Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
'Kill him!'? Silence as McCain/Palin Response is Deafening
Dissonance is the soundtrack of any faltering political campaign. Things get said to jar the ear and maybe shock the conscience. It grabs attention that reasonable coherence alone couldn't deliver. Sometimes it works. It did four years ago, when an incompetent president defeated his challenger by conjuring up fears and slanders that played into what was left of the electorate's 9/11 stupor. Look what it got us.
The re-elected incompetence proved worse than even George W. Bush's core supporters could imagine, now that he's officially less liked than Richard Nixon at his impeachable lowest. His heirs, Sarah Palin and John McCain, aren't proposing much more than a change of accents and actuarial risks in the White House even as the whole country begins to get a sense of what it must've been like to be in the New Orleans Superdome after Katrina. With all their chatter about cleaning Washington, the same Washington McCain spent the past 25 years furnishing, McCain and Palin sound like a pair of Hoovers vacuuming the luxury deck of the Titanic while it sinks. Since their poll numbers have been sinking along, they've reverted to conjuring fears and slanders of their own -- nothing unexpected, nothing we didn't see coming from reactionaries enraged at the notion of a black liberal with an African first name, an Arab middle name and a drumroll of a last name vaulting to their no-longer-white-only presidency.
Prepared for it or not, the flammable can burn. Palin rallies have become accelerants of inflammatory hate that, in Florida last week, turned dangerous when she linked Obama to Bill Ayers, the Chicago university professor whose Weather Underground organization set off a few bombs around 1970, when Obama was in elementary school. It's worth noting what's seldom said about those bombs: They were preceded by evacuation warnings and set off in the middle of the night in places like a deserted U.S. Capitol toilet. The only people killed were three Underground members who set one off accidentally in their basement. The bombs were intended to protest bombings in Vietnam and Cambodia, paid for by every American taxpayer and orchestrated by Palin pal Henry Kissinger, that massacred civilians at the rate of about 500 a day while terrorizing millions.
Anyway, all set up with her sordid little libel of Ayers, Palin went in for the payoff against Obama: "I'm afraid this is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to work with a former domestic terrorist who had targeted his own country." Someone yelled out, "Kill him!" Palin went on. When she sneered at the "kind of mainstream media," the crowd turned on reporters covering the event, firing epithets that included Jim Crow vocabulary directed at a black television crew member. The word "terrorist" also is being thrown around in reference to Obama. Palin and McCain have yet to condemn the goons. Their silence condones it. Let's not suggest that what spouts out of their rally props is out of their control. As David Gergen, the bipolar Republican and Democratic operative, put it on CNN on Thursday, "yes, you can" control it, "and it is up to Sarah Palin at her rally and for John McCain to tell her if she doesn't start doing this, to stop right there and take issue with what's been said."
But they haven't. More to the point: How could they not condemn the merest suggestion from their supporters, let alone an explicitly murderous threat, that Obama should be assassinated, when the prospects of an Obama assassination have been openly anguished over? "There is," The New York Times reported on its front page in February, "a hushed worry on the minds of many supporters of Senator Barack Obama, echoing in conversations from state to state, rally to rally: Will he be safe?" Not when his opponent's ticket puts a silencer on its own minimum standards of civility.
"And I am just so fearful," Palin could still say of Obama at the very same "Kill him!" rally in Jacksonville, "that this is not a man who sees America the way that you and I see America."
She's right. The America she sees, the America she wants, the America Bush transformed and the America Palin inflames at her rallies is not at all the way most of us see America. Nor is it the way most of the world had ever imagined America could become, though it's the kind of America the world, and most of us, have been enduring. The only thing to fear, is if that era were not to end come Election Day.

84 Comments so far
Show AllThe continuation of Republican hold on White House is very real. American President became Leader in all, including his name. If American press reports about action of our Leader, German press obidiently translates word Leader into its German equivalent. The only difference between past German Leader and our domestic ones is that German Leader declared war even if only formally.
There are no ways to predict how Southern and MidWest States voters will be influenced by the race: it is unknowable. What is knowable, however, is that this talk about race in NSM, honorable Mr. Frank Rich included, may be and, alas, will be used for explaining out yet another rigged election. Only this time it will be rigged BIG WAY indeed! Who can prove beyond reasonable doubts that the race of a Dem's candidate was not carefully thought through as a belivable camouflage?
v.purto
.Why this article caused me to remember this John Stuart Mill citing, from 'Three Essays on Religion', is also a mystery, but it did:
"Human existence is girt round with mystery. The narrow region of our experience is a small island in the midst of a boundless sea. To add to the mystery the domain of our earthly existence is not only an island in infinite space, but also in infinite time. The past and the future are alike shrouded from us. We neither know the origin of anything which is, nor its final destination."
Our political practices have long descended to a travesty and naked appeals to emotionalism and our basest instincts. People as sordid and emotionally bereft as Sara Palin would not be able to remain in the public eye if there was not something very wrong with the public.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
A country without a Soul is destined for Hell...on Earth.
"Crack open a cynic and you will find an angry idealist!"
Conservatives kill.
This is very different from the swiftboating of Kerry. It's crossing a line that should never be crossed, basically creating a lynch mob. The McCain-Palin campaign is indeed treading on very thin ice, and if any personal attacks should be made on Obama, it will be on the Republican heads for incitement.
Kathy
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Has anyone seen the YouTube video clip of the racist going to a Palin speech in PA who was carrying a stuffed monkey with Obama's name on it? That wasn't enough for the jerk, he had to call it "Hussein." He and the other racists thought it was quite funny. Typical Republican racist McCain supporter.
McCain is racist and wants everyone to know it. His 2 performances during the debates easily confirm this. The man is volcanically furious at the fact he must run against a black man demonstrably more intelligent than he. How dare "that one"? How dare he?! H.L. Mencken famously said that no one ever lost a dime underestimating the taste of the American people. Don't underestimate (I believe the word is now "misunderestimate) their racism either.
Mordechai Shiblikov October 12th, 2008 4:10 pm, I agree with Mencken's sentiments most of the time, but occasionally something comes up -- such as the destruction of the US economy -- that takes people out of their 'comfort zone' and forces them to face facts. This happened during the Great Depression and I think it's happening again today in our 21st Century repeat of that era, brought on once again by hands-off, laissez faire, 'free market' Republican policies toward Wall Street and corporations.
My friend's conservative Republican rural-resident 90-year-old southern born-and-raised grandmother is, in her words, "voting for the colored man" this year. She says she's sick and tired of all these Bush Republicans fouling things up.
McCain is "volcanically furious" -- LOL......it's true. I just wish Obama would say something to make him lose it during the last debate so we can see McInsane's true, ugly temper.
Mordechai: I agree with you on McCain's condescending attitude, especially in debate #1. But paraphrasing H.L. Mencken was rather ill-placed his diaries revealed a very rabid anti-semite with an affinity for Nazi Germany.
No question, not all the angles of race that converge in this campaign have received much attention.
It’s increasingly popular to argue that the fuel for unrest has disappeared because the problem of racism has receded into America’s past. This idea has long held sway on the right, but, paradoxically, it’s taken Barack Obama’s candidacy to elevate this persistent right-wing myth into conventional wisdom.
Obama’s candidacy is seen as an indication that racial barriers no longer exist in the United States. Indeed, the election of a black president would be an undeniable milestone in American history, forcing many white Americans to confront latent fears and distrust of black people. And many see progress in the fact that a black man can run a campaign in which race is incidental. Yet it’s taken Obama’s embrace of post-racialism, and concurrent distancing from traditional civil rights-style black leadership, to lend viability to his campaign. Some activists see him as the culmination of a trend over the last 40 years of black leaders moving away from the communities they’ve traditionally served and closer to the political and corporate power that dominates the Democratic Party.
Read the full: http://www.indypendent.org/2008/10/02/illusion-post-racial-america/
Ayers set off a few bombs that were carefully placed so as not to harm anyone. McCain took part in the carpet bombing campaign known as Operation Rolling Thunder. Remind me who's the 'terrorist'?
Ayers set off a few bombs that were carefully placed so as not to harm anyone.
you're joking me right?
Ayers must not be CIA if he can't place a bomb to kill innocent people.
Read Bill Ayers book "Fugitive Days" or watch the documentary "The Weather Underground".
