Skip to content

‘Raaaaacism’ Is Just Another Word For Nothing Left To Lose

28 July 2012 @ 16:43

Leftist Hack and full-time apparatchik for the Soviet, er, Progressive Cause, Jonathan Chait has provided us with a splendid example of how the Leftist Mind works [medical term: ‘Malignant Fun House Mirror Myopia’] in a blog post over at NYMag.  A highlight:

Mitt Romney’s plan of blatantly lying about President Obama’s “you didn’t build that” speech is clearly drawing blood. But what makes the attack work so well is not so much the lie itself but the broader subtext of it….

The key thing is that Obama is angry, and he’s talking not in his normal voice but in a “black dialect.” This strikes at the core of Obama’s entire political identity: a soft-spoken, reasonable African-American with a Kansas accent. From the moment he stepped onto the national stage, Obama’s deepest political fear was being seen as a “traditional” black politician, one who was demanding redistribution from white America on behalf of his fellow African-Americans.

Quin Hillyer replies:

What a steaming load of diseased dung this is. The time has come to call this “racism” wolf cry what it really is: the Left’s version of McCarthyism. As with the original, the game is to accuse adversaries of something awful, and awfully untrue, purely for political effect, to cause a political wound. (The difference is that at least McCarthy had some small basis for his vilely overstated accusations, as the Venona documents have since shown; this cry of racism, here as in so many of the Left’s uses of it in recent years, has not even a shred of truth to it.)

I associate myself with the remarks of John Nolte at Breitbart, who called Chait’s dung heap “equal parts hilarious, maddening, unAmerican, and just plain pathetic.”

The reason Barack Obama’s outlook is alien to the American tradition is not because he is black; it is because he was mentored by a Communist, raised by leftists, inculcated with foreign values in Indonesia, befriended (and willing befriending of) some of the vilest radicals and terrorists on American soil, studied and emulated the evil Saul Alinksy, and consciously chose (by his own testimony in his crafted, semi-fictionalized “autobiography”) the persona of a man disaffected from and antagonistic to many of the values historically adopted and admired by most Americans.

He says we cling to guns and religion as a way to deal with our own bitterness; he says we didn’t build our own businesses (or the roads and such paid for by taxes on the profits from our own labors); he says Americans have been arrogant and dismissive of Europe and that we are “still struggling” with the legacy of Jim Crow; he runs roughshod repeatedly over religious liberties; and again and again, he shows disdain for the actual workings of the free market that is the means of our prosperity.

Do take the time to click here and read Quin’s full response.

[One Quibble: At least Senator Joe McCarthy got the big picture correct and most of those who ran with his accusations were doing so out of good motives.]

Obama’s disdain for the Free Market is an actual hatred of it.  Many people [including, it seems, Stacy McCainwell…I never said he was a god, only a demi- version] assume he gives a good Goddamn about prosperity. Obama does not. He has learned from his Communist teachers and seeks nothing less than the destruction of American Society, and part of any successful effort on that part will involve eliminating the Free Market System.

Barack Hussein Marshall-Davis-Obama and his comrades know exactly what they’re doing.  They are slaves to the procedure found in the Leftist Playbook.

-In a comment he left over in a post by Smitty on Chait’s posting, Adjoran uses his nail gun:

Chait has been a leftist hack since he was hatched by whatever reptile laid his egg. In true Marxist-Leninist tradition, he never lets the truth stand in the way of his propaganda narrative or interfere with the pursuit of totalitarian power.

Chait, of course, isn’t a true revolutionary in the spirit of Che Guevara or Stalin. He hasn’t the stomach or strength for the wet work. He’s more of a boardroom revolutionary, the sort who fancies himself a High Commissar.

Certainly if the Marxists ever did get control, punks like Chait and Ezra Klein would be among the first of the “useful idiots” to be “liquidated.” Is it ironic that the dishonest merchants of totalitarianism live on only because of the respect for human rights by the polity which is their sworn enemy?

As Ronald Reagan observed, “The Soviets have Freedom of Speech, too. The difference is that in America, we have Freedom after Speech.”

I like the term Carpet Revolutionary [which I just created, based on the old term for desk Generals: ‘Carpet Knight’].  While Chait may bear a strong resemblance to Strelnikov*, he ain’t riding no train.

By the way: Smitty’s post offers some of his own witty commentary on this subject and a fine aggregation of some of the more spot-on analysis of it.

Aaron Goldstein:

As with many liberals, Chait does not approach conservatism and its adherents rationally. He looks upon both conservatism and conservatives with hatred in both his mind and heart. So when Chait makes his latest charge we have to consider the source. With that now let’s consider these two sentences:

Watch Obama’s delivery in the snippet put together by this Republican ad. The key thing is that Obama is angry, and he’s talking not in his normal voice but in a “black dialect.”

But it is President Obama who chose to be angry in that moment. It is President Obama who chose not to talk, as Chait puts it, “in his normal voice.” It is President Obama who chose to stray from the teleprompter. No Republican made Obama do that. President Obama is responsible for what he says and does. Thus President Obama has only himself to blame for striking the wrong chord with the American people during his speech in Roanoke, Virginia.

Obama uses two Black dialects: the Southern Preacher one and one I call ‘Street’ where he tries to sound like a Brothah From The ‘Hood.

The former is easy – Hell, I can do it – but the latter, not so much, and he fails at it a lot, reminding me of that dorky Black A+ student in every suburban high school in the 1970’s who spoke near-perfect English, wore a pocket protector, and looked like a complete fool when he tried to speak like Shaft.

-The award for Best, Most Accurate Analysis and for Most Succinct & Spot-On Comment goes to William Jacobson [emphasis mine]:

We’re not worried about Obama’s dialect, we’re worried about his dialectic.

Man…I wish I had written that.


*Strelnikov is one of the best examples in fiction of the
Leftist Mindset.  Here’s a bit of his musings: ‘Feelings,
insights, affections… it’s suddenly trivial now. You don’t
agree [Zhivago]; you’re wrong.
   The personal life is dead in Russia. History has killed it.
[…] The private life is dead – for a man with any manhood.’

  1. 28 July 2012 @ 16:55 16:55

    The Leftist hate mongers are out in full force manufacturing racism because they don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to the important political issues concerning America. What a bunch of freaking crybabies! Waa Waa Waa. They certainly are experts at fantasyland victimhood.

  2. 28 July 2012 @ 17:40 17:40

    That old black dialect has me in its spell,
    That old black dialect that I know so well…

  3. M. Thompson permalink
    28 July 2012 @ 18:06 18:06

    Arrogance means you don’t even have to try an understand your opponent.

  4. srcoop44 permalink
    31 July 2012 @ 15:02 15:02

    Kudos Teresa….

    I totally agree with your sentiments!

  5. L0LB4MA permalink
    03 August 2012 @ 17:52 17:52

    “The key thing is that Obama is angry, and he’s talking not in his normal voice but in a “black dialect.”

    That is the key thing….for the Left. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve argued with them over the internet and been chided about my “tone”. First, that’s just how I talk about everything.Second, how the hell can anyone tell what my tone is over a keyboard?

    When I’ve argued with conservatives, they always argue with me about what I said. If I have one against the ropes,he might try some fancy trick with my words to skew my message,but the argument is always about WHAT I SAID and not HOW I SAID IT. That’s why I know this race-baiter Chait is absolutely unequivocally full of crap,probably deliberately and maliciously so.

  6. Red permalink
    10 August 2012 @ 09:01 09:01

    “The time has come to call this “racism” wolf cry what it really is: the Left’s version of McCarthyism”


  7. 02 October 2014 @ 01:21 01:21

    You can also give an assortment of games, movies, song albums, rare instrumental albums if the recipient is
    interested in such entertainment sources. You are free
    to put any of their products in the basket or on the cutting board.

    Another incredibly well-liked company is Coca-cola.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: