic representation of the American Dream: he rose from less than ideal economic and social circumstances and was able to achieve the most extraordinary success possible. He is now the favored candidate for arguably the most powerful political position in the world, and the only reason he is not already leading in the polls by 20 or more points is this perception that he is the black stereotype of a slave-descended-oppressed African-American. He was not raised in that 'culture' and so does not share those 'characteristics' which many low-information voters/Americans fear. As stated above, were he 'white' with a 'white' name, the contest would be over.

I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation
peace,
st john

Posted by: st john on October 30, 2008 at 1:21 PM | PERMALINK

Let me clarify- it is no accident that their symbol of an "average joe the plumber" is a white man.

Listen to mccain/palin's rhetoric and then listen to rush and hannity- suddenly all of their racially coded language is no longer in code.
All the socialist crap is about taking white people' hard-earned money and giving it to lazy, inferior black people.

Posted by: zoe from pittsburgh on October 30, 2008 at 1:21 PM | PERMALINK

They do, but they're smart enough not to vote against their interests
Posted by: Allan Snyder

Which shows you don't understand Joe's interests. It obviously ain't just about the money and the tax breaks.

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 1:22 PM | PERMALINK

JHM writes "I've often wondered why it was that American never adopted many of the same 'socialist' policies that did most of Europe (National health care and pensions, et alii) ...Your post makes me wonder if there is a racial element to it ...

winner..... we don't have programs that benefit both the rich and the poor because "poor" is synonymous with "urban" [IE: black] as opposed to "rural." [IE: white] even through more whites live in poverty and get welfare than blacks.....

some folks bitch about food stamps without realizing that lots of rank and file military families use them to get by on...

think "pay-day" loan offices are only concentrated in the inner cities?? think again...they are concentrated in places that have army bases....

Posted by: dj spellchecka on October 30, 2008 at 1:26 PM | PERMALINK

I'm sure it's not easy to run for president while avoiding gaffes altogether, but I sure wish that Obama hadn't used the phrase "spread the wealth" in the first place. It's not an accurate reflection of his views, nor the views of most of his supporters.

The goal is to grow the middle class (which helps us all), and we can't do that when the poor and the middle class are burdened by taxes that they can't afford to pay. A graduated income tax is a the only practical way to fund our military, infrastructure, and other government services (sales and flat taxes will shrink the middle class). As the middle class expands and more people are climbing out of the lower tax brackets, a graduated income tax becomes a moot issue when most household safely reside within one or two middle-class tax brackets. At this time, the marginal rates can be reduced since our tax base would be significantly larger (i.e. more people contributing to the cause).

Posted by: CJ on October 30, 2008 at 1:28 PM | PERMALINK

"I fear we will see violence in segments of this country." thorin-1

That is my fear too. Someone sent me an email missivie written by a lady in Lufkin, TX about telling an Obama campaign caller off and getting a visit from the Secret Service. She said some pretty ugly and rude stuff, but really didn't threaten Obama's life, but the gist was that under Obama we are going to get "Jack boots" and freedom of speech for the RR is gone. Anyway, the email said it was in the Lufkin paper. So I looked it up to see if it was true.

The article did appear there, which isn't the point. The comments were horrific. One person said, "Don't let Obama come to Texas or he will get what that other liberal democrat got when he dared to set foot in Dallas." He/she went on to dare the Secret Service to come after him/her.

I'm really afraid for him. People are serious psycho about the perception of whites losing power if Obama gets elected.


Posted by: Always Hopeful on October 30, 2008 at 1:29 PM | PERMALINK

A bit off topic but I need to vent here: There was yet another unbelievably stupid "View" wherein Hasselbeck asserts that Obama is not trustworthy--that he lied in the Senate about raises taxes and he lied about public financing. "It's all going to come down to who you can trust in this election. And I don't trust Obama when it comes to the economy".

No-one says they absolutely trust Obama, no-one broaches his sound judgment and thoughtfulness.

Whoppi just says she wants it to be over.

