Hate Speech, Slander and the 2008 US Presidential Elections by Mark Taylor-Canfield This is one of those articles that I wish I didn’t feel compelled to write. I certainly do not wish to give any more attention to the right-wing bloggers and radio shock jocks who have already stirred up unnecessary controversy surrounding matters of race and religion during the current presidential elections. However, in the great spirit of Tom Paine, I must shout out a warning about the precarious state of political democracy in the United States of America circa 2008. HOPE FOR THE NATION One can not begin this critical discourse without noting the phenomenal success of Illinois Senator Barack Obama’s campaign to become US president. This extremely charismatic candidate has been traveling around the nation in rock star fashion, drawing tens of thousands of supporters to events reminiscent of old time revival meetings. I watched as a woman fainted in the middle of a crowd of 18,000 enthusiastic fans during his speech at Seattle’s Key arena in February. Three thousand more stood outside the arena in the cold winter weather to hear his speech broadcast on loudspeakers. Some particularly ardent supporters stood in line for four and a half hours to see the man speak. It was a truly historic event. People are literally brought to tears by the Senator’s eloquent speeches describing his own heroic story of triumph over adversity and his dreams of a more enlightened America. He is especially loved and admired by the volunteers working with the campaign. Obama seems to be able to inspire people of all backgrounds and ethnicities to embrace hope for the future at a time when most folks have become extremely mistrustful of government, and they are, for the most part, thoroughly disenchanted with mainstream politics. This is quite an amazing accomplishment after seven long years of utter contrition on the part of the vast majority of the Democrats in Congress. George W. Bush has had them all eating from the palm of his hand for most of his two war-mongering terms as US President. RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY THEORIES Having said this, I find that I still have to wax philosophical when it comes to the entire subject of a hopeful new “progressive” America, for lurking in the belly of the beast is a mad cadre of ignorant and prejudiced right-wing extremists. These troglodytes are loath to admit that the US population is now perhaps ready to elect a presidential candidate whose father was an African Muslim. Many of the aforementioned bigots are conservative talk show hosts who preach their hatred daily on right-wing radio stations all across the country. Instead of defining their hatred and bigotry out in the open, these deceptive denizens of the dark world of right-wing “conservatism” spout slanderous rumors and spin outright lies in the name of power politics. All this claptrap is produced to satisfy their listeners’ basest instincts and to provoke meaningless conflict. The Fox network and other media companies are involved in a malicious attempt to entice a tiny percentage of the US public into accepting the absurd notion that Barack Obama is actually a “Manchurian Candidate”, planted by Al Quaeda terrorists in a plan to destroy the US from within. The term “Manchurian Candidate” refers to a famous Hollywood film made nearly forty years ago. The plot of the movie involves a scenario in which Communists in Asia run a secretly planted candidate for the office of President of the United States of America. In the film, Communists leaders were hoping, of course, to eliminate the US as an adversary by controlling its government from the White House. No one in US politics has ever seriously proposed that such a dastardly plan could be successfully implemented. The idea remains in the realm of paranoid fantasy, since most sane individuals realize it would be almost impossible to avoid public exposure of such a vast conspiracy during an election season when the press, especially the tabloids, are engaged in obsessive investigations of every last detail of a candidate’s private life. In the case of the 2008 presidential elections, the neo-con’s Obama scenario reads the same as the basic movie script, but contemporary shock jocks on the right now would have you believe that the foreign agents behind the subversive candidacy of Barack Obama live somewhere in the mountains on the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan. These radio propagandists repeat ridiculous stories designed to shake people’s faith in Obama’s positive message of change. In their minds, change is considered extremely dangerous. Instead of looking for the reds under the bed as was suggested during the height of the cold war, we are now told by paranoid extremists to watch for Osama bin Laden’s murderous cohorts behind the curtains on the stage at Senator Obama’s next campaign speech. THE “MOST DANGEROUS MAN IN AMERICA” Unfortunately, to the ultimate denigration of everyone living in this country, there are those living among us who stupidly choose to believe these slanderous lies in order to justify their own racist world view. Many folks in isolated regions of the nation are truly fearful of Obama’s candidacy because it challenges all of their closely held beliefs about white privilege and social conformity. The sad, errant reasoning in their tiny little brains goes something like this: “How can I feel secure in my racist views as an American, if the country elects a president who is the product of an interracial marriage?” Of course this kind of blatantly racist perspective ignores the fact that Obama’s admirers include people of all races because his campaign focuses on unity. His campaign has inspired people from all walks of life and from many different political persuasions. It is a call to join the bandwagon of hope. People see him as a winner and they like his chances in the upcoming presidential election. The latest popularity polls show that he is beating both former First Lady Hillary Clinton and Republican candidate for president John McCain. There is a growing sense among national pundits on all sides of the political spectrum that Senator Obama is the man of the hour, at least for the Democratic Party. There is a hint of optimism in their analysis of the elections which says that Obama may even be the man of the hour for the entire nation and for the rest of the world. This positive