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

September 30, 2009

INCITEMENT RHETORIC GETS EVEN MORE DANGEROUS.... Just eight months into a Democratic administration, Newsmax is running a piece speculating about a military overthrow of the elected leadership of the United States government. Seriously.

Newsmax columnist John L. Perry encourages his right-wing readers not to "dismiss" the notion of an American military coup as "unrealistic."

America isn't the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn't mean it wont [sic]. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it....

Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.

Military intervention is what Obama's exponentially accelerating agenda for "fundamental change" toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama's radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.

In April, a common Republican talking point was the notion that Democrats were creating some kind of "banana republic." In retrospect, the irony is rich.

There is an unmistakable trend in right-wing rhetoric in the direction of extremism and violence. It's not at all healthy, and it's a sign of conservative contingents gone stark raving mad.

Steve Benen 9:20 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (89)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

There is another Oklahoma City in our near future, I become more certain of that every day. I just hope by some lucky accident it ends up being far less lethal than the original.

Posted by: Steve LaBonne on September 30, 2009 at 9:23 AM | PERMALINK

Where is Kirk Douglas now that we need him?

Posted by: Mustang Bobby on September 30, 2009 at 9:24 AM | PERMALINK

I would wonder what kind of violence it might take before the Right realizes how bad this sort of thing is for America.

But then I remember that these people really, really do not like America. They don't care for its institutions, its freedoms, its diversity--and they certainly don't care about the welfare of its citizens. So, if it takes the deaths of several thousand (or even hundreds of thousands) of Americans to restore Republicans to power, that's a good thing in their book.

Posted by: Domage on September 30, 2009 at 9:24 AM | PERMALINK

I agree with Mustang Bobby - It seems some on the far right are playing out their seven days in May fantasies right before out eyes. What we are witnessing is beyond repugnant. It smacks of sedition! -Kevo

Posted by: kevo on September 30, 2009 at 9:29 AM | PERMALINK

I find speech like this to be more than a little frightening.

Some of them will not be happy until Obama is dead or blood is running down the streets. I guess elections don't matter? When Bush was appointed president I didn't advocate for a violent overthrow even though I believed totally that Gore won the election. Their lack of maturity and reason is truly appalling.

Posted by: Missouri Mule on September 30, 2009 at 9:30 AM | PERMALINK

"Bloodless coup" ??

Does Perry think that the people he's stirring up would do this without violence? Does he know these people? Has he gotten out of his protected pundit-bubble and walked among them?


Steve L: I share your concerns.

Posted by: TonyB on September 30, 2009 at 9:31 AM | PERMALINK

Looks like NewsMax has pulled this article from their web site. After the fact, editors realized coup talk is a step too far.

Posted by: KevinMc on September 30, 2009 at 9:31 AM | PERMALINK

This guy and his ilk, project such a sense of entitlement, don't they? They run around shreiking "real American, real American", without acknowledging that it was the Democratic Process, in the their beloved Republic, which elected a Black Democrat President. I never read it, it's never mentioned on FOX, and there are no placards at townhowls proclaiming Freedom at the Ballot Box. It's all birth certificates, Take Back America, Kill Acorn and guns at presidential events.

Posted by: bcnaz on September 30, 2009 at 9:31 AM | PERMALINK

I've said it before and I'll say it again, "Repugs won't be truly happy until all those with skin color other than white are either slaves or serfs and the poor whites are made into indentured servants".

Posted by: chris on September 30, 2009 at 9:32 AM | PERMALINK

This is my favorite line:

Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem.

Apparently they've ruled out exercising their franchise to vote as a way of addressing political differences.

Posted by: shortstop on September 30, 2009 at 9:34 AM | PERMALINK

What is it going to take for Republicans to really start pushing back on this kind of rhetoric. Newsmax may have taken the article down but they published it in the first place. You can't tell me there's not some editor there that looked at this piece and thought hold on a minute.

The rightwing is going collectively crazy and dragging their elected leaders with them.

Posted by: Unstable Isotope on September 30, 2009 at 9:35 AM | PERMALINK

What if, God Forbid, somebody (obviously a crazy lunatic!) was to kill the president?

...But it COULD happen, and if it did, well, wouldn't we be better off?

What the fuck is the matter with you?

