Everyone’s Eating Eachother. Obama, Largely, Escapes Unscathed… June 15, 2009
Posted by bensix in Uncategorized.trackback
There is no mainstream opposition to Obama. None. Nada. Not a dissenting sausage.
Certainly, there are people who present themselves as opposition. Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity squeal away like wounded pigs, but they don’t focus anger on anything significant – just throw up a lot of futile, and somewhat gaseous, wind. The supposedly intellectual Right, too, remains bankrupt. Charles Krauthammer, for example, has been touted as “Obama’s biggest critic“, and yet his strictures only run to the President being too harsh on Israel and exaggerating the crimes of his country. As any rational mind could tell you, these accusations aren’t merely false, they are the antithesis of truth.
To add to this tidal wave of squandered noise, writers who opposed the Bush regime are wasting paper. They don’t have much to say about Obama and, indeed, are more concerned with his opponents. In his Saturday column, Frank Rich warned of a “spillover of…poison into the conservative political establishment“. This came hot on the heels of a Paul Krugman article, in which he too observed “right-wing extremism…systematically fed by the conservative media and political establishment“.
Granted, there’s a hell of a lot of nuttiness, but how dangerous is that? There was a fair bit of aggro towards the last incumbent – including often justified, accusations of fascism – but we didn’t, as far as I remember, see any rioting or assassinations. Both columnists cite the recent killings and, yes, Roeder may have been influenced by anti-abortion rhetoric. Von Brunn, however, was singularly crazy. His bigoted mind teemed with fractious, contradictory notions and he had a history of unhinged violence. Rich tries to get around this “lone gunman nutjob” thesis by quoting Beck’s apparent admission that “the pot in America is boiling“, but this misses something: Glenn Beck’s a complete idiot, and the fact that he asserts something doesn’t make it so.
The “rhetoric of purgation and annihilation” isn’t so ubiquitous that people can’t misrepresent their opponents. Rich, for example, castigates “Republican leaders” for their failure to condemn the eliminationists within their movement…
Few if any mentioned, let alone questioned, the ominous script delivered by the actor Jon Voight with the G.O.P. imprimatur at that same event. Voight’s devout wish was to “bring an end to this false prophet Obama.”
Let’s give that quote in full, shall we?
…let’s give thanks to all the great people like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, William Bennett, Glenn Beck, Hugh Hewitt, Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, Dennis Miller, Dick Morris, Ann Coulter, John Kasich, Michael Steele, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, Thomas Sowell, Victor Davis Hanson, Shelby Steele, Charles Krauthammer, Michelle Malkin, Fred Barnes and so many others. Let’s give thanks to them for not giving up and staying the course, to bring an end to this false prophet Obama.
So, is Voight imploring Ginrich or Sowell to gun down the President? No – he’s an idiot and thinks that they represent effective political opposition. This is what’s most dangerous: the acres of steaming, sickly waffle that one has to trek through to find any cogent, necessary critique.
I agree that there’s not much genuine political opposition, but I think the furious rhetoric is more important – and harmful – than you do. The right has fallen back into conspiracy and rage, and some of the most splenetic figures are using language that justifies violence. (I’d count the “false prophet” comment in there, too: I think the dog-whistle phrase has a meaning out of the context of the sentence you give. I don’t think the Beck comment is an admission, either: I think it’s an attempt to give individual angry people the promise that they belong to a community capable of acting.)
It’s obviously not possible to draw a straight line between the incitement and the action (particularly in the case of Von Brunn, as you say) and I’d rather American intellectuals were criticising Obama rather than criticising the non-arguments being thrown at him, but still – I’m not convinced that these concerns are empty. Maybe exaggerated, and definitely reactive, but not empty.
I would argue that Obama is getting no heat because, mostly and be no means perfectly, he’s doing a fair job at the moment. I mean consider the universal healthcare plan? What a step in the right direction that is.
Also, and please do not take this is a rude way, you’re a young man who has only known Bush’s 8 years as a sentinant political being, most of the time, the current state of affairs is how it’s always been; not the polarized partizan shouting match of the W’s time.
Finally, the GOP is in a mess, so the leading cheerleader for anyone BUT Obama has a sore throat and no ideas.
To take these comments in reverse order (God, it’s all crrrrazy down here…).
Daniel…
Well, here are just a few things that aren’t getting nearly enough coverage…
- Suppression of torture evidence (http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/06/16/secrecy/index.html).
- Pointless, bloody drone attacks (http://backtowardsthelocus.wordpress.com/2009/05/04/numbers-words-and-ants/).
- An endless extension of the Iraq withdrawal timetable (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/62930.html).
- The lurid hypocrisy of Ibrahim Jassam’s detention (http://backtowardsthelocus.wordpress.com/2009/05/27/free-ibrahim-jassam-2/).
I didn’t think he was establishing universal healthcare. Have you got a link?
That’s a fair point, and I agree that the sea of nuttiness is terribly bad for journalism and accountability. However, I’m not sure that’s it’s dangerous enough for mainstream commentators to focus on.
Very true.
I am aware that he is less than perfect but I also feel that what you chrage as evidence of his failinga have another side to them, may not be a great side but politics is not perfect, it is eternal compromise.
As for the healthcare plan, best place to start is here http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Why-Reform-Why-Now/ and I still feel that more good is happening than bad.
Sarah…
Oh, I quite agree that it’s not empty, and it’s certainly worthy of comment – aggression against immigrants, for example. What I object to, though, is the bewildering way it’s taken precedence over governmental scrutiny, the conflation of hate and, often misguided, criticism and the strange whispers that “something must be done!” (see, for example, Bob Herbert in today’s NYT).
I suspect that “false prophet” sprung from right-wing parodying of the supposed messianic perceptions of Obama. Then again, who knows – there’s little coherence to Voight’s intelligence (in fact, there’s little intelligence to Voight’s intelligence).
I agree that there is too little serious opposition to Obama & the points raised in comment 3.
Thank goodness for John Pilger, Chomsky, Fisk. http://www.newstatesman.com/middle-east/2009/06/pilger-obama-israel
Howver, I find your dismissiveness of right wing extremism less agreeable. Violent ‘nut job’ episodes increase under Democrat rule
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/anti-choice-violence-skyrockets-democra
That aside, keep up the good work.