Originally, the Weather Faction meant to stoke an actual guerilla war. Several of their members were killed while preparing a bomb at their Greenwich Village residence, a bomb which they meant to detonate at a USO dance at a nearby military base. The survivors, those who were not there, went underground, and made the decision that they would attack property, NEVER human beings. Whenever they set a device, they called authorities well in advance to advise them to evacuate the premises.
Terrorists make no distinction between combattants and non-combattants, and so they strike with no warning, with the intention of getting the authorities to be equally indiscriminate. A person who warns the authorities in order to give them the opportunate to evacuate a target is by definition not practicing terrorism.
Well, actually the authorities do call them terrorists even if they only want to blow up property. Or burn SUVs for that matter.
That being said, I think property crimes are far less serious than crimes that end with people dead.
"Question authority before the authorities question you" (button/bumpersticker).
.You are tragically misinformed.
The bomb that detonated in NYC was not meant for any such location as you claim. Considering that you read , or claim to have read, the book your error is egregious. That bomb was meant for a New Jersey target, was going to be detonated at night when noone was around. Each target selected was done so with an eye to harming noone. The next series of targets were going to be against recruiting offices in the area.
This is not to be seen as support for the violence of that decades old attempt to bring down our facist nations governance, only to expose the misinformation you posted, for whatever your reason. Also, after that Greenwich Village incident there were, for all intents and purposes, no further Weather Underground plots or violence. Ayers and Dorhn were on the run for a long time thereafter. Reading a book is fine, understanding what was read is much better...I ve got an autographed copy myself...
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
It's shocking how low the right-wing (right-libertarians included) standard of discussion has gotten on this board lately. "You're joking me right?" is your whole counter-argument? All I can really reply to that is....you're joking me, right?
Yesterday I asked someone on here to cite a smear they were spouting against Lenin, and their reply was "Look it up yourself". Me verify your vague claims! Ha.
I don't know why, but I would have expected that being a minority on this site would cause them to raise their game. If anything, it causes them to lower it.
McCain is still a terrorist, and probably a murderer too, but who knows--maybe his bomb bay jammed on every single mission he flew to drop bombs over villages of civilian rice farmers and their families. I don't want to draw any hasty conclusions!
edit: notice how SnowWolf never returned after Saint-Just demolished his vague non-argument of "you're joking me right."
.It isnt enough to live in your fairy tale world, Snowflake, you have an entire internet at your disposal and should be able to find truths on your own. Sitting there in pompous ignorance ill becomnes you.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Dear ardee:
As the name Snowflake suggests …..”flake”.
.I prefer the term,"tragically partisan" myself. "Flake" implies an inability that this poster does not demonstrate, his posts are not misspelled, are gramatically correct and are simply paeons to partisanship. The facts simply get in his way, over and over, again and again.
It is interesting to note the way he holds, as a shield , his service in the military as if this somehow exempts him from a duty to the truth.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
What's the difference between someone who hires a person to kill another person for them and someone who deliberately, over and over, incites violence in people, knowing there are certain types hearing them who could very well act on their inciteful words?
One pays cash, the other is applauded.
And if caught, the payer of an assassin pays for their crime along with the assassin, while the person acting on what the inciter said will pay for their crime, and the one who incited them to violence will be free to incite again.
&YYY&
'Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?' So says King Henry II about Thomas Becket, head bishop of his church. And said by some of his less gifted followers in various ways.
And some in Homeland Security were listening and was not going to let this go by. Several of the police, whose job it was to prevent out outspokenness against the government, went and sought out the miscreant when he was in a sacred place and assassinated him with their weapons.
King Henry was later most apologetic, saying he did not really mean to inculcate the murder.
The quote is "Will no-one rid me of this interminent priest."
Walk in peace.
'Turbulent Priest' I do beleive.
Yep, from the Oxford book of Quotes
"Will no one revenge me of the injuries I have sustained from one turbulent priest."
Of course the other translations might be more accurate, after all the old King Henry did not speak what any of us would recognise as English. I think they called it 'old english'...
.
"...after all the old King Henry did not speak what any of us would recognise as English." Neither does the current King George!
Oh My God...
Go to Huffpo or the Daily Kos or any number of Left Wing Blogs (Firedog Lake anyone?) and see the wild eyed hate towards Bush, Cheney, Tony Snow, Michele Malkin et al...
its ok when Lefties do it but everyone screams "Hatespeech" when Righties do it?
Pathetic
SnowWolf October 12th, 2008 5:40 pm, I don't recall any author on any of those sites you mentioned saying "Kill them" in regard to Bush, Cheney, Snow, Malkin, et al.
Do you have a specific example?
I recall shouts for joy when Tony Snow was Diagnosed with Cancer...and cheers when Cheney had a heart episode
I recall Alec Baldwin wanting Henry Hyde Stoned to Death and Spike Lee saying Charlton Heston should be shot in the face with a .44 calibre Bulldog...
The examples are numerous...
its not nice when either side does it...but both sides do it
But notice, you don't see this kind of raw hate at Obamas rallys, do you?
And you also never see anyone from the right or far-right murdered. Wonder why...Wolf.
Yeah.. there is a big difference...
The internet is a different medium.. People behave differently on the internetS than they do in public. OBama inspired positive feelings while Palin inspired fear and hatred...
That is what Republicans do. Look at Cheney.. he snears and says F*** Y** to other members of Congress... Bush "jokes around" in mean insulting ways to folks... If they inspire hateful attacks... perhaps what goes around comes around. Granted.. that may not be the most "CHRISTIAN" thing to do.. but they don't appear to be very nice people. People "attack": them in vicious ways because BUSH's and CHENY's ACTIONS have been hate filled and deplorable...
Don't EVEN bring up Rev WRight.. BECAUSE.. you know why??? Go back and rewatche documentaries about the Civil Rights movment and the KKK... and perhaps you can understand the vitriol. OK>> so it isn't Civilized.. or mature or whatever...
but THe "RIGHT" has tended to be more hate filled... and violent and the left more about peace and justice....
If there is blowback.. it is because of human frustration in processing through the hate and apathy that is so prevalent in our society.
WE are attempting to evolve here....
"Be ashamed to die until you have won some victory for humanity" Horace Mann First President of Antioch College.
Murder is incorrect terminology, it's about being conspiratorially
__ A $ $ A $ $ I N A T E D __
Namaste
funny...but I don't see the vitriol on conservative blogs...its a reverse image isn't it
SnowWolf October 13th, 2008 3:40 am: "funny...but I don't see the vitriol on conservative blogs...its a reverse image isn't it"
LOL -- that is funny. You should read Free Republic, Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler and Michelle Malkin's site. They represent the 'sludge at the bottom' of right-wing vitriol.
After reading your blogs on this issue, it confirms what I've said so many times. Republican/Conservative, and Democrat/Liberal are two seperate species. One could be from a different planet they're so different. The only ones who can even bear to listen, watch, or read both sides are those truly of neither side. Of course the Members of neither can hear or see the hate and hear the vitrol coming from their party.
They're like armies from totally foreign countries, having different languages and beliefs, and are doing their damndest to kill each other. Without understanding, there can never be peace between waring countries, nor a united America.
.You see and hear what you wish to see and hear...You seem not to hear the crap spouted at republican gatherings but hear rather clearly what never occured at all...What a piece of work you are...sad, very, very sad.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Excuse me, but you don't get off that easy, SnowWolf October 12th, 2008 6:47 pm; exactly who shouted for joy at Tony Snow's cancer? Provide a direct quote and link. I also don't know any liberal bloggers who actually celebrated Cheney's heart attack, but I did read some who said they thought he deserved it. Again, provide quotes and links for your claims so that we can decide for ourselves. I also don't recall Baldwin's remark re Henry Hyde, nor Spike Lee saying anything like that about Charlton Heston.
If the examples are so numerous, providing exact quotes and links should be easy.
Both sides do it? Cite someone here at CD who has called for the death of a prominent Republican or said anything as vicious and hateful as Ann Coulter:
"We need to execute people like John Walker [Lindh] in order to physically intimidate liberals."
-- Feb. 2, 2002.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200507290007
or
"If I’m going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot."
-- Good Morning America, ABC, Oct. 2007.
http://digg.com/political_opinion/Ann_Coulter_Attacks_John_Edwards_On_Good_Morning_America
What if Michael Moore had said the same thing only substituted 'Newt Gingrich' for John Walker Lindh, 'conservative' for 'liberal,' and 'Ronald Reagan' instead of John Edwards?
And how about:
"My libertarian friends are probably getting a little upset now but I think that's because they never appreciate the benefits of local fascism."
-- MSNBC, February 8, 1997.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0111.coulterwisdom.html
Would any of these quotes constitute hate speech or hilarious humor for you, SnowWolf? And do you support a little 'local fascism' to keep Americans in line?
RSJ: Great comeback. Facts are anathema to the McPalin campaign.
"Facts! We don't need no stinking facts. Just get a rope!"
McCain must really take comfort in knowing his core supporters include such ignorant dregs of American society. Remember how popular he was at last summer's big biker rally? I doubt even Hitler would have stooped so low.
Hate-speech is directed at whole groups en masse for their shared traits. Thus, because he has the middle name "Hussein", Obama must be Muslim, and all Muslims are by definition anti-democratic and anti-semitic, therefore, etc.
This is a typical ploy from the right, to pretend that the victimizers are victims, that the oppressive are being oppressed, that those attacking hate-mongers are somehow morally equivalent with those selling the hate.
Hatred directed at authoritarian thugs is moral hatred.
C.f. Ward Churchill's "Pacifism as Pathology."
I agree, SnowWolf. Someone disputed your claim below, but I remember lots of hateful comments about Repubs, including about Tony Snow after he was diagnosed with cancer. I suspect the worst of the negative comments have been scrubbed off of DailyKos and Huffington Post, but I did a quick 'net search anyway and it didn't take long to find this:
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/03/tony_snow_faces_recurring_canc.html
Good news. He is a cancer. Good riddance, Snow-Job Tony Snow...
Posted by: Steve | March 27, 2007 12:14 PM
Good one, atheist October 13th, 2008 1:54 pm, you find one obscure poster named Steve at the Tribune blog and you think that's equivalent to best-selling right-wing author Ann Coulter's hateful vitriol? This is your pathetic proof that liberal bloggers are just as nasty and mean-spirited as those on the right? As Mark Twain once said, it's enough to make a cow laugh.
Besides, how do you know 'Steve' wasn't a right-wing plant on a 'false flag' operation to make liberals look bad? I understand neocons enjoy that 'false flag' stuff immensely -- right, atheist?
Atheist, you and Snow Wolf should get a room. It's sad that CD has seems to been taken over by American fascists like yourselves. Pathetic! Stupid Palin lovers!
Bush and Cheney deserve the world's disdain for what they've done to our country. Snow and Malkin were/are their bootlickers. Still, I don't remember us liberals saying "Kill him!" or her, as the case may be.
Malkin is one confused (and under-educated) blogger. I think she's one of the most ultra right-wingers out there. But one look at her and you have to wonder just how welcome she'd be at a KKK or other white supremacist meeting. Talk about brainwashed!
Obama '08
I wonder how soon the US will endure it's own 'Kristalnacht'?
Walk in peace.
Archbishop Oscar Romero went to his assassination on March 24, 1980.
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0324-21.htm
Christianity and Corporate Powers always shed blood.
"When I feed the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they call me a communist."
Archbishop Romero was a priest, an archbishop, who was implementing what had come to be known in Catholic circles as "God's preferential option for the poor".
There have been many Christian martyrs, particularly among nuns, killed for practicing peace.
I remember hearing the Spanish priest and jesuit martyr Martin Baro state at a church in Berkeley (ten months before he was murdered by the death squads in EL Salvador,) that "in academia the expression is publish or perish" but in his adopted country of El Salvador, "the expression is publish and perish." How prothetic to predict his own murder. I visited the spot where he the death squads sprayed their automatic weapons. A memorial was set up on the ground where the Spanish priests dropped along with their housekeeper and her sixteen year old daughter. This led to the second offensive and many more deaths in El Salvador almost twenty years ago. We in the USA are complicit for allowing our tax dollars to train the military dictatorships around the world.
So does everyone still think that the incendiary cover of the June New Yorker -- of the Obamas in the oval office with Michelle brandishing an ak47 and the american flag burning in the fireplace -- does everyone still excuse that horrible image as 'satire'
It was a meme intended for implant in the public subconscious, the cover got widespread press but not so the article inside the magazine (a picture says a thousand words, right ?) and most people saw the cover out of context as it was dismissed by the pundits of the day as satire
At the time i said that satire sucks. Because it does. And this is exactly why.