Posted by: shortstop on September 30, 2009 at 9:36 AM | PERMALINK

We are inching closer to a modern civil war. This is getting seriously scary. The problem is you can't reason with the crazy. Their minds are made up and I fear there is no turning back for those that have already drank the kool aid. Another disturbing thought...you all have seen how the crazy can go mainstream in a viral blink of an eye. We skirting disaster....I'm not liking this.

Ronald

Posted by: Ronald on September 30, 2009 at 9:36 AM | PERMALINK

shortstop - I believe it was /snark ...the next step by these crazies

Posted by: John R on September 30, 2009 at 9:42 AM | PERMALINK
I would wonder what kind of violence it might take before the Right realizes how bad this sort of thing is for America.
See 1861-1865 for an order-of-magnitude estimate.

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of private, for-profit, health insurance is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of slightly lower top marginal income tax rates is no virtue!

Posted by: Davis X. Machina on September 30, 2009 at 9:43 AM | PERMALINK

Good lord, that was obtuse of me. My apologies, DAY.

Posted by: shortstop on September 30, 2009 at 9:43 AM | PERMALINK

They were suppose to have a permanent majority by now. Seems it didn't work out as they planned.

Posted by: jeff on September 30, 2009 at 9:44 AM | PERMALINK

"I would wonder what kind of violence it might take before the Right realizes how bad this sort of thing is for America."

I definitely agree that another Oklahoma City is coming. My theory (crackpot or otherwise) is that conservative leaders are hoping for it, and actually nudging these lunatics towards it. I'm guessing they believe such an event would throw the population into their welcoming, national security loving arms.

This has gone far beyond kissing up to christian conservatives. It became clear when the stink from Sarah Palin began drawing flies last fall that the Republicans were willing to court a very dangerous element. That element has taken root in the Party.

I think something bad will happen, and I think all of these people (the politicians, the media stars) will be held accountable.

Posted by: SaintZak on September 30, 2009 at 9:44 AM | PERMALINK

Time to open the FEMA re-education camps I say.

Posted by: John R on September 30, 2009 at 9:45 AM | PERMALINK

I'm curious. Can anyone remember seeing this level of incitement on the left while GWB was president? I'm genuinely curious. It's hard to imagine there wasn't someone who said something like this (thinking of constitutional liberties, the unnecessary war in Iraq, etc.). But was there? Or is this territory that only the right travels in?

Posted by: prettyboywally on September 30, 2009 at 9:45 AM | PERMALINK

Also, I just noticed the first "thought" in this excerpt, which suggests that military coups are only messy in countries where there are lots of brown people. This is the kind of delusional nonsense these people are (a) capable of and (b) stuck with. As in, "I can't have Obama as my president! If there were a coup, it would be a nice one! Shouldn't we maybe try that?" Sad, unbelievable, frightening.

Posted by: prettyboywally on September 30, 2009 at 9:48 AM | PERMALINK

I definitely agree that another Oklahoma City is coming. My theory (crackpot or otherwise) is that conservative leaders are hoping for it, and actually nudging these lunatics towards it. I'm guessing they believe such an event would throw the population into their welcoming, national security loving arms

I believe at least some of them recognize that another OKC would be seriously bad PR for the GOP. Tim McVeigh was not hailed as a hero by anybody who could prove marginal psychological fitness.

I think what they're pushing for is quite simply a presidential assassination.

Posted by: shortstop on September 30, 2009 at 9:48 AM | PERMALINK


After years and years of conservatives bullying Democrats into repudiating so-called extremism (MoveOn's "Betrayus" comes to mind) it would be refreshing if they held themselves to the same standard. Anyone wanna bet whether or not Republicans actually come out and repudiate this extremely unamerican crap?

Posted by: Lab Partner on September 30, 2009 at 9:48 AM | PERMALINK

Don't delude yourself and think they will be held accountable. When....when has that EVER happened?

Posted by: Ronald on September 30, 2009 at 9:50 AM | PERMALINK

shortstop - I believe it was /snark ...the next step by these crazies

Posted by: John R at 9:42 AM | PERMALINK

It was moron snark. Crap.

Posted by: burro on September 30, 2009 at 9:51 AM | PERMALINK

The Smith Act is still on the books in this country.

"The Alien Registration Act or Smith Act (18 U.S.C. 2385) of 1940 is a United States federal statute that makes it a criminal offense for anyone to knowingly or willfully advocate, abet, advise or teach the duty, necessity, desirability or propriety of overthrowing the Government of the United States or of any State by force or violence, or for anyone to organize any association which teaches, advises or encourages such an overthrow, or for anyone to become a member of or to affiliate with any such association."