Sherri Sheppard insists she's undecided still. We all know why--she is a hard core right-to-lifer, and also a bible literalist--believes there really was an immaculate conception, believes that there was a Noah's Ark replete with two of every animal..believes even that the world may indeed be flat and that nothing pre-dates Christianity. No joke. She is a lot like Palin. But she is a woman of color and she has a conflict because Obama is such a good candidate...

But she of course doesn't admit any of this.

When asked why she is still undecided, she stammered and said she's is looking at the "health care" issues. Then she adds it's because of security, about the war thing...

Barbara Walters asks her how she is going to decide in the next four days, what will she look for.

I don't know, she says. Elizabeth looks to her and says: "There's still hope, we talk".

ARBH! Thankfully most have made up their mind. But those who can be swayed may indeed be so by these final days of lies and smear that insist: "He can't be trusted" theme.

Posted by: on October 30, 2008 at 1:29 PM | PERMALINK

It obviously ain't just about the money and the tax breaks.

Yeah, it's also about the country music record deal and running for congress and lying about Obama and appearing at McCain rallies(I guess he has a light work schedule at the plumbing shop), among other things. Buying that $280,000 business apparently got pushed to the back burner--along with paying his back taxes.

Posted by: Allan Snyder on October 30, 2008 at 1:31 PM | PERMALINK

I disagree with much of the above.

- any Dem Prez candidate would be attacked on taxes

- every Dem Prez candidate this decade has been attacked as "the most dangerous and extreme liberal in the Senate"

- there's always a tinge of "commie" "socialist" stuff when attacking leftists

- Obama's comment of "spread the wealth", if made by a white candidate, would be attacked the same way

- Of _course_ Joe the Plumber would be a white guy, no matter who the Dem candidate would be

- "Real" America is always a middle age white guy who works with his hands (blue collar or farmer) and not in a city

It's the same ol' same ol' that's been peddled for at least half a dozen past elections. The Dem guy always wants to raise taxes, redistribute wealth, is a remnant from the commie-pinkos, is elite and/or city dweller, Ivy League educated, doesn't understand "real America", has no callouses on his hands, isn't "salt of the earth", etc etc.

These are the same as the attacks on Kerry, was that racist?

It happens every four years. Are our memories really that short?

Posted by: A DC Wonk on October 30, 2008 at 1:31 PM | PERMALINK

What McCain is defending here is the increasing concentration of wealth in fewer and fewer hands. But he knows that he cannot sell that nakedly to the white middle class, so he has to create another common enemy via a classic tactic that has been used by the American aristocracy since before the founding days of the Republic. Many people can see through it, but the followers who cannot cling to the old message of divide from the common enemy and unite with the wealthy elites. It is just another deviation on the shell game that McCain has mastered in his long political career. Make no mistake, McCain is a flim flam artist who would have done well on the carnival circuit. If there are racial undertones to the message, I don't think it is because McCain is a racist, but that McCain is just a conniving little jerk.

Posted by: lou on October 30, 2008 at 1:31 PM | PERMALINK

All the mavericks in the house hold your hands up.
All the plumbers in the house pull your pants up.
All the flag wavers in the house hold your noose up.
All the rednecks in the house pull your hoods up.
(January 20, 2009)
All the repubs in the house pull your chairs up
and watch the son of a former slave be sworn in by the son of a former slave owner.


Posted by: rick on October 30, 2008 at 1:33 PM | PERMALINK

Which shows you don't understand Joe's interests. It obviously ain't just about the money and the tax breaks.

So tell us -- if Joe's interests aren't only about money and tax breaks, what other interests are you thinking of?

Posted by: Mnemosyne on October 30, 2008 at 1:34 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, it's also about the country music record deal and running for congress and lying about Obama and appearing at McCain rallies(I guess he has a light work schedule at the plumbing shop), among other things. Buying that $280,000 business apparently got pushed to the back burner--along with paying his back taxes.
Posted by: Allan Snyder

Read CJ's post. Anybody could have asked that question. It was Obama's answer, "Share the wealth" that resonates, albeit negatively. Attacking JT Plumber just makes Obama fans look really, really bad to boot.

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 1:35 PM | PERMALINK

I see it striking a nerve with Objectivists and people that think that way. People think that they can get ahead in America through hard work, and get further ahead through harder work, and tend to despise the idea that someone could coast along not working as hard but then say, "Share the wealth."
Posted by: SJRSM

There's the problem right there ... Objectivists are intellectual and emotional midgets, so taking their view seriously is your first mistake.

Posted by: Gonads on October 30, 2008 at 1:35 PM | PERMALINK

I think it's much broader than racist, an updated welfare queen argument.

The real target is those awful socialist liberals, who are taking money out of the pockets of hard working, God and America loving folks and putting it in the hands of lazy good for nothing scum who don't work for a living and hate America.

Posted by: hark on October 30, 2008 at 1:36 PM | PERMALINK

So tell us -- if Joe's interests aren't only about money and tax breaks, what other interests are you thinking of?
Posted by: Mnemosyne

See my 1:19 post.

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 1:36 PM | PERMALINK

These are the same as the attacks on Kerry, was that racist?

Yes, they were, but it was harder to see when it was a white candidate.

Basically, the Republicans have been calling Democrats n**ger-lovers for years. They've been telling white people that the Democrats are going to take their money and give it to Reagan's mythical "welfare queens" in the ghetto. And it's worked for almost 30 years.

Now that we have an actual African-American candidate for president, the Republicans can't pull that same trick where they say the Democrats are going to give all of your money to poor black crack addicts without really saying it. This is why the attacks are becoming so nakedly racist -- Michelle Malkin wrote yesterday that Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe forcibly confiscated the property of white people so he could give it to black people and, well, does she have to draw you a picture?

I'm sure that SJRSM has no idea how it could be racist to say that Obama will confiscate the property of white people so he can give it to black people, but I think people of normal intelligence can understand what the problem is here.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on October 30, 2008 at 1:45 PM | PERMALINK

See my 1:19 post.

Your 1:19 post says it's about money. You said Joe's concerned about his interests that don't involve money. What interests are those?

Posted by: Mnemosyne on October 30, 2008 at 1:50 PM | PERMALINK

It was Obama's answer, "Share the wealth" that resonates, albeit negatively.

I must be missing the negative resonation--Obama is kicking McCain's ass.

Attacking JT Plumber just makes Obama fans look really, really bad to boot.

Not sure when pointing out facts became "attacking". Is his real name "Joe"? Nope. Is he really a plumber? Nope. Does he owe back taxes? Yup. Did he hire a publicist? Yup. Are they trying to get a country music record deal for him. Uh-huh. Was he a McCain partisan hack from the beginning? Affirmative.

Is the McCain campaign going down in flames because of these transparent gimmicks? You betcha!
I know it sucks to be on the losing side, but Republicans are the worst losers I've ever seen.

Posted by: Allan Snyder on October 30, 2008 at 1:50 PM | PERMALINK

John Judis (from TNR).

I guess no other liberals are troubled by all the links from Washington Monthly to TNR? Marty Peretz's ravings are still featured prominently there - and he's the editor-in-chief.

If you don't know, read about it.

I think it's weird how TNR's obvious, overt biases are tolerated, and unremarked upon... When Kevin was here, he also linked heavily to TNR, and ignored questions about it. I assume WashMonthly is affiliated with TNR somehow. Which means liberals also shouldn't be reading Washington Monthly, unfortunately.

Posted by: flubber on October 30, 2008 at 1:51 PM | PERMALINK

Your 1:19 post says it's about money.
Posted by: Mnemosyne

No, it says it is about being rewarded for hard work.

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 1:53 PM | PERMALINK

"I'm afraid it's one or the other."

Put me down with, "No it isn't. It's both."

Posted by: A noun, a verb and POW on October 30, 2008 at 1:54 PM | PERMALINK

No, it says it is about being rewarded for hard work.

That assumes people who work their whole lives for under 250k a year don't work hard and don't deserve a tax break.
If you and "Joe" don't want your tax cut from Obama because you don't believe you've earned it or you think it's socialism, then feel free to send it back.
Every type of tax is a form of income redistribution--like the tax on oil companies in Alaska that Governor Palin used to send checks to every Alaskan citizen who did nothing to earn the money except to live in Alaska. But I guess some forms of wealth-spreading are okay with you.