assessment, however, precludes the inane and idiotic remarks currently being made by nutty neo-con radio shock jocks and bloggers who have attacked Obama mercilessly. Eric Erickson, a political commentator from the biggest conservative blog in the nation (Redstate.com) calls Senator Obama, “Perhaps the most dangerous man in America.” BILLY CUNNINGHAM VS. OBAMA AND MCCAIN After conservative talk show host Billy Cunningham introduced John McCain at a recent campaign event, McCain had to repudiate Cunningham’s repeated emphasis on Barack Obama’s middle name: “Hussein”. Cunningham uses this common tactic practiced among neo-con extremists (emphasizing the name “Hussein”) to infer that Senator Obama has insidious ties to the Islamic world or to former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, and that therefore the senator is somehow involved in anti-US terrorist activities. It’s a tactic that only works on folks who possess the IQ of an infant, but apparently there are a lot of those people listening to conservative talk radio. When interviewed about McCain’s repudiation of his introduction, Cunningham referred to the former POW as “John ‘Pedro’ McCain”, a clear reference to McCain’s supposedly liberal stance on immigration from Mexico - a point of contention among many conservative Republicans. Cunningham says he has now dropped his support for McCain’s candidacy because the senator from Arizona is not a “true conservative”. Cunningham accuses Senator McCain of, “trying to win favor with the liberal media by being politically correct.” Instead of being summarily dismissed for his prejudiced remarks as was the case last year when radio host Don Imus spouted off about “nappy headed hos”, Billy Cunningham is completely unrepentant. In fact, he has recently been rewarded with a new contract with the Premier radio network. He has now been afforded the exclusive opportunity to broadcast his bigotry over 300 radio stations throughout the US. He claims that his stand against Obama has polarized the political debate and he plans to lead the conservative march to the right. He definitely appreciates the notoriety his controversial remarks have brought him. He told his radio audience, “Because of what I’ve said, I am the man of the hour and I plan to take full advantage of that.” I guess one should expect this kind of behavior from a guy who states emphatically, “Guantanamo Bay is a pretty good place to be – three square meals a day is a good deal. God Bless America!” He also claims, along with many other neo-con shock jocks, that Barack Obama is a “quasi-Marxist” who wants to give out too much government money to the poor. “Everyone knows”, says Cunningham, “that the only problem with poor people is their lack of moral and ethical values. Barack Obama has Marxist views”. He is an expert in reverse psychology when it comes to using obfuscation, subterfuge and double-speak while addressing the issue of race baiting in politics. According to Cunningham, “These idiots at the Obama rallies think they’re electing the next ‘American Idol’.” “Liberals think like racists. These small-minded bigots, who should be marginalized, have accused me of racism. The extent of my derogatory remarks about Barack Obama was the repeated pronunciation of his middle name. If I say ‘John Fitzgerald Kennedy’ or ‘John Forbes Kerry’ is that racist?” This does not explain why some right-wing talk show hosts have “accidentally” mixed up the names “Obama” and “Osama” (referring to terrorist Osama bin Laden). It’s happened more than once and seems to be part of a regular pattern of deception and insinuation. Things have already gotten so out of hand that a caller to Billy Cunningham’s radio program on February 24th even suggested that Obama is actually the “Great Deceiver” - the Biblical antichrist. Believe it or not, she was completely serious! Blogger Eric Erickson, who was a guest on the show which is aired locally on KVI, responded to the woman’s insane ramblings about Obama by stating that, “I don’t know whether he is the actual anti-Christ, but he is certainly seducing people and working them up into a frenzy. It’s almost as if they are being hypnotized. Women faint at these events and men have heart attacks.” This kind of irrational response to Obama’s candidacy seems to be typical of folks who are as ignorant and bigoted as Erickson appears to be. Some of the extreme right-wingers in the media have an almost pathological fear of Obama as the representation of a powerful black man. Jealousy and anger are the order of the day when entrenched power and privilege are being challenged by a political leader who is not a member of the typical “good ole’ boys” network. Erickson maintains, “The only thing Barack Obama has ever been good at was shoving cocaine up his nose and smoking marijuana. There are claims that he is a former drug dealer.” Although Obama candidly admits in his biography that he used drugs as a young man, the allegation that he sold drugs came from a man named Larry Sinclair who has failed two lie detector tests when questioned on the subject. Still, the rumor persists among Obama’s extreme political opponents. He has also been accused of attending a school in Indonesia which was operated by Islamic terrorists. Some right-wing bloggers maintain that Obama and his wife are “anti-white” racists who endorse Louis Farrakhan. He’s referred to as a “former cocaine user” and Cunningham called the Baptist church he attends in Chicago a “weird quasi-Christian, quasi-Muslim, quasi-secular humanist religion.” Other accusations include the charge that the senator idolizes Che Guevara, refuses to salute the US flag and won’t stand during the national anthem. Of course there is no evidence for any of these insipid allegations, but that doesn’t stop the likes of radio talk show hosts like Cunningham, Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, Dennis Prager and the former president’s son Michael Reagan from repeating these prevarications ad infinitum and ad nauseum. What really annoys the neo-con machine is the one and only truth to be told by the Republicans - Barack Obama of Illinois is indeed the most “liberal” senator in the US Congress, if you go by his public voting record. He opposes capitol punishment, is in favor of some gun control laws and wants to end US participation in the Iraq war. The truth is that Barack Obama has been a tireless advocate for the poor and underprivileged during his entire career as a community activist and attorney. He currently serves on the board of several non-profit social service agencies and charities in the Chicago area. Not the typical Washington beltway politico, Obama has been active on the streets of his own neighborhood trying to make life better for the folks who live in his community. DANGEROUS IDEAS What worries some political observers like myself is that, inevitably, there are always a few crazy independent actors on the political stage, sometimes individuals or secretive groups who decide to take the law into their own hands, and through political assassination or other violent means attempt to stop a candidate before an imminent election. I hope to God that this does not happen in 2008. We’ve had enough martyrs for peace and democracy in the US over the last four decades. One only has to harken back to the insane diatribes against MLK before his assassination and the violent outrage which shook the nation after his death in 1968 to understand the implications of such a horrendous, destabilizing event. During the month wherein Dr. King was killed, articles had been appearing in the conservative national media warning of his increasingly radical stands on poverty and the war in Vietnam. While John McCain’s father, an admiral, was writing unbelievably inaccurate propaganda pieces for the military in Reader’s Digest declaring victory in Vietnam, King, Andrew Young and other African-American civil rights leaders and members of the clergy were gearing up for the poor people’s march on Washington, DC. As the current candidate for the Republican Party, McCain is obviously following in his father’s footsteps when he proclaims that the security situation in Iraq has vastly improved after four years of constant turmoil and violence. Any fool can see that his claims are far from the truth. It is a sad fact that his father continued to give glowing reviews of progress in Vietnam even after the decisive Tet Offensive which virtually destroyed any chance of the army of the South Vietnam winning the conflict against the Communist north. In April of 1968, conservative pundits claimed that Dr. King’s march on the nation’s capitol was on the verge of becoming an open rebellion and that violence would result. In the press he was openly called a Communist, a traitor, and a dangerous radical by paranoid right-wing agitators who felt extremely threatened by his power to mobilize huge movements of people. When Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated, riots immediately broke out in major cities across the US. Newark, Watts and Detroit burned for days while the US Army was called in to maintain order, resulting in the deaths of many innocent people. Does anyone question whether the reaction today would be any less severe after such a terrible tragedy? It is impossible to avoid the reality that we are a society balanced on a knife’s edge. When people’s hopes for a better future are taken away by a cowardly and violent act of suppression, they often react by taking their frustrations out on their own neighborhoods. In Seattle, after the Rodney King verdict was announced, roving gangs of angry young black men overturned cars and broke windows downtown in a violent fit of rage. I certainly wish it were not true, but a century and a half after the crime of slavery was officially abolished, we must face the fact that there is still much racial tension in the United States. A 150 year epic struggle for civil rights has led us to this day when our greatest opportunity for progressive evolution as a society may finally be at hand in the form of a politician who, by his very presence, breaks down some of the major traditional stereotypes and racial taboos placed upon us long ago. Barack Obama is an eloquent, intellectual and inspirational spokesperson for change in 21st Century America. No one who has ever run for political office can claim to be completely free of human weaknesses. No single person, no presidential candidate can solve all of our national woes after so many years of regressive policies perpetrated by irresponsible, selfish, narrow-minded leadership. But if a corner is to be turned and we are to take on an ethical leadership role in the world again, Barack Obama just might be the man for the job, despite the current polarization in US politics which he has also inspired. Perhaps it is time for the racism and the ignorance endemic to our society to be fully exposed once more for the sake of truth and justice. In the last century we witnessed attack dogs being used against African-Americans in Birmingham and Selma. Today those attack dogs are thriving on the right-wing airwaves, as malicious and unrestrained as ever. WORST CASE SCENARIO We’ve seen in the past how those in power tend to try to subvert positive social change if the new plans for reform cause harm to their own personal interests. Conspiracies abound about shadow governments and the misuse of political and economic influence by the wealthy elite who control our political structure. No one doubts after the Gulf of Tonkin, Watergate, Iran-Contra, the invasion of Iraq and the scandal at Abu Ghraib Prison that some government and military officials are completely willing to violate any oath of office in order to ensure the success of their efforts to hold onto power with an iron grip. Fascism has raised its ugly head again during the Bush administration through vehicles like the Homeland Security Act, the Defense Authorization bill, various executive signing statements, and private corporate mercenary armies. The usual program of subversive social control requires an escalation of responses to popular dissent, from standard vote rigging scams to a complete crackdown on freedom of speech and the establishment of martial law. Let’s consider the worst case scenario in which the “powers that be” go all the way. If the first few subversive political schemes don’t work, the tendency is to ramp up the efforts until success is achieved. This is just a mock exercise in satire, but the plan put forth by the mostly hidden political and social “controllers” behind the scenes, in response to a strong popular progressive social movement might look something like the following: 1) Stack the Deck 2) “Swift boat” the Political Opponent 3) Rig the Election 4) Start A War or Stage an Act of Terrorism 5) Political Assassination 6) Declare A National Emergency and Establish Martial Law |