Toss Perry into prison for sedition, and seize and dismantle Newsmax.

As my mom used to say, 'Give them something to cry about.'

Posted by: Stranger on September 30, 2009 at 9:52 AM | PERMALINK

I want to know who NEWSMAX's primary advertisers are. We should organize a boycott of this type of irresponsible journalism.

Posted by: rawls on September 30, 2009 at 9:53 AM | PERMALINK

Simply appalling.

I'm with Stranger.

Posted by: Jon on September 30, 2009 at 9:53 AM | PERMALINK

Shortstop, I doubt it would be bad for them. The media would bend over backwards to absolve them of guilt and pansy-ass democrats would sit there and do nothing.

Posted by: soullite on September 30, 2009 at 9:54 AM | PERMALINK

Apparently the GOP jobs plan is to create the need for the largest secret service ever. I hope every day they're on their toes and sharp. They've got a big job on their hands.

Posted by: doubtful on September 30, 2009 at 9:55 AM | PERMALINK

The original article no longer appears on newsmax's site. Hopefully the editors will provide some sort of statement of why it was pulled.

Posted by: Tom on September 30, 2009 at 9:56 AM | PERMALINK

Looks like NewsMax pulled the column.... Chickenshits..

Posted by: Dave in Austin on September 30, 2009 at 10:01 AM | PERMALINK

If universal health care makes for a "Marxist state", does that mean we lost the Cold War? Just consider that all our NATO allies have had "Marxist states," by this guy's definition, for decades. It's absolutely unfathomable to me that even a single person can believe this kind of crap.

Posted by: will on September 30, 2009 at 10:03 AM | PERMALINK

If Democrats have any courage, a big "if", they would hang this crap around the necks of every Republican running for office in 2010. Let the voters decide whether this is appropriate or supported.

Posted by: Th on September 30, 2009 at 10:05 AM | PERMALINK

If you Google the name Smedley Butler, you'll see that right wing zealots are not averse to grabbing power. They were terrified of Roosevelt then and would not let a quaint old constitution stand between them and their craving for control and profit.

Posted by: John Fullerton on September 30, 2009 at 10:06 AM | PERMALINK

If you Google the name Smedley Butler, you'll see that right wing zealots are not averse to grabbing power. They were terrified of Roosevelt then and would not let a quaint old constitution stand between them and their craving for control and profit.

Posted by: John Fullerton on September 30, 2009 at 10:07 AM | PERMALINK

When the left was angry at Bush there was talk of impeachment and war crimes trials. In other words, taking legal actions to challenge Bush's policies.

On the right the talk is of assassinations and coups. You may recall that even back in 2004, when it was apparent that Bush might lose the election, many on the right were arguing for some kind of Bush-led dictatorship as preferable to a democracy that would elect Kerry.

The right, for all its talk about "law and order" and "fealty to the Constitution" really doesn't give a rat's ass about the either the law or the Constitution.

Posted by: ZH on September 30, 2009 at 10:08 AM | PERMALINK

I sincerely hope that the FBI and Secret Service are paying Mr. John Perry, the author of the article, a little visit--or a long visit.

Posted by: sagacity on September 30, 2009 at 10:09 AM | PERMALINK

As much as some of us detested the Bush years, I don't ever recall such a blatant call to arms (there ain't no such thing as a bloodless coup).

What we are seeing now is a seething, rabid, irrational, and dangerous discourse. It's one-sided. The right are hammering their voices all over the air-waves, trying to drown out the voices of reason and compassion.

We detested George, but I never heard "kill him."

I just hope the Secret Service hasn't been infiltrated by right wingnut rabid thugs.

Posted by: Tom Nicholson on September 30, 2009 at 10:14 AM | PERMALINK


Has anyone heard the phrase "during a time of war" lately? It doesn't seem that long ago when Republicans couldn't go two sentences without aiming the phrase at some Democrat.

I also seem to recall hearing the same Republicans using the phrase "Commander in Chief" a lot too. Haven't heard that one for a while either.

Posted by: Lab Partner on September 30, 2009 at 10:18 AM | PERMALINK

If Democrats have any courage,

They have no courage.