Posted by: Allan Snyder on October 30, 2008 at 2:00 PM | PERMALINK

No, it says it is about being rewarded for hard work.

And the rewards you envision for your hard work are ... personal satisfaction? Having a product in your hands that you can be proud of at the end of the day? The relationships you form with your clients?

I'm not quite sure how you expect those rewards to be given away to the undeserving, but I'm sure you'll come up with something.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on October 30, 2008 at 2:04 PM | PERMALINK

flubber writes:
"I guess no other liberals are troubled by all the links from Washington Monthly to TNR? Marty Peretz's ravings are still featured prominently there - and he's the editor-in-chief.

I think it's weird how TNR's obvious, overt biases are tolerated, and unremarked upon... When Kevin was here, he also linked heavily to TNR, and ignored questions about it. I assume WashMonthly is affiliated with TNR somehow. Which means liberals also shouldn't be reading Washington Monthly, unfortunately."

==============
???? that's like three degrees of guilt-by-associantion in that one comment..... there's lots of good stuff at the tnr blogs...as long as you have the common sense to skip "Marty Peretz's ravings."

i know better than to click on HIS links...he's a tool....

that fact doesn't do anything to reflect badly on Steve OR the washington monthly....get a grip...ps

ps:
my bitch is that you can't leave comments if you're not a subscriber...probably just as well...i'd spend all day flaming marty's bullshit, otherwise....

Posted by: dj spellchecka on October 30, 2008 at 2:05 PM | PERMALINK

Being moderately young, is this the first out of the closet fascist campaign for president?

McCain spoke at the Sturges rally. You don't go there claiming the other guy, who happens to be black, is a commie if you aren't a fascist.

Posted by: grinning cat on October 30, 2008 at 2:06 PM | PERMALINK

flubber writes:
"I guess no other liberals are troubled by all the links from Washington Monthly to TNR? Marty Peretz's ravings are still featured prominently there - and he's the editor-in-chief.

I think it's weird how TNR's obvious, overt biases are tolerated, and unremarked upon... When Kevin was here, he also linked heavily to TNR, and ignored questions about it. I assume WashMonthly is affiliated with TNR somehow. Which means liberals also shouldn't be reading Washington Monthly, unfortunately."

==============
???? that's like three degrees of guilt-by-association in that one comment..... there's lots of good stuff at the tnr blogs...as long as you have the common sense to skip "Marty Peretz's ravings."

i know better than to click on HIS links...he's a tool....

that fact doesn't do anything to reflect badly on Steve OR the washington monthly....get a grip...

ps:
my bitch is that you can't leave comments if you're not a subscriber...probably just as well...i'd spend all day flaming marty's bullshit, otherwise....

Posted by: dj spellchecka on October 30, 2008 at 2:10 PM | PERMALINK

flubber writes:
"I guess no other liberals are troubled by all the links from Washington Monthly to TNR? Marty Peretz's ravings are still featured prominently there - and he's the editor-in-chief.

I think it's weird how TNR's obvious, overt biases are tolerated, and unremarked upon... When Kevin was here, he also linked heavily to TNR, and ignored questions about it. I assume WashMonthly is affiliated with TNR somehow. Which means liberals also shouldn't be reading Washington Monthly, unfortunately."

==============
???? that's like three degrees of guilt-by-association in that one comment..... there's lots of good stuff at the tnr blogs...as long as you have the common sense to skip "Marty Peretz's ravings."

i know better than to click on HIS links...he's a tool....

that fact doesn't do anything to reflect badly on Steve OR the washington monthly....get a grip...

ps:
my bitch is that you can't leave comments if you're not a subscriber...probably just as well...i'd spend all day flaming marty's bullshit, otherwise....

Posted by: dj spellchecka on October 30, 2008 at 2:10 PM | PERMALINK

It is about race. In Arizona, the right opposes paying taxes because 'they don't want to pay for public education for a bunch of illegals'. The 'illegals' are moving in and ruining their property values, so they don't want to pay their property taxes. Raising the minimum wage is verboten, of course, because why pay 'illegals' a living wage to pick vegetables? People are blatant about this in Arizona. They will say it to your face with no shame. It's been well documented in the AZ newspapers too, because the anti tax people are very loudly vocal.

To them, taxes=give my hard earned money to lazy, breeding,crime loving, drug dealing, filthy illegals who don't even speak English.

Result? Arizona has been named the dumbest state by the Pew Poll. We have the second lowest minimum wage of all 50 states. Alaska is the lowest. Children and women's organizations grade McCain on a 1-100 scale with 100 being the highest, a '0'. He doesn't even rate a '1'. Also, AZ has a huge disparity between the rich and the poor because everything is skewed for the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer.

Posted by: knowdat on October 30, 2008 at 2:11 PM | PERMALINK

"I see it striking a nerve with Objectivists and people that think that way. People think that they can get ahead in America through hard work, and get further ahead through harder work, and tend to despise the idea that someone could coast along not working as hard but then say, "Share the wealth."

NEWSFLASH!!!! OBJECTIVIST HERO ADMITS DEFEAT AND SAYS ENTIRE PHILOSOPHY IS FLAWED BEFORE ENTIRE WORLD JUST LAST WEEK!!!!

Get real.. As someonelse wrote "we've all read Ayn Rand, most of us laughed at the adolescence of it all and moved on."

You'd be better off finding a new religion based on crappy literature. Try Scientology.

Posted by: on October 30, 2008 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINK

JHM writes "I've often wondered why it was that American never adopted many of the same 'socialist' policies that did most of Europe (National health care and pensions, et alii) ...Your post makes me wonder if there is a racial element to it ..."

It's always been about race. The only way Social Security was able to get enough votes from the Southern crackers to pass was by incorporating enough exclusions to prevent nearly 2/3 of the Black population from being covered. It took decades to rectify this in the law, and it'll take more to change peoples minds.

Posted by: thalarctos on October 30, 2008 at 2:19 PM | PERMALINK

Americans in there 50s and 60s have seen what the Republican answer to "rewarding someone for there hard" actually means. Objectivism reads like Talmudic text compared to Reaganims and 40 years of Republican theivery of the American worker. The idea that capital can move freely but workers get to move one way. That is they get to move down on the socioeconomic ladder. There's been years and years and years of Republican economic and governing philosophy exporting jobs and capital into the wealthiest, laziest, most corrupt few. What is the answer provided by Republicans and McCain? The other guy is a terrorist/marxist and we should have more wars based on religious fanaticism and more and more capital moving away from the hardest working backbone of America. Don't come here peddling bullshit without any numbers or facts to back up your claims that Joe just wants to get rewarded for working hard. We've all worked hard and our the the sons and daughters of people that worked hard. If your coming peddling objectivism listen to your hero Greenspan sound like a repentant financial criminal. In case you missed that reality he found a flaw in his philosophy.

When you cite Objectivists I think of pubescent males on trust funds in New England prep schools. "Joe the Plumber" makes Holden Caufield sound enlightened. Everyone's a phony but Joe. Who is actually a phony.

Posted by: grinning cat on October 30, 2008 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

watch the son of a former slave be sworn in by the son of a former slave owner

Well, symbolically that may be true. But as all his black ancesters are from Kenya, it's doubtful that he has any slaves in his family tree.

Further, his mother's side he does have slaveowners.

A double-twisted irony, eh?

Posted by: A DC Wonk on October 30, 2008 at 2:31 PM | PERMALINK

Red State Mike: Which shows you don't understand Joe's interests. It obviously ain't just about the money and the tax breaks.

Which is why "Joe the Plumber" didn't ask Obama about money and tax breaks. Oh, wait...

Posted by: Gregory on October 30, 2008 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK

Which shows you don't understand Joe's interests. It obviously ain't just about the money and the tax breaks.

Good point! It's also about accusing Obama of being about to cause the death of Israel. See, Joe's impeccable grasp of the issues extends far past crude concerns about money. He has to be constantly corrected on his comical misunderstanding of the candidates' tax plans, but that's because his mind's just on higher things like rewarding hard work. Work he's going to do someday. Soon.

Posted by: shortstop on October 30, 2008 at 2:59 PM | PERMALINK

Sounds like it is more about the race card than race.

I still think Obama's best endorsement came from Jesse wanting to cut his acorns (pun intended) off. A lot of people are seeing him as a post-racial candidate, and Jesse hating him helps confirm it. But discussions like this make the opposite case.

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 3:02 PM | PERMALINK

Well, symbolically that may be true. But as all his black ancesters are from Kenya, it's doubtful that he has any slaves in his family tree.

Further, his mother's side he does have slaveowners.

A double-twisted irony, eh?

Indeed. And his wife is the descendant of slaves, and McCain's ancestors owned slaves (whose descendants, the black McCains of Mississippi, were just interviewed by somebody or other).

All part of our American history.

Posted by: shortstop on October 30, 2008 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

Red State Mike wrote: discussions like this make the opposite case.

Sadly, no -- pointing out the dishonesty and ignorance of a dishonest and ignorant Republican tool makes no case other than Republicans rely on ignorance and dishonsty.

Posted by: Gregory on October 30, 2008 at 3:07 PM | PERMALINK

Has anybody notice the way the McCain ad works that starts with a picture of Obama on the left and this wording and spacing:
Barack Obama
LACKS
the experience...

Does anybody but me see "BLACKS" somehow falling out of that picture???
Whoever designed that puppy is going straight to Hell, frankly. Disgusting.

Posted by: jhill on October 30, 2008 at 3:10 PM | PERMALINK

I truly hope they get more dirt on Joe the con-artist bigoted asshole who wasted Obama's precious time.

Obama was SO nice and patient with him, and now this narcissistic camera-loving psycho/loser has made it his mission to exploit this Q & A Obama so generously offered on the trail to the hilt.

He now has the audacity to say a vote for Obama would mean "death to Israel".

Posted by: Katie, I'd like a lifeline on October 30, 2008 at 3:34 PM | PERMALINK

Sounds like it is more about the race card than race.

In other words, you can't back up a single one of your bullshit assertions, so now you're going to claim that there's no such thing as racism, only the "race card," and you're the real victim here.

Didn't see that one coming a mile off. Nope, not at all.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on October 30, 2008 at 4:27 PM | PERMALINK

In other words, you can't back up a single one of your bullshit assertions...

Assertion? Read the writings and quotes of JT Plumber hisself. His words. Read the what people are saying about him. Their words.

The only person running around yelling RACE!!! is you. And everyone else here. Time for you to back up your bullshit assertion.

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 4:37 PM | PERMALINK

To track these kinds of dog whistle politics visit stopdogwhistleracism.com.

Posted by: ludovic on October 30, 2008 at 4:45 PM | PERMALINK

Assertion? Read the writings and quotes of JT Plumber hisself. His words. Read the what people are saying about him. Their words.

I have. Their words say that they'd rather pay higher taxes and have their money go to big corporations than help their fellow Americans. Even Joe admitted that he would pay less in taxes under Obama's plan ... but he's still going to vote for McCain, higher taxes for himself, and lower taxes for corporations.

Why is that? Do corporations deserve our tax dollars more than our fellow citizens?

The only person running around yelling RACE!!! is you. And everyone else here. Time for you to back up your bullshit assertion.

We have. Repeatedly. Go take a look at the Michelle Malkin piece where she claims that Obama will confiscate the property of white people and give it to black people if he becomes president.

The fact that you lack reading comprehension and reasoning skills is not our fault, but I guess that's what makes you a Republican.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on October 30, 2008 at 5:06 PM | PERMALINK

sjrsm is on record here calling arabs "ragheads." he may not be the go-to guy regarding awareness of racially charged terminology.

it does, however, suggest that he is exactly the type to respond to mccain's dog whistle as expected.