Republicans are the scarecrow and the tin man -- no brain and no heart. But an insane amount of bravery. Democrats are the cowardly lion.

Posted by: ZH on September 30, 2009 at 10:21 AM | PERMALINK

The republican right nutcase rhetoric is unjustified (their problem is their sanity, not our reality), but the appropriate parallel to the levels of rhetoric is probably not with the Civil War but with SDS and Black Panther rhetoric in the late 1960's.

Posted by: N.Wells on September 30, 2009 at 10:22 AM | PERMALINK

Looks like Rahm needs to get out the tire iron and work on some kneecaps....

Posted by: Just Dropping By on September 30, 2009 at 10:22 AM | PERMALINK

A military coup to "restore and defend the Constitution"?? WHAT. THE. FUCK.? Perhaps these lunatics should sit down and actually, ya know, READ the fucking document before advocating destroying it in order to "defend" it.

Posted by: ckelly on September 30, 2009 at 10:25 AM | PERMALINK

We detested George, but I never heard "kill him."

Of course, that might have been because Cheney was next in line.

Just kidding. There wasn't "kill him" talk about Nixon when Ford was next in line. There wasn't "kill him" talk about Reagan. There *was* impeachment talk in both cases, because Nixon, Reagan, like GWB, all just couldn't conform to the Constitution. There was no impeachment talk with Ford or GHWB because as much as we might have disliked their policies, that wasn't appropriate for them.

OTOH, impeachment bumper stickers were printed by the right wing for Clinton by February, 1993, and for Obama even before the election. And assassination talk was going on before the inauguration for both.

Posted by: ZH on September 30, 2009 at 10:26 AM | PERMALINK

Not only is this idiot treasonous and hateful, he's absolutely nuts.

What the heck does this mean?

Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars.

What kind of crack is this guy smoking? He's advocating the illegal exchange of a democratically elected president, and the appointment of "an interim administration." Who? some imaginary Giant Bunny Rabbit? He's imagining replacing federal employees with members of the military? He's imagining "nation building?" (a hilarious irony, coming from the right) What kind of building does he imagine our nation needs?

his supposedly reassuring fantasy of "how it would work" is so nonsensical it attests to how in-fucking-sane this guy is.

I'm glad Newsmax had a moment of shame and took it down.

Posted by: g on September 30, 2009 at 10:28 AM | PERMALINK

N. Wells" At least the Black Panthers were an embattled and persecuted minority. They had good reason to want to tear the entire system down: it was rigged against them. What is the excuse of conservatives?

Posted by: soullite on September 30, 2009 at 10:32 AM | PERMALINK

I'm less concerned and more amused by this than most of you, I guess.

He's talking to himself. They are all pretty much having a cheeto-laden circle jerk out there in Wingnutistan.

Believe me, the military is only too happy to have replaced Bush with Obama.

Posted by: Noam Sane on September 30, 2009 at 10:33 AM | PERMALINK

I'm glad Newsmax had a moment of shame and took it down.

Sadly, I'm sure this little stunt will boost the magazine's subscription numbers seven fold, and they know it. Beck has shown the way to make mega-moola off the millions of ignorant and easily fomented Americans in this country.

Posted by: about time on September 30, 2009 at 10:41 AM | PERMALINK
He's talking to himself.

The concern is not that the military establishment is listening to such fruitcakes. It's that there are potential McVeighs listening to them. I think it's a concern that needs to be taken seriously, because many innocent lives can be at stake.

Posted by: Steve LaBonne on September 30, 2009 at 11:07 AM | PERMALINK

Bloodless coup? Just like Franco in Spain, or Pinochet in Chile. Those were civilized, first world countries too. There wasn't any bloodshed in those military coups ... nope.

Look - Mr. Perry knows perfectly well that there is no such thing as a "bloodless coup" - just the same way as there is no such thing as a Constitutional coup by the U.S. military. He is trafficking in the sort of Orwellian doubletalk that seeks to legitimize scary and otherwise unacceptable ideas, and give them a gloss of legitimacy.

Posted by: Bokonon on September 30, 2009 at 11:12 AM | PERMALINK

It's not at all healthy, and it's a sign of conservative contingents gone stark raving mad.

On the other hand, if Obama's policies are outraging loathsome toads like Perry, it's a sure sign he's all the right track.

Posted by: DelCapslock on September 30, 2009 at 11:16 AM | PERMALINK

At the risk of repeating myself, the most underplayed story of the last 8 months has been the run on gun stores and the purchase of ammunition. I don't think the progressives are driving the uptick in gun sales. Maybe we should be. Look, Friedman is right, there now is two very distinct Americas. Given the power of the federal government in comparison to 1860, I don't think the Country is in for another civil war. However, I do think that you will see more states and local governments attempting to go rogue. The 10th amendment will become a very important constitutional principle, and look for the Supreme Court to revisit the settled principles of law in this area. I agree with Andrew Sullivan and Friedman that the Union has been severely weakened by events of the last 16 years. My disgust with the Bush administration left very little room for feeling like there was a we in politics. What they did to Clinton was inexcuseable. Politics is purely tribal now; there are no overriding principles to bind us together, just remnants of institutions to be used in our ongoing internecene war.

Posted by: Scott F. on September 30, 2009 at 11:19 AM | PERMALINK

Apparently they've ruled out exercising their franchise to vote as a way of addressing political differences.-- shortstop, @9:34

Yeah, but, see... Replacing Obama by the electoral process doesn't come up till 2012; that *whole 3 years*. A nice little coup, OTOH... we could have it tomorrow (or the day after, the worse comes to worst). Flowers and chocolates from the grateful citizenry littering every street... Uniforms -- so handsome... Military marches on the radio 24/7 -- so rousing...

It is childish but it is also scary, given that it's not being proposed by a mentally handicapped two year old. I wish these people were held accountable for their words, not just their actions. "Publish and be damned" is a fine principle, if you're willing to take the second part of it with the first.

Posted by: exlibra on September 30, 2009 at 11:19 AM | PERMALINK

Newsmax forgot to remove the column from their mobile site: http://m.newsmax.com/site?t=fT8Ct8seTWd7EzpnpgDzIw&sid=newsmax

Posted by: Husker Blue on September 30, 2009 at 11:22 AM | PERMALINK

There are some very ill people in our midst. A threat to public health, even. How do we approach other public health threats? Not by bashing the sick. First, we contain the spread by reducing exposure to the infectious agent. Education is inoculation against ignorance. Second, let's treat those who are sick with compassion and help them heal. Very few people actually enjoy hating and living in fear. They need and want an alternative - something good to live for. Let's offer it to them. We can all do our part in our daily lives. Excoriating these folks and setting them up as the enemy only feeds their paranoia. If we believe we're our brothers' keeper, well, these social "lepers" are our brothers, folks.

Posted by: FC on September 30, 2009 at 11:22 AM | PERMALINK

I'm glad Newsmax had a moment of shame and took it down.

But in all likelihood, they had no such moment.

By allowing that column to be posted in the first place, the idea of a 'bloodless coup' (sheah, right) has begun its journey into 'acceptable' political discourse.

They're completely poisoning the well, one drip at a time. Perry should be facing prison time - the sentence for sedition is death, but I'm a compassionate liberal so I'll show his hatin' ass a little mercy.

Posted by: Stranger on September 30, 2009 at 11:23 AM | PERMALINK
Does Perry think that the people he's stirring up would do this without violence? Does he know these people? Has he gotten out of his protected pundit-bubble and walked among them?
Exactly. For these people, violence (or fantasies of violence) isn't to be avoided--it's the whole point. They're just looking for a pretext. Posted by: Tom Hilton on September 30, 2009 at 11:27 AM | PERMALINK

These are the terrorists who pose the most immediate threat to our national security. C

an anyone recall any left-wing organization whose rhetoric was even remotely comparable during the Bush years?

Posted by: bdop4 on September 30, 2009 at 11:34 AM | PERMALINK

Who's afraid of pudgy wimps who couldn't run around the block? Bring it on.

Posted by: Bob M on September 30, 2009 at 11:34 AM | PERMALINK

Newsmax has taken the column down, but TPM has the full text here

Posted by: Win Pollard on September 30, 2009 at 11:35 AM | PERMALINK

This is why we allow (and TREASURE) free speech in this country. Every day, we can watch them slit their own throat with their absurd statements.

(PS. "accountability challenged"? Nobody has less accountability than a military dictator with a gun.)

Posted by: osama_been_forgotten on September 30, 2009 at 11:37 AM | PERMALINK

If they're pudgy wimps with guns, I'm terrified!

Posted by: Kirsten on September 30, 2009 at 11:43 AM | PERMALINK

Here is the web site of the Republican National Committee.

http://www.rnc.org/splashpage/index.aspx

It has a response feature. I encourage you to use it. What would we like to see on their web-site? An immediate and unequivocal repudiation of this sort of rhetoric. In my own comment, I advised them that if the Republican leadership does not condemn this, their silence will be taken as consent, and the blood of the next Oklahoma City victims will be on their hands. I also said that the American people would hold them to account for it.

Posted by: T-Rex on September 30, 2009 at 11:51 AM | PERMALINK

Very few people actually enjoy hating and living in fear.

Actually, a lot of people do enjoy hating. They like to gen up fear, too, because it gives them an excuse to hate. (And, hey, horror movies?)

Why do they enjoy hating? Because it is one way they can feel morally righteous while excitedly envisioning the death or suffering of other human beings (sadism), and it gives them the sense that they are embarked on a Great Mission to save the world/deliver justice. Very exciting. Never a dull moment. Makes life worth living.

Negative excitement, especially the sui generis variety, over things that are not in fact dangerous, is pleasurable for many, many people. Especially the bored and failed.

Posted by: Julia Grey on September 30, 2009 at 11:53 AM | PERMALINK

I have a hard time believing that any members of the military hierarchy would consider this. If they were really upset, at the most they would quietly resign. That happened during the Clinton administration, and the military back then was much more opposed to him then they are to Obama.

Posted by: Monkey Puzzle on September 30, 2009 at 11:54 AM | PERMALINK

If their coup is going to be "bloodless," then why all the guns?

Posted by: Gaia on September 30, 2009 at 11:56 AM | PERMALINK

There's not much new here. Roosevelt, Kennedy, Clinton, and now Obama put the right-wing into apoplectic fits of rage. Truman Johnson and Carter didn't seem to have the same effect. Smedley Butler was still a man of honor and blew the whistle on the plot to overthrow Roosevelt. Would someone do that now?

Kennedy was so aware of the animus towards him in some quarters that he encouraged the production of "Seven Days in May" as a way to alert the country. Unfortunately he didn't take seriously the warnings he got about staying away from Texas in November 1963.

The paranoid right wants a dictatorship of entitled white aristocrats, basically a return of the Confederacy, and to them democratic institutions are important only in so far as they maintain a rigid social structure with them in power. That isn't new either.

Idiot Perry doesn't exactly advocate a coup or an assassination, clever wording, but suggests it wouldn't be so bad if one were to occur. Where does free speech end and sedition begin? And who's going to test that distinction? Not the Obama administration.

The right-wing is living in a Rambo movie of the 1980s. It makes them feel better. With the media in general and the right's echo chamber in particular, the name of the game is to ratchet up the rhetoric to hysteria levels and legitimize non-existent problems. It's all about perception. There is no reality anymore.

Posted by: rrk1 on September 30, 2009 at 11:58 AM | PERMALINK


My fellow citizens, the next civil war may be right around the corner. Or it may be that we continue to screw around and let this crap go on and on for another generation.

But the next civil war is inevitable.

The last time, they assassinated a president, got away with it, and we appeased and pandered to the Disloyal South with a whitewash Truth and Reconciliation, and a hearty reconstruction. Instead of razing their cities to the ground, taking their women and children into slavery, and putting all the men (lets call them "enemy combatants") to the sword.

And because of this leniency, the stars and bars still proudly fly over their capitols. They still talk openly of revolution, and genocide, and they still hold midnight meetings with their pointy-white hats.

Might I suggest, that THIS time - (though we've already allowed them to murder the Kennedys, and MLK, and probably also senator Wellstone) - THIS time. . . can we PLEASE do the job right?

When (not if) they start another SHOOTING civil war - they should suffer real consequences. As a culture, they should be held responsible. As responsible as NAZI Germany was held after WW II. (might I suggest y'all take a look at photos of downtown Berlin after the Soviets got through with them). The noose should change from a symbol of black lynchings, into a symbol of justice for these thugs.

Lincoln's murderers were NEVER brought to justice. And their heirs and descendants are still plotting. Banjos and bayonets.

Posted by: ghost_of_lincoln on September 30, 2009 at 12:02 PM | PERMALINK

Julia - good comments re "the joy of hate". Orwell has it down pretty well in _1984_. I guess releasing pent up rage and frustration and making someone pay can feel pretty good. Yet deep down they and we are small children, needing acceptance and validation. The way is not to make them feel less secure, but more. Refute the behavior, not the people. Disarm them. Obama is good at this. (I have a jpeg of him as a jedi knight on my desktop. :)

Posted by: FC on September 30, 2009 at 12:03 PM | PERMALINK

If their coup is going to be "bloodless," then why all the guns?

I think they're just trying to lure the bored and failed, as Julia Grey puts it (she's right; FC's wrong -- there's a whole class of people who fucking thrive on hatred and fear, and guess who they didn't vote for?) out of their dark, smelly, depressing lairs with the promise that no one on their side will get hurt. 'Cause they're not pussies and their cause is awesomely righteous.

Posted by: shortstop on September 30, 2009 at 12:08 PM | PERMALINK

"...Military intervention is what Obama's exponentially accelerating agenda for "fundamental change" toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama's radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible..."-JLPerry

Hell yeah! And then we could just re-hold elections and elect Obama all over again.

These A-holes only consider this a democracy when they are in power. If it's not their way then no matter how big a majority says otherwise it's just not American.

What they will do to get their way is destroy our democracy...telling us you can only vote for them.

Posted by: bjobotts on September 30, 2009 at 12:08 PM | PERMALINK

Yet deep down they and we are small children, needing acceptance and validation.

They want it from each other. From people who fully validate their hate and fear. Not from us.

Posted by: shortstop on September 30, 2009 at 12:10 PM | PERMALINK

Yep, the column is still up on their mobile site. This means they're still in violation of the Smith Act.

Anyone want to report this to the Secret Service? I'm at work now and can't take political action from my desk ...

Posted by: charlotte on September 30, 2009 at 12:27 PM | PERMALINK

Shortstop - I'm talking about seeing this us vs. them duality and transcending it. The solution to violence is not more violence. We need to protect ourselves and not stand passively by while they go on a destructive rampage, but the primary focus needs to be peace, or love, if you prefer - a peace they too can believe in. I know it sounds cliché and maybe even naive but experience tells me it works. It's also very hard to rise above our own impulse to punish.

Posted by: FC on September 30, 2009 at 12:28 PM | PERMALINK

Anyone want to report this to the Secret Service? I'm at work now and can't take political action from my desk ...

They were aware of it minutes after it went up last night.

Posted by: shortstop on September 30, 2009 at 12:33 PM | PERMALINK

Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem.

He meant to say "The Final Solution to the Obama Question."

Sounds like this lunatic would love to help organize a 21st century Wannsee Conference. Sick bastard.

Posted by: Death Panel Truck on September 30, 2009 at 12:39 PM | PERMALINK

NewsMax is now saying Perry's only relationsip w/ it is as an "unpaid blogger," but in 1999, when he first became associated w/ it, NewsMax issued a press release describing him as its "Senior Editor." That has continued to be his title. He's been a featured columnist since then.

Posted by: K on September 30, 2009 at 12:47 PM | PERMALINK

from the mobile site: http://m.newsmax.com/site?t=Skc.L1f5Nv3vus5UaltCKA&sid=newsmax

"John L. Perry, a prize-winning newspaper editor and writer who served on White House staffs of two presidents, is a regular columnist for Newsmax.com. Read John Perry's columns here."

Posted by: FC on September 30, 2009 at 12:50 PM | PERMALINK

This is just more projection from the right-wing fringe. They are so embarrassed at how George Bush compares to Obama, they are trying to make us forget how pathetic he was as POTUS. History will judge, and history will not be kind to GWB or his nut-job supporters like these.

Posted by: Marko on September 30, 2009 at 1:02 PM | PERMALINK

Perry is making the same appeal to the "Christian" conservative "bored and failed" (as shortstop rightly points out) that madrassah leaders make to idle and unemployed young Muslims. Many who call themselves Christians have a fetish for violence and martyrdom, so I don't know that they think all the blood lost will be ours. I can easily imagine some collection of militia types (who at least think of themselves as "skilled, military-trained, nation-builders") hearing this as their call to greatness, and dim hordes of fundamentalists imagining themselves as Christian soldiers in a just cause.

Posted by: Gaia on September 30, 2009 at 1:13 PM | PERMALINK

N. Wells:

"The republican right nutcase rhetoric is unjustified (their problem is their sanity, not our reality), but the appropriate parallel to the levels of rhetoric is probably not with the Civil War but with SDS and Black Panther rhetoric in the late 1960's."

I agree with you that the SDS' and the Black Panthers' rhetoric was probably as unbalanced as Perry's column. However, as someone else pointed out upthread, the SDS and the Black Panthers NEVER enjoyed anything like the status or influence of a major party. Moreover, these guys hated the Democrats as much as the Republicans, and guess which party had riots sparked by Abbie Hoffman and his soul brothers? That's right, the Democratic party convention, in 1968.

Ghost_of-Lincoln:

I find your rhetoric to be just as appalling as that of Perry and his ilk. One of the problems with continued relations with the South WAS the scorch and burn policy of the North post-Civil War. I might also mention that horrible as the Nazis were, the treatment of the Germany in general after WWI and WWII was dramatically different (think Marshall plan). Which one was more successful?

Incidentally, my maiden name is Lincoln and yes, I AM related, though distantly. Somehow, based upon Lincoln's writings, I don't think he would approve of your rhetoric either.

Posted by: Wolfdaughter on September 30, 2009 at 1:29 PM | PERMALINK

This is like the beginning of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar where the conservative Brutus fails to notice that the noise of the crowd behind him is the noise it makes rejecting Antony's attempt to crown Caesar --all he can hear is the noise and sets about trying to 'save' Senatorial privileges by assassinating Caesar producing a popular backlash that destroys his very object which wasn't threatened in the first place until he freaked out.

Or am I over-reacting?

Posted by: cld on September 30, 2009 at 1:34 PM | PERMALINK

Perry has an obligation to say what military officers he's talked to. Either he's really heard somebody talk about a coup or he hasn't. He claims not know not just what's in the mind of some retired sergeant next door, but what the nation's military leaders are thinking. Why should anyone believe him?

The projection is breathtaking. Some of the national problems Perry describes are all too real, but Obama didn't cause them. The responsibility lies w/ the leaders & movement that governed before him. And to the extent ordinary citizens can be held responsible for the leaders they choose & what they demand of them, people like Perry themselves bear responsiblity for the wreckage we face. I begin to wonder how much their rage against Obama is just an evasion of the magnitude of their own failure.

Posted by: K on September 30, 2009 at 1:47 PM | PERMALINK

I believe at least some of them recognize that another OKC would be seriously bad PR for the GOP. Tim McVeigh was not hailed as a hero by anybody who could prove marginal psychological fitness.

That's why they immediately started campaigning to "prove" that McVeigh was a dupe and it was really secret agents from Iraq who did the bombing. Because if it was foreign agents and not a disgruntled former soldier with ties to white supremacist groups, then the right wing is off the hook!

Trust me, even if there is a second Oklahoma City -- or a third, or a fourth -- you'll still have Dick Cheney on "Meet the Press" talking about how the Iranians are making proxy war on us and the white guys arrested for the bombings aren't the real bombers.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on September 30, 2009 at 1:51 PM | PERMALINK

My wife attended a course at the Army War College as a civilian a few years ago. When it came out that many of the officers were not exactly enamored of the G.W. Bush administration, the civilians pushed them on why they didn’t oppose the administration more directly. An officer replied rather icily: “Be careful about what you are asking for. We don’t do coups.”

Posted by: J. Frank Parnell on September 30, 2009 at 2:02 PM | PERMALINK

So Perry is proposing a Putsch because he thinks Obama is a Nazi. He should look in a mirror and see what a Nazi looks like.

Posted by: Fafner1 on September 30, 2009 at 2:06 PM | PERMALINK

I believe at least some of them recognize that another OKC would be seriously bad PR for the GOP. Tim McVeigh was not hailed as a hero by anybody who could prove marginal psychological fitness. I think what they're pushing for is quite simply a presidential assassination.

OKC worked out quite well for them. They spun it as "see what the evil gvmt has caused an otherwise good boy to do?" and caused them to redouble their efforts smearing WJC and investigating Whitewater, until they turned up Monica, which neutered WJC better than an assassination ever could.

Posted by: Disputo on September 30, 2009 at 2:35 PM | PERMALINK

Well of course the democrats are working to produce a banana republic ! How else are we going to feed all those republicans ?

Posted by: rbe1 on September 30, 2009 at 3:34 PM | 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