Posted by: Gonads on October 30, 2008 at 5:08 PM | PERMALINK

Their words say that they'd rather pay higher taxes and have their money go to big corporations than help their fellow Americans.
Posted by: Mnemosyne

No, their words say that "Share the wealth" is right up there with "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Reminds me of the Godfather II and "I just want to wet my beak."

You want to talk about dog whistles and coded messages, these are dog whistles for socialism, and for some reason Obama let down his guard and gave it a loud tweeet!

This shouldn't be about the Plumber. If Obama hadn't said "share the wealth" it would have been a nothing moment. If you and yours hadn't gone after JT with your politics of personal destruction he'd have disappeared after his few minutes of fame. Joe The Plumber is your creation. Enjoy. He'll be around for years.

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 5:16 PM | PERMALINK

No, their words say that "Share the wealth" is right up there with "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Which means it is about the money after all.

Posted by: Gregory on October 30, 2008 at 5:21 PM | PERMALINK

joe the plumber is a know-nothing racist piece of shit emblematic of the ignorant, know nothing racist pieces of shit that palin and the christian taliban have elevated to the status of "real americans."

nothing more, nothing less. he's nothing after mccain loses next week.

Posted by: Gonads on October 30, 2008 at 5:21 PM | PERMALINK

Which means it is about the money after all.
Posted by: Gregory

Only to someone for whom being given money is no different that earning it, e.g., you.

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 5:23 PM | PERMALINK

Enjoy. He'll be around for years.

But, like Sarah Palin, completely unseen and unheard after Nov. 4, 2008 except by those who watch Fox, listen to winger radio or read unhinged forwarded emails. Enjoy. If Joey and Sarah say something stupider than usual, be sure to waddle over here and tell us.

Posted by: on October 30, 2008 at 5:30 PM | PERMALINK

Only to someone for whom being given money is no different that earning it, e.g., you.
Posted by: SJRSM

Unless Gregory is a white, male investment banker or bank CEO, then that's a vicious slander.

If I were Gregory, I wouldn't appreciate being equated with that kind of white trash.

Posted by: Gonads on October 30, 2008 at 5:35 PM | PERMALINK

But, like Sarah Palin, completely unseen and unheard after Nov. 4, 2008 except by those who watch Fox, listen to winger radio or read unhinged forwarded emails. Enjoy. If Joey and Sarah say something stupider than usual, be sure to waddle over here and tell us.
Posted by:

Ya, don't ever watch Fox or listen to right wing radio. You might learn something that would threaten your liberal comfort level. Every day I see solid investigative journalism on Fox and hear good points from Rush and Hugh and Ann and Michael that you morons completely miss because you're hiding in this echo chamber.

Posted by: SJRSN on October 30, 2008 at 5:37 PM | PERMALINK

If Joey and Sarah say something stupider than usual, be sure to waddle over here and tell us.
Posted by:

Now that is genuinely funny. Leftie sites like this are CONSUMED with talking about McCain, Plain, and now Joe the Plumber. Go check the front page and see how many articles are about Obama versus otherwise.

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 5:37 PM | PERMALINK

Oh sorry, I'm a dumbfuck. I didn't read the "after Nov. 4, 2008" part about JT and Sarah. I'm still an independent thinker who believes neither party has a lock on truth, though. I considered voting for Obama but I think I'm going to have to go with McCain. I was really openminded and gave it full consideration, but I'm going with Johnny.

Posted by: SJRSN on October 30, 2008 at 5:48 PM | PERMALINK

You have to forgive SJGRSM, when you spend as much time killing brown people as he has, you tend to stop thinking of them as equally human. Hell, if you're a real sick bastard you might compare blowing an innocent woman to bits with VD.

Obama's crime isn't taxation, it's that, unlike McCain, he isn't for simple-minded jingoism that murders foreigners without any thought to national security. Taxation is just an excuse why nutcases like SJGRSM won't vote for Obama.

It's that simple.

Posted by: heavy on October 30, 2008 at 5:54 PM | PERMALINK

If you said that to my face, heavy, I'd beat the living crap out of you. To show how hypocritical this group is, no one ever speaks up against heavy when he spreads his hate speech against me. The things he posts are the worst things ever said here, but not a peep from the caring and compassionate liberals.

Posted by: SJRSN on October 30, 2008 at 6:01 PM | PERMALINK

I was really openminded and gave it full consideration, but I'm going with Johnny.
Posted by: SJRSN

RSM promising to vote for the guy who'll kill more "ragheads" as he calls them ... color me surprised.

Posted by: Gonads on October 30, 2008 at 6:39 PM | PERMALINK

The real target is those awful socialist liberals, who are taking money out of the pockets of hard working, God and America loving folks and putting it in the hands of lazy good for nothing scum who don't work for a living and hate America.
Posted by: hark

Pretty much...

[we hope you enjoyed your stay - mod.]

Posted by: SJRSM on October 30, 2008 at 7:11 PM | PERMALINK

It happens every four years. Are our memories really that short?
Posted by: A DC Wonk

Yes, we're really not that smart. Just loudmouthed.

Posted by: heavy's Gonads on October 30, 2008 at 7:51 PM | PERMALINK

No, their words say that "Share the wealth" is right up there with "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

So, again, by voting for McCain they're indicating that they prefer to pay higher taxes that will go to corporations than pay lower taxes that might possibly maybe go to a meth addict in the Appalachians. Because, what, the corporations really deserve our money, unlike those filthy drug addicts?

This is why you're so funny to me, SRJSM. You are voting to raise your own taxes to prevent your tax money from being given to people on welfare. You would rather pay more money to the government than see your tax dollars go somewhere you don't approve of.

I think you may be right -- it's not about the money, or you'd actually do the thing that's in your own self-interest. There must be something underlying it, something about the people you don't want your money going to. It's not the idea of the money being given to people who don't deserve it, because then you'd be up in arms about Exxon getting tax breaks when they made $4 billion in a single quarter.

What could the difference be between Exxon and the people on welfare be that makes you so determined to give your money to Exxon instead?

Posted by: Mnemosyne on October 30, 2008 at 8:16 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, sorry, I misunderestimated my Exxon comment above. $4 billion is what the oil companies get in tax breaks. Exxon actually made $14 billion in profits last quarter, not $4 billion. Which is why SJRSM thinks they deserve his tax dollars more than his fellow citizens do.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on October 30, 2008 at 8:28 PM | PERMALINK

Don't even bother with SJRSM. Republicans like him can't even figure out basic things, like the fact that the EITC is only available to those that *work* and draw a paycheck. They just so happen to get paid so little that they are under the official poverty level, and so the government cuts them a check. You would think that the "responsibility" crowd would be all in favor of this, especially since you have to have actual earned income to qualify (disability is included also, but you have to be disabled for the entire year, I believe), and it means that you're taking another person off of welfare. Furthermore, a lot of people that are eligible for it, do not take advantage of it. In my case, my wife and I were not married, but had a child and were just starting out, and she received the EITC one year because we were still filing separately. That money was very helpful in getting us ahead. We now have been married for many years, we have owned our own small business for many years, and pay very large amounts of taxes. So, when Republican jack-asses talk about giving money to those that don't work as hard, they're talking out of their asses again and basically calling my wife and I a couple of dead-beats, and I'm sure that we're not the only people that have used the EITC when they were starting out.

Posted by: OhNoNotAgain on October 30, 2008 at 10:48 PM | PERMALINK

When Obama talks about Hispanics, it's code for anti-white racism. He wants to brown up the country and put whites in concentration camps.

Posted by: Luther on October 31, 2008 at 1:17 AM | PERMALINK

Mnemosyne,

1. You don't know who I'm voting for. I like Obama. He's post-racial. You're not.

2. It is possible to not want to give tax breaks to corporations and not want to reward people who don't work hard

3. You act like corporations are A Bad Thing. Who owns Exxon stock? About 75% is owned by mututal funds, 401K and IRAs, employee-owned stock, and individual small investors. People like you and me.

Posted by: SJRSM on October 31, 2008 at 8:52 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly