Noam Chomsky Has ‘Never Seen Anything Like This’

[babylonsister]

Noam Chomsky Has ‘Never Seen Anything Like This’
Posted on Apr 19, 2010

By Chris Hedges


Noam Chomsky is America’s greatest intellectual. His massive body of work, which includes nearly 100 books, has for decades deflated and exposed the lies of the power elite and the myths they perpetrate. Chomsky has done this despite being blacklisted by the commercial media, turned into a pariah by the academy and, by his own admission, being a pedantic and at times slightly boring speaker. He combines moral autonomy with rigorous scholarship, a remarkable grasp of detail and a searing intellect. He curtly dismisses our two-party system as a mirage orchestrated by the corporate state, excoriates the liberal intelligentsia for being fops and courtiers and describes the drivel of the commercial media as a form of “brainwashing.” And as our nation’s most prescient critic of unregulated capitalism, globalization and the poison of empire, he enters his 81st year warning us that we have little time left to save our anemic democracy.

“It is very similar to late Weimar Germany,” Chomsky told me when I called him at his office in Cambridge, Mass. “The parallels are striking. There was also tremendous disillusionment with the parliamentary system. The most striking fact about Weimar was not that the Nazis managed to destroy the Social Democrats and the Communists but that the traditional parties, the Conservative and Liberal parties, were hated and disappeared. It left a vacuum which the Nazis very cleverly and intelligently managed to take over.”

“The United States is extremely lucky that no honest, charismatic figure has arisen,” Chomsky went on. “Every charismatic figure is such an obvious crook that he destroys himself, like McCarthy or Nixon or the evangelist preachers. If somebody comes along who is charismatic and honest this country is in real trouble because of the frustration, disillusionment, the justified anger and the absence of any coherent response. What are people supposed to think if someone says ‘I have got an answer, we have an enemy’? There it was the Jews. Here it will be the illegal immigrants and the blacks. We will be told that white males are a persecuted minority. We will be told we have to defend ourselves and the honor of the nation. Military force will be exalted. People will be beaten up. This could become an overwhelming force. And if it happens it will be more dangerous than Germany. The United States is the world power. Germany was powerful but had more powerful antagonists. I don’t think all this is very far away. If the polls are accurate it is not the Republicans but the right-wing Republicans, the crazed Republicans, who will sweep the next election.”

“I have never seen anything like this in my lifetime,” Chomsky added. “I am old enough to remember the 1930s. My whole family was unemployed. There were far more desperate conditions than today. But it was hopeful. People had hope. The CIO was organizing. No one wants to say it anymore but the Communist Party was the spearhead for labor and civil rights organizing. Even things like giving my unemployed seamstress aunt a week in the country. It was a life. There is nothing like that now. The mood of the country is frightening. The level of anger, frustration and hatred of institutions is not organized in a constructive way. It is going off into self-destructive fantasies.”

more...

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/noam_chomsky_has_never_seen_anything_like_this_20100419/

[Ikonoklast]

1. He's behind the curve on this one,

The Teabaggers are already losing steam, this just may be the apogee of their support.

As their effectiveness as a useful tool of the Republican Party diminishes, so will the monetary support without which, they cease to exist.

HCR was the rock on which they foundered; now banking reform will have them confused as their benefactors are telling them that they need too be allied with Wall Street, as the poor, persecuted investment bankers and hedge fund billionaires are down to their last hundred million dollar bonus.

Even the dimmest teabagger among them realize that they just might be on the wrong side of this issue.

[ShortnFiery]

2. Don't kid yourselves. Chomsky is not ever behind the curve.

We are going to get our democratic asses handed to us this November and President Obama will be defeated in 2012.

I see the anger fomenting throughout the USA. Unfortunately, too many people LIKE President Obama's personality and their democratic representatives so much they will not PERMIT themselves to see the groundswell of resistance against The Corporate State.

President Obama is continuing the corporate control of America, albeit slower with regard to domestic policy. With regard to Foreign Policy, he's following, line by line, the BushCo. playbook.

Has GitMo closed?
Patriot Act still in effect?
Are we still occupying two sovereign nations?
Are we saber rattling against Iran JUST LIKE we threatened Iraq?

No, President Obama never had the GOPers and is losing Independents and Progressives more and more each day.

I hope there's something to salvage from our party in 8-12 years because, in the near future, we're in for a political bloodbath. :(

[Igel]

27. Minimalism.

Actually, even in GB he was a bit behind the curve. Before that, too. He was a good summarizer, sometimes managed to synthesize things in fairly obvious ways. His big contribution by 1975 was to pick and choose what to synthesize, knowing full well that a lot of omitted stuff still worked fine.

In Minimalism, he sort of left the curve and wiped out, except for his most die-hard supporters (who have been arguing, even since, on just how to fix it to make it work as well as GB). Minimalist inquiry has a few good points. Dwelling on them isn't usually worthwhile.

I guess it's not worth pointing out the linguistic wars, either. If you like Lakoff, you have to think that Chomsky largely missed the boat. And vice-versa. To support both avidly is to support neither even weakly, even if I think that generative semanticists and generative syntacticians find common ground in some formal semantics.

We can ignore all this, though, if we take "not ever" to mean "seldom, at least when a few selected topics are involved."

[JDPriestly]

41. Chomsky's book on transactional linguistics was brilliant and

brought a new era to the study of language in general. We used it as a textbook at university. Chomsky's work is transformational. Lakoff is great, but I believe that Chomsky's linguistic work preceded the work of Lakoff. Chomsky was born in 1928; Lakoff was born in 1941.

Avram Noam Chomsky (pronounced /ˌnoʊm ˈtʃɒmski/; born December 7, 1928) is an American linguist, philosopher,<2><3> cognitive scientist, and political activist. He is an Institute Professor and professor emeritus of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.<4> Chomsky is well known in the academic and scientific community as one of the fathers of modern linguistics.<5><6><7> Since the 1960s, he has become known more widely as a political dissident and an anarchist.<8>
In the 1950s, Chomsky began developing his theory of generative grammar, which has undergone numerous revisions and has had a profound influence on linguistics. His approach to the study of language emphasizes "an innate set of linguistic principles shared by all humans" known as universal grammar, "the initial state of the language learner," and discovering an "account for linguistic variation via the most general possible mechanisms."<9> He elaborated on these ideas in 1957's Syntactic Structures, which then laid the groundwork for the concept of transformational grammar. He also established the Chomsky hierarchy, a classification of formal languages in terms of their generative power. In 1959, Chomsky published a widely influential review of B. F. Skinner's theoretical book Verbal Behavior. In this review and other writings, Chomsky broadly and aggressively challenged the behaviorist approaches to studies of behavior and language dominant at the time, and contributed to the cognitive revolution in psychology. His naturalistic<10> approach to the study of language has influenced the philosophy of language and mind.<9>. . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky

George P. Lakoff (pronounced /ˈleɪkɒf/, born May 24, 1941) is an American cognitive linguist and professor of linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, where he has taught since 1972. Although some of his research involves questions traditionally pursued by linguists, such as the conditions under which a certain linguistic construction is grammatically viable, he is most famous for his ideas about the centrality of metaphor to human thinking, political behavior and society. He is particularly famous for his concept of the "embodied mind", which he has written about in relation to mathematics. In recent years he has applied his work to the realm of politics, exploring this in his books. He was the founder of the now defunct progressive think tank the Rockridge Institute.<1><2>

. . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Lakoff

[femrap]

69. Comparing Lakoff to

Chomsky is laughable. Lakoff likes having his fame.

[PSzymeczek]

86. Chomsky was my hero

in undergrad school. I was a linguistics major. I did my undergrad thesis on grammar instruction at the college level.

[Mr Rabble]

57. Im sure that you are prepared to offer an alternative.

So please, expand of the professors ideas, and let us know where he is omitting things that you think relevant. Please do so with some degree of specificity so that we can all learn something today.

Thanks!

[Qutzupalotl]

33. I think Obama beats all comers in 2012.

If you can think of someone who can beat him, I'm listening.

[peace frog]

38. +1

Agreed.

[xxqqqzme]

63. the jebster

is positioning himself, waiting for the permafrost princess to melt down. The teabagging RW will be whipped into such a frenzy of fear, they will welcome yet another spawn from hell.

[Rubble]

95. unfortunately for Obama, there is someone who comes to mind

General David Petraeus.....

He is being positioned for a 1952 Eisenhower-style campaign. Look for Tim Pawlenty, Rick Perry, or Robby Jindal as veep, with dark horse (actually dark spawn of hell) Liz Cheney. Many miles to go till 2012, with possible false-flag terror attacks, Iran war drums (Iraq redux, except this time will be possible WWIII) and further unraveling of the derivative-fuelled global financial meltdown.

[icee]

37. Without question, you are correct. I believe we are on the cusp

of a bloody revolution. All these states reversing CCW laws, and teabaggers arming themselves for demonstrations. Anger and fear build on themselves... However, I no longer think that even had we passed Single Payer or Medicare for all, it would have made much difference. There is simply a seething anger that people are feeling. It's more directed at loss of country than anything else. People know what's going to happen.

[freebrew]

44. It's the betrayal of the people,

by their own party. Rahm is a big part of it. Clinton, as much as I like him, had a big hand in it.
But it all seemed to start with Raygun, the union-buster.

The working class gets used and screwed, while the upper middle-class is getting the same but doesn't see it happening.

We need a return of the Fairness Doctrine in the media, but that isn't going to happen until Faux does something so totally outrageous that even the idiots won't stand for it. And I don't hold out much hope for idiots seeing the light...

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[whathehell]

67. Then why do the polls put Obama at about six points ahead of any Repuke contender? n/t

[femrap]

68. +1

Just like Noam said....it's like the late Weimar.

The white boyz are very angry....especially in the South. And these dudes don't like their women taking their jobs (even though it was their rich white brothers who outsourced their jobs) and bringing home the 77 cents on the dollar.

Anger is everywhere. He's right.

I want to be a hermit way out in the country with a few cool neighbors if I could find them.

edit for typo.

[MadMaddie]

79. What should be done with Iran?

Nothing? Kinda like Osama Bin Laden and his threat?

I am not talking about preemptive strikes but pressuring Russia and China to enforce sanctions.

The Iranian leader has already said they would sell nukes to the taliban if they ever get them developed.

I think you are wrong in your analysis, it's the Republicans that are losing the independents and the sane Republicans.

The Republican party has shown it only supports big business not the average American.

We are not going to get our asses kicked in fact I say between now and November the Republicans will cross the line so far that there will be no return for them.

The economy is turning around and we will be out of Iraq in 2011.

Oh by the way the next Timothy McVeigh will not be from the left, you know it and I know it. We both know it is a matter of time before something bad happens.

[janedum]

82. Well said. Obama is definately a ONE-termer. Bush on steroids.

[CoffeeCat]

85. Just like Chomsky said...

...Both sides are very disillusioned and angry. Both parties have sold out
to corporate America. Like Chomsky said, that leaves a vacuum. That's how
Hitler rose to power. He was the "answer" for all of those angry people who
needed an enemy to blame.

The question is...who or what will the neocons produce as the "answer." Who is
their leader? I really see no one.

I see a lot of scapegoatting going on, and it scares me. Especially when it comes
to illegal immigrants and Hispanics. The media and the right wing have always
demonized illegal immigrants, ignoring the fact that they are here, in part, because
big business employs them as cheap labor and there are no laws to stop it.

[WilliamPitt]

97. Wanna bet on it?

[Chulanowa]

107. No, we're not

I know you're really, really hopeful that the Democrats face a "bloodbath" - like most progressives, your main interest is seeing Republicans win, obstinately to "send a message" to Democrats - but it's not going to happen.


There will be plenty to salvage from the party in the next 8-12 years. You, however, will still be a bitter wreckage of a person, desperately wishing someone would pay attention to your bullcrap.

[Enthusiast]

4. Every Tea Party gathering

is given press and credence by the M$M. I don't see them losing steam. I agree with the other poster that we are vulnerable, very vulnerable in November and 2012.

Democrats didn't take advantage of the popularity of the public option. And they didn't take advantage of huge anger built up against the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. For this reason they have lost support.

Many of us have lost the enthusiasm we had in 2006 and 2008. If we don't get the vote out in November Republicans will change the face of congress and things will only get worse from there.

[Ikonoklast]

9. But they have less and less attendees.

Democrats will retain majorities in both the House and Senate this fall.

Many of us have not lost enthusiasm.

[Lost4words]

18. I am not so sure, and the pukes have cheated before, whats to stop them doing it again?

its not who votes but who counts the votes. Remember!?

[kimmerspixelated]

52. Good point.

Sometimes the only treason I think they LET Obama win was so they could make him the fall guy, have time to regroup and to put off the lawsuits against them.

[CoffeeCat]

87. Seriously...the neocons wanted a break...

Their original plan was to have a neocon nominated on each side--Hillary for
the Dems and McCain for the Reps.

Seems like they figured...screw it--this will be a damn good way to blame
the economy, the wars, the high deficits and God-knows-what-else on the
liberals/Democrats (and yes, Obama isn't a liberal, but they say he's a liberal
and a socialist, so that's all that matters). Who wants to pick up after the massive
messes thatBush made anyway?

Let someone else stew in the toxic dump and get blamed.

No way in hell will the neocons EVER give up power. Just look at the PNAC plan that
was on their Website (which still galls me, that the had the audacity to publish
their evil plot). Iraq first, then Iran, then Syria. They accomplished their
most difficult challenge--getting a foothold in the Middle East. No frickin way
will they lose that ground.

They'll steal the next election for sure.

[Hardrada]

93. The old Stalinist phrase, "counter-revolutionary Trotskyite wrecker"

actually applies very well to the neocons!! Wish we had a gulag for them.

[sabrina 1]

29. If they cannot get done what they said they would do with the

majorities they now have, not to mention control of Congress and the WH, even the loss of a few Senate and Congressional seats, even if they retain a majority, what do you think they will accomplish then?

This was the time, the once-in-lifetime opportunity to get, at the very least, a PO. I would have preferred far more, but they didn't even get that minimal amount of work done, claiming all kinds of excuses, none of which made sense. We are not stupid, contrary to the propagandists who think they can manipulate thinking even when people can see things with their own eyes.

Without the enthusiasm of the base, a party flounders. This party insulted and excluded the base, the people who work the hardest to get them elected. If they don't win them back, they will lose enough to make them ineffective considering they claim to be ineffective now.

Whoever is 'controlling the message' in this party, is doing a terrible job. I've not seen so much alienation of real democrats in over nine years. And it's hard to understand why these so-called 'pragmatists' would be doing this. I think they have allowed their own personal hatreds take over their reasoning powers.

[HughMoran]

10. I thought they ran out of steam in their little pouty bus tour

Boston was a fizzle and the Washington event seemed like a yawn. I think even the press is getting bored with reporting the same old BS - over and over again. I know I'm tired of it :D

[paulkienitz]

36. It's true that Democrats are bringing a lot of fail right now

... but the baggers are failing even harder. We're going to keep power.

[ThomThom]

45. But who will that lost support go to, not Palin, not a republican

Dems are stuck with this President. Republican and teabaggers don't have anything but negativity. We need to push Obama to the left every day. Demand that he rein in the banksters, develop alternate fuels and create jobs.

[femrap]

70. But the Dems couldn't

offer the Public Option since they owe Big Insure and Big Pharma and every other Big Corporation.

I don't think this Centrist Democratic Party cares about me. Hell, Obama wrote an Executive Order regarding Abortion...no poor women can have one. PERIOD.

I don't have a party anymore...it moved to the Right and is now like Nixon's Administration....a Republican Lite, but worse.

There may well not be an Election in 2012 for all we know.

[dorkulon]

14. We dismiss these people at our peril.

It's never been about HCR; these people have been nurturing their hatred since the Civil Rights act; or from a longer view, since the Civil War.

[BunkerHill24]

31. I concur. We should be concerned, and rightly so. n/t

[awoke_in_2003]

56. Bingo...

they want to put the black man back in "his place". Electing a black president pushed these loonies over the edge. They cannot stand the very idea that a black man sits in the Oval Office. They will deny it, but they are lying.

[femrap]

71. +1

Plus they are willfully ignorant....with guns. A scary combination.

[h9socialist]

35. Logically you are correct . . .

. . . but I must tell you that I think racism is the very heart and soul of the Tea Party movement. Therefore, while they may be programatically impotent, they nevertheless summon the stupidity, fears and hatreds of certain segments of the petty bourgeois and parts of the working class. In the long run, I think your analysis will prove out. But in the shorter one this could start looking like Germany in the last days of the Weimar Republic. The ugliness of some people doesn't manifest itself fully until they gain a self-awareness of their own obsolescence! And that is fertile ground for right-wing extremists.

[Autonomy]

39. Agreed. n/t

[JDPriestly]

40. The Teabaggers are not what he is talking about.

He is talking about the fact that our entire country is ripe for serious problems because high unemployment rates, the lost wars, the general disillusionment with our system (remember how we protested the Bush administration during the past eight years), the serious decline of our economy above and beyond the unemployment rates, our unjust tax system, our very, very corrupt bankers, the cover-ups and secrecy in government and the inflation that has not yet arrived but will come due to a number of factors create fertile ground for the emergence of angry, fanatical, true-believer movements of all kinds. All it takes is one very charismatic leader and silence, fatigue and confusion in the ranks of the reasonable and patient. The Teabaggers are just a symptom that such an environment is developing.

I suggest that DUers read the book The Lost City by John Gunther. He was a journalist who lived in Austria when the Creditanstalt failed and reports on how the government destroyed public housing that was viewed as the home of many on the left.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gunther

http://www.alibris.com/search/books/qwork/4047359/used/The%20lost%20city,%20a%20novel.

http://www.amazon.com/Lost-City-John-Gunther/dp/B000NV66PY/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1271708607&sr=1-7

Check your local library's interlibrary loan.

The book is long and may be difficult to read for Americans of our time because it contains a lot of historical and cultural references that may be unfamiliar. But it is very important to read that book if you really want to understand what happened in Germany and why I believe that conditions in our society are very similar to those in pre-WWII Austria and Germany.

I'm not using hyperbole when I say that. I know the history. I know the countries -- all three, Germany, Austria and the U.S. The similarities are frightening.

[femrap]

73. +1

Similar, indeed! I fear for this country....for the world.

I much prefer Mother Nature smacking us around....like the volcano and earthquakes as opposed to evil men and their nuclear weapons and sensitive egos.

[dana_b]

80. thanks JD

I am going to look for that book. I know a bit about Austria (used to go there frequently when I worked for the airlines) but more present day than the past. I would like to read how it happened.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[happygoluckytoyou]

54. Ikonoklast... sadly, i think you underestimate the ability of the teabaggers to be stoopid...--->

they have great depth in that department

I HOPE YOU ARE RIGHT but at the last count, (2000 teeth divided by 2) there were 1000 such idiots carrying misssspelled signs
and spouting irrational claims at a local rally...

THERE IS A SOLUTION.... but it is in OBAMA's hands to SHOW PROGRESS
and in the DEMOCRATS HANDS to rally the GRASSROOT SUPPORT they had at the last election

here is to hoping i am wrong!!!

[MannyGoldstein]

61. The Nazis Had Also Peaked, And Were In Decline

Then they weren't.

The teabaggers are not (yet?) the Nazis - but there's an opening for something very, very bad to happen.

[happyslug]

72. If you studied the Nazis, they peaked in 1931 BEFORE Hitler ran for President

And the Nazi's vote had actually DECLINED afterward, but Hitler took power anyway for he was till the single most powerful party. The Second most powerful was the Communists who were on the rise when Hitler took over. Thus Hitler's was given power as his base was in decline AND the opposition was gaining power. At that point the traditional powers in the German Political system gave Hitler complete power. The Communists were the repressed (if not killed) The Catholic Centre Party agreed to support Hitler in exchange for more freedoms for Catholics (A promise Hitler Subsequently broke) but once Hitler had total power he dissolved all other parties (In the case of the Center Party, with an treaty with the Vatican where the Vatican agreed NOT to interfere with Politics and Hitler agreed to leave the Catholic Church alone, a promise Hitler subsequently broke).

November 1932 Election, the Nazis win 34% of the vote"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_election,_November_1932

Compared to the July 1932 election where the Nazis had won 37% of the Vote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_July_1932

In the last free Election in Germany (March 1933) the Nazi dropped again to just 33% of the Vote (and this is with Hitler as Chancellor and thus free to use the SA to intimidate voters at the polls):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_March_1933

My point is the issue of peak is NOT important, Hitler saw a steady decline in support in the year BEFORE he took power. His ability to hold on to most of that base AND the that the opposition HAD to be allied with the Communists (Who also had about 33% of the vote) left the ruling elites to go with Hitler. There was no way they would go with the Communists and with the Communists getting 1/3 of the Vote just increased the fears of the rich. Right now we have no serious radical left opposition so the ruling elite can use the Tea-partiers with minimal fears, but if the radical left would get energized then you will see a Hitler.

[humbled_opinion]

83. Your Wrong...

I work with many, I was thinking too, how can they be programmed to support wall street but the teabaggers issues are much deeper i.e.,

One Teabagger was spouting on one day about how Obama "is proposing fines and more regulations on banks and corporations and that those greedy businesses will not eat the cost increases by lowering any salary of the CEO or Board of Directors, no they pass the costs of government regulations, controls, fines and taxes on to the consumers as costs increase on their goods and services or job cuts or outright shipping jobs overseas for lower costs...... I actually found myself agreeing with him and then he continued.... "But you know all this oversight, regulation, government control, management of the collection of the fines and taxes such duties will require more government personnel, more government offices, more government furnishings, more government services all of which are then passed on to all of us in the form of increased taxes and out of control deficits.

The bottom line is the teabaggers are more then willing to let corporations and businesses live or die on free market terms, letting consumers decide if they will continue to buy the products or not is something they see as a form of freedom of choice and liberty, but they are all lock step against further government control, increased government size, and any type of government bail outs. Sadly the Repubs have already gained ground on this issue because the Congress has not put direct edicts in their legislation that guarantee taxpayers will never bail out corporations in the future.

Ron Paul had an article recently about how Obama was actually a corporatist.... that kind of rhetoric is catching on with some of the people I work with. Imagine Ron Paul is their idea of Mainstream.... LOL....

[CoffeeCat]

88. I had a conversation with a teabagger...

...that was so infuriating--it literally took me a week to calm down.

This teabagger blamed the entire housing crisis on our government that
FORCED banks to loan money to people who did not deserve to be in houses.
Our government, according to t-bag, wrote regulations that forced banks
to write all of those bad loans. Hence--according to t-bag--we need LESS
regulation on banks. The government just needs to stop regulating the
banks with all of these horrible policies and rules--and we would have
never had the housing implosion or the bailouts.

I get angry just writing this out. I'm having flashbacks from that conversation!

Can you believe that right-wing radio and Glenn Beck get these flibbertigibbets to
argue for LESS government regulation on banks--that we have now??? Blows...the mind.

For one--we have very little regulation now. The problem is that the banks
are unregulated renegades. Secondly, the government didn't force banks to
make weak loans. The banks PAID CONGRESS to relax regulations and policies--so
they could make all of those crazy loans!

It was the banks who fueled the bubble. They couldn't sell enough of those
crazy-financed and sub-prime loans. We know now that they were packaging up the
shit loans with good loans and passing them off as AAA-rated securities and making
a ton of money this way. Their assembly line of profit was contingent upon them
selling TONS of those crappy loans.

Unbelievable!

Glenn Beck does a rollicking good job of brainwashing these people into toeing
the line for the corporations. These tea baggers are so stupid!

[NBachers]

91. I bet you are the first person on DU to say "flibbertigibbets"

[humbled_opinion]

98. Yep but you only elaborate one side of the equation.

There is a personal responsibility aspect in other words, FHA makes it easy for people to qualify for no money down loans a bank is in the business of making money (period) when the bank required 20 pecent equity down payment it made the house a personal investment harder to walk away from where a person would lose real money.

The argument is that government through Fannie and Freddie took too much risk backing bad loans.

The teabags believe that it is people that should be informed enough and responsible enough to make their own decisions, that people would be able to decide wether a product or a service is desired and therefore people not government are in a better position to force the failure of corporations. That is exactly why they rail against "Big Government" they believe that Government is removing their choices and limiting their Freedom.

Of course we all know that there is a fine balance between the two can't have too much regulation but can't have too much corporate control either...

[ShortnFiery]

3. Chomsky reserves his fiercest venom for the liberal elite ...

... in the press, the universities and the political system who serve as a smoke screen for the cruelty of unchecked capitalism and imperial war. He exposes their moral and intellectual posturing as a fraud. And this is why Chomsky is hated, and perhaps feared, more among liberal elites than among the right wing he also excoriates. When Christopher Hitchens decided to become a windup doll for the Bush administration after the attacks of 9/11, one of the first things he did was write a vicious article attacking Chomsky. Hitchens, unlike most of those he served, knew which intellectual in America mattered.

“I don’t bother writing about Fox News,” Chomsky said. “It is too easy. What I talk about are the liberal intellectuals, the ones who portray themselves and perceive themselves as challenging power, as courageous, as standing up for truth and justice. They are basically the guardians of the faith. They set the limits. They tell us how far we can go. They say, ‘Look how courageous I am.’ But do not go one millimeter beyond that. At least for the educated sectors, they are the most dangerous in supporting power.”

/snip

“I try to encourage people to think for themselves, to question standard assumptions,” Chomsky said when asked about his goals. “Don’t take assumptions for granted. Begin by taking a skeptical attitude toward anything that is conventional wisdom. Make it justify itself. It usually can’t. Be willing to ask questions about what is taken for granted. Try to think things through for yourself. There is plenty of information. You have got to learn how to judge, evaluate and compare it with other things. You have to take some things on trust or you can’t survive. But if there is something significant and important don’t take it on trust. As soon as you read anything that is anonymous you should immediately distrust it. If you read in the newspapers that Iran is defying the international community, ask who is the international community? India is opposed to sanctions. China is opposed to sanctions. Brazil is opposed to sanctions. The Non-Aligned Movement is vigorously opposed to sanctions and has been for years. Who is the international community? It is Washington and anyone who happens to agree with it. You can figure that out, but you have to do work. It is the same on issue after issue.”

[srf Rantz]

5. this is where I part with both Chomsky and Hedges

aside from it not being clear who exactly he is talking about...

whatever you think of the Liberal elite, they're on our side. It does little good to attack them with the same venom that the right wing elite do. If they are not effective or are not making progress, then we need to back them up and push them harder, not tear them down.

Destroying our own leaders does not a strong movement make.

personally I believe they are not as effective as Hedges and Chomsky would like to see, not for lack of conviction or passion, but because of the overwhelming power and strength of the entrenched and powerful forces arrayed against them.

[ShortnFiery]

6. Bull! The ruling class liberal elites are wealthy and pre-occupied with their own "fluffy life."

None of their actions will mean that there won't be a BIG PAYCHECK and money to spare for EXCESS for them and their families. Therefore, it's all a f**king Chess Game to them. They don't appreciate that their political ass-grabbing for large corporations and throwing us "little people" the scraps HURTS wage earning Americans *to the core.*

Wake up "liberal" intellectual elites: Your lack of concern for the working and under-classes is going to bite you in the ass. Why? Because day after day, Middle Class Americans lose their jobs. They're ANGRY and BITTER. They don't want to kiss your a**es anymore like they did in the 90s when "a few scraps" was EXTRA instead of DIRE NEED.

I think that I loath the rich "liberal" intellectual elites almost as much as I hate the GOP right wingers.

That's embarrassing given that I'm a wage slave LIBERAL. I can't relate to these people - not at all. :thumbsdown:

[srf Rantz]

11. who are you talking about?

it sounds like you're talking about those same generic "liberal elites" the RW noise machine rails about daily for the past several decades.
reacting with the same emotional hatred/jealousy---"they don't know or feel how I am suffering!!!"

so just who exactly are they?

the political leaders: Pelosi, Reid, Obama??
maybe the DLC triangulators like Emmanuel and the Clintons??
(I'd hold the latter are not liberals but centrists or moderates)

the stand up rank and file progressive politicians: Alan Grayson, Weiner, Franken???

the economists and columnists: Paul Krugman, Frank Rich, Joan Walsh, Glenn Greenwald, Joe Conanson???

the pundits: Olbermann, Maddow??

actors/enterainers like: Sean Penn, Tim Robbins? Bill Maher? the Dixie Chicks?

wealthy billionaires like: Buffet, Soros or Cuban?

who?

academic intellectuals like Hedges and Choamsky themselves?
or maybe just those who they think haven't stuck their necks out as far as they have and gotten them stepped on as much?

all the people I've listed above, I am proud to support and admire for their courage to speak out and take what has often been a blizzard of rage and criticism, even if I didn't agree with their approach or proposed solutions or strategy.

my point is: when we fall into joining with the RW to attack our own, we weaken our movement not strengthen it.

[ShortnFiery]

16. I'm talking about our milquetoast democratic leaders who continue to serve the Corporations above

the needs of the average wage earning American.

Olbermann and Maddow are entertaining but even they are "out of touch."

Newsflash: The CORPORATE right-wing is "a ruling part" of both parties.

We live in a right-wing duopoly. It's not PARTY, but PEOPLE who I support.

[srf Rantz]

23. agreed...pretty much

we know who the bad guys are. the enemy is, and has been, for decades, the corporate oligarchy.

they certainly do influence and control many of our politicians in both parties.

the Republicans are unashamedly and openly in their pockets--(all the more wonder that the teabaggers think the Rs represent their interests!)

so we're left with the Democrats. they still advertise themselves as the "people's" party, or try too, the friend of the working man. And for decades they haven't been able to deliver much. Hence becoming the target of the anger and frustration of you and so many others here at DU, and often myself as well.

While I'm sure there are those Dems who are wholly owned from the get go and there are those who are "bought out" too. There are those who believe that the only way to make any head way is to work with the powers that be and try to negotiate some favorable gains however meagre. (ie. Clinton, Emmanuel and Obama, even LBJ). There are still many others who succumb to pressure of a myriad of kinds (including real violence and threats), and there are those who just can't get any traction no matter how tall they stand up.

The bottom line is: all this only proves is how entrenched and powerful the "enemy" is. It is not proof that Democratic leaders "serve the Corporations," regardless of whatever manner by which they have been rendered ineffective and or powerless.

If we want strong leaders, we have to create them and we have to back them up.

[CoffeeCat]

89. Very well said...

Both parties have been corrupted.

The appearance of a two-party system is a charade. I believe the tea-party
movement was started to give the appearance of two opposing political sides
fighting--and also to give reason for future Democratic elections, "Oh, those
tea partiers are just so angry and motivated that they really affected the
election."

Yeah, right.

It's all illusion at this point, and remember---they're "history's actors."

[naaman fletcher]

78. Well for starters,

Every Democrat who supported the Iraq war and the bank bailouts.

[femrap]

74. +1 nt

[Warren Stupidity]

17. Consider HCR and the role our 'liberal elite leaders' played

in producing a completely republican center right health insurance reform bill that kept real health care reform off the table right from the start, all in order to gather ZERO republican votes for this 'bipartisan' effort.

[JDPriestly]

42. srf Rantz, Please, please read The Lost City by John Gunther.

You can probably borrow a copy on interlibrary loan.

[srf Rantz]

58. why?

care to give me a synopsis?
I did find that it deals with life in Vienna during the 30s by a very famous journalist who saw it all first hand.
and explain how it relates to my point that attacking and weakening our own leaders in the face of already withering fire from the true enemy won't help us.

[JDPriestly]

65. The book describes how corrupt the "centrist" government of Austria

was in the aftermath of the failure of the Creditanstalt (which was a major factor in setting off the Great Depression) and how that "centrist" government turned violent toward the left possibly in order to avoid confrontation with the extreme right and to retain its comfortable position of power as long as it could.

The centrist government was afraid of the right, but believed the left would be easy pickings. Also, the right was better funded and better organized. The left was very idealistic and not very wary.

Our situation today is similar. The extreme right is loud, rich and well-funded. The extreme left does not really exist in our country. The center-left is not well organized, is poorly funded and would be easy pickings.

The good news is that we don't live in communities of those who agree with us politically. In Vienna, many of those who called themselves socialists at the time lived in public housing in certain areas of Vienna. They were sitting ducks.

As the book points out, some of the people considered to be socialists really were socialists, but many of them were center-left.

You might want to Google the history.

John Gunther shows how mundane and routine and ordinary life can seem in the most horrific times.

A couple of links for you to read that concern the period about which Gunther writes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx-Hof
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_Civil_War

The Austrian Civil War pretty much destroyed the left in Austria and prepared the way for the takeover by the NAZIs in 1938. The government that made the fatal decision to destroy the left was a centrist government.

[femrap]

75. Speaking of 'sitting ducks....'

Don't you think just about every city has its own 'Liberal Area?' Be it around a university or just a working class/poor neighborhood.

Sitting ducks are everywhere if this country becomes 'militarized' by say, a false flag operation.

I sometimes think this is a good time to be invisible....lucky me, I'm a woman over 55! :evilgrin:

[srf Rantz]

76. thanks sounds interesting

I've been saying for a long time, at the expense of being called a chicken little, that the left (including anyone more moderate than Bill O'Reilly) will be the targets of the RW goons. we've been demonized for so long by the RW noise machine who have convinced their open carry followers that we have a grand conspiracy to destroy the country and take away their guns and freedoms. they now believe this with all their heart and soul. it won't be too hard to put it all in motion when they deem the time has come.

but I don't see the centrists launching the round up.

I think their plan includes allowing, (perhaps even facilitating) Obama to take office and using the racial hatred and fear associated with that "change" to gin up the level of intensity to the point of violence. all the while blurring and conflating the epithets "liberal" and "socialist" and even "fascist".

I do not think however that Obama has been a willing player for the right from the get go or even now. I know how these guys play ball, and how the game is fixed. What he gets to do is what they allow him to do, whereas with George Bush, what he did was what they told him to do.

While there are many many similarities between then and now, and I feel it will have the same or very similar endgame, it doesn't have to play out the same step by step to be the same type of fascist or authoritarian takeover.

the overwhelming and relentless attacks by the right on Obama are unlikely designed to force him to crack down on the left as their proxy, while they certainly effect much of his scaling back any true progressive reforms, as they have so far, but more likely designed to depose him and the centrists (already branded indelibly as socialists anyway) in the process shutting down any chance of reason or compromise, or vestiges of democracy.

the true left, as you said, which barely exists at all, have long ago been marginalized, and are many of the ones already calling Obama a willing tool of the capitalist pigs from the other side of the fence. thus keeping all opposing factions in disarray and any chance of serious resistance remote.

not at all sure how it will actually play out, but one scenario my fevered brain has cooked up is the goons squads and militias will eventually start to carry out attacks and random violence. this will escalate as Obama is forced to mobilize police and law enforcement and eventually military to crack down on them. situations like waco and ruby ridge reoccur, eventually chaos will reign and anarchy prevail. People will long for order to be restored. He will either be deposed in a military coup, like Allende in Chile, if they have the Chiefs in their pockets, or will himself be forced to declare martial law and at that point all hell breaks loose as some military remain loyal and the oath keeper types turn. If the latter, I'm imagining they have a contingency plan, involving Blackwater and other paramilitary troops ready to take control. It will be at that time we see a strong new "charismatic leader" appear. And it is then the round ups of the "subversives" will commence...

interesting times...

[liberation]

47. What liberal elites exactly?

actual liberals are among the most under represented group in American politics, how can one have an elite without any significant representation?

[Papa Boule]

7. A economic collapse and an emergent charismatic leader or spokesperson

...as Chomsky says, an "honest" one, who doesn't appear bought, who walks the walk of his ideology without hypocrisy or compromise or apology... that's all it will take.

It does surprise me that Chomsky doesn't say that anti-Semitism will return and flourish this time too. A situation like that will be ripe for a demagogue or group to exploit and fan the flames of populist resentments and fury.

[ShortnFiery]

8. "Liberals" will be the source of all EVIL for this charismatic leader.

Strap yourselves in fellow liberals, the next decade is going to get real interesting. :eyes:

[srf Rantz]

13. my pet theory

is that there won't be a single charismatic leader this time around.

its very very clear that the forces behind the current fascist shift have studied and followed history very closely, but have made adjustments and planned ahead to avoid the pitfalls that led to resistance in the past.

the number one strategy is to deny that such a movement exists while at the same time strenghtening and building it and moving its agenda forward. quite a trick.

I believe that we'll see a rotating variety of "charismatic leaders" as we do now, such as Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Limbaugh, etc. who will come and go and a clear "Fuhrer" will never be present as a dead giveaway of what is going on. The real leaders will stay largely invisible behind the curtain.

Instead we will see the misdirection, we are witnessing now, in holding Obama up as the "charismatic leader" taking us down the road to totalitarian fascism/communism, and using that fear to demonize him (and his efforts to resist the corporate oligarchy) to further enrage and motivate the shock troops and street fighters aka the Tea Baggers. It doesn't have to make sense. Confusion is the goal. Then the "yearning for order" brings on and welcomes the authoritarians.

[liberation]

49. There is no need for a charismatic leader, since for all intents and purposes they have control

However has been in control for the past few decades will most likely put forth some new "product" and market it accordingly. Their main interest is in furthering the social divide, and thus remain in control.

The danger for me in the tea baggers, is that they are the epitome on how part of the middle and lower classes can be so easily manipulated to proactive destroy and undermine their own interests.

[kimmerspixelated]

53. Yes, they are dangerous.

Mindless, evil robot-like baggers on a mission from the devil.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. I love Chomsky but I need to see these polls

Because it sounds to me like he's getting old and watching too much media.

[ShortnFiery]

15. He's been correct - SPOT ON - for the past 8 years. Chomsky may have slowed down ...

but he's still both insightful and intellectually sound.

[Ysabel]

20. 8 yrs ? / make that half a century...

[ShortnFiery]

21. I stand corrected. Meant to emphasize the past reign of Bush Co. eom

[Ysabel]

24. aye i thought that's probably what you meant...

anyway we agree... :)

- edit: darn skippy keyboard (double letters)...

[MilesColtrane]

19. RealClearPolitics poll averages

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/


President Obama Job Approval

Approve 48.3
Disapprove 47.0
Spread +1.3

Congressional Job Approval

Approve 22.8
Disapprove 71.2
Spread -48.4

Generic Congressional Vote

Republicans 45.0
Democrats 41.8
Republicans +3.2

Direction of Country

Right Direction 36.8
Wrong Track 58.0
Spread -21.2

[Uncle Joe]

26. Here are some polls supporting Chomsky's key point.

“It is very similar to late Weimar Germany,” Chomsky told me when I called him at his office in Cambridge, Mass. “The parallels are striking. There was also tremendous disillusionment with the parliamentary system. The most striking fact about Weimar was not that the Nazis managed to destroy the Social Democrats and the Communists but that the traditional parties, the Conservative and Liberal parties, were hated and disappeared. It left a vacuum which the Nazis very cleverly and intelligently managed to take over.”

While the heading of the poll below by Gallup cites "Democrtic Pary Image Drops," check out the poll ratings and you will see that Democratic and Republican rankings have dropped double digits since 1993.

For some reason I could copy and paste the actual graph to D.U.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/127262/Democratic-Party-Image-Drops-Record-Low.aspx

PRINCETON, NJ -- Americans' favorable rating of the Democratic Party dropped to 41% in a late March USA Today/Gallup poll, the lowest point in the 18-year history of this measure. Favorable impressions of the Republican Party are now at 42%, thus closing the gap between the two parties' images that has prevailed for the past four years.

<snip>

Gallup last measured party images in late August/early September of last year. At that point, the Democratic Party enjoyed an 11-point favorable image advantage over the Republican Party. Now, the favorable ratings of the two parties are essentially tied.

[Kablooie]

22. But he's right. If a charasmatic leader appears we are in big trouble.

Luckily skeleton woman and blubber man aren't that.

[Uncle Joe]

25. This is an excellent column.

Kicked an recommended.

Thanks for the thread, babylonsister.:thumbsup:

[progressoid]

28. Noam needs to watch a little Glenn Beck.

Beck also references the Weimar Republic.

And as any Fox viewer can tell you, we already have that charismatic figure. His name is....BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

[ShortnFiery]

30. Glenn Beck is a rodeo clown. Few people ADORE him: He's bread and circus. eom

[mimitabby]

32. they're already beating up homeless and "immigrants"

[certainot]

34. will the left start paying attention to those 1000 radio stations now? with

their coordinated UNCONTESTED repetition?

fox is a tick on limbaugh's ass.

[Doctor_J]

81. and do what?

outside of a truck bomb a Fox News, what might help?

[certainot]

99. picketing the limbaugh megastations and their local sponsors

and students and faculty of universities that have sports broadcasting relationships with those racist and global warming denierl stations.

that would be a start.

[Doctor_J]

100. The Beck boycott showed that those are absolutely futile

Big Media is part of the corporate rulers' arsenal. The propaganda value of 24/7 lies is worth much more than advertising revenue.

[certainot]

106. no, on a national level that's true but the stations themselves need those local sponsors

that has been the failure of any progressives trying to boycott or complain to limbaugh and hannity and beck and their main offices- they add the attention to their rating- the local stations rely on local sponsors and many of those sponsors are in it merely because they're trying to get on the biggest stations or their ad cos put them there- calll up, and you'll see very few defend the racism and lies and many think of the blowhards as entertainers.

the big mistake, aside from ignoring talk radio, has been to deal with it on a national level instead of recognzing the local limbaugh stations as the power centers of the GOP and embassies of corporatestan- we wouldn't be in iraq if we had taken the demonstrations there- to where the bulk of the repetition to sell the lies was happening.

and there is no excuse for US universities to broadcast their athletics on thse stations.

if the left takes talk radio seriously and recognizes its critical part in the last 20 years disaster the local sponsors will peel off.

i do agree that the national blowhards are in it for selling war and deregulation and global warming denial - not flooring and flowers and penile enhancement formulas.

[AlbertCat]

43. So... has Norm never seen anything like this or is it just like Germany in the 30's?

Can't be both!

Yes there are similarities to pre WWII Germany.... But y'know what.... there are many more differences that are nothing like pre WWII Germany. One of the main differences is we have Nazi Germany to remember. Where's the discipline of the 3rd Reich?

And I'm supposed to believe the small fake geriatric party named after an oral sex act who can only agree on one thing: that they don't like the black man in the White House, is supposed to start WWIII? Are they gonna draft the under 30 crowd into an army? Like they'd let them....

I'm sorry, most Americans do not agree with the Teabaggers, even if they get wall to wall coverage and think they are actually a majority. Wildly differing world wide POVs are instantly available unlike the 1930's

Look at the gun nuts celebrating Timothy McVeigh Day. Do you think a majority look at them with respect? Are they not just proving they can wave their weapons around practically anywhere they want? Are they showing us they can't take them to DC. What a relief that must be to way more than their little 20%! Are the Dems to be completely and totally against corporations? Wouldn't that actually make them commies? Are 8 years.... on top of a previous decade or two... of Right Wing prominence supposed to just vanish after one year of Obama? His election was supposed to wipe out instantly deeply entrenched conservative interests and operatives?


No... nuts and kooks shouldn't be ignored.... but let's not help to empower them before they even know what the hell they are doing.

[liberation]

46. Technically, most Germans did not agree with the nazis (they did not really sweep any elections)

and when Hitler wrote Mein Kampf, remember he was both in prison... and his party was in complete disarray.

Although I think that trying to establish historic parallels, usually leads to the composition of false equivalences. I think Chomsky is correct in pointing out the danger of these sort of groups if they are not squashed. And there is a clear danger, because there is no mainstream liberal party in the USA. At least in the Weimar Republic there were plenty of leftist political organizations. Whereas in our country, as of today, there is not a single left political party being represented in either house (never mind the presidency). The closest we have to liberal party, is the Dems... which I am sadden to say, have moved firmly into the center-right side of the spectrum. And I find that a tad unnerving.

It does not have to be "exactly" like Germany, but none the less... there is no equivalent group to undermine and neutralize the tea baggers from the left. We can only count on the fact that at some point the tea baggers are going to believe their own kool aid, and will start to present an out of control monster that may threaten the interests of its creator (the conservative elite). They will probably squash the movement right then and there. Alas, then there is the danger... that if that is the case, we're still in a lose-lose situation since it will mean we are in a quasi de-facto corporatis system (which we know what that is Italian for....)

[Blue Owl]

50. There's no way a +/-20% minority can sweep anything

Sorry Noam, ain't gonna happen unless some massive election theft occurs.

[stevenleser]

59. Electorally, you are correct

I think Chomsky is more worried about a bloody revolution. It only takes a small percentage to do that.

[DeSwiss]

55. K&R

"History doesn't repeat itself, but it can rhyme." ~ Mark Twain

[defendandprotect]

60. These are well to do whites who feel their privilege being challenged ....

and, I'm probably wrong, but I disagree with Chomsky --

Meanwhile, had we seen anything like this gun display and militia groups forming among

African Americans or other people of color, you can bet that the government would be putting

an immediate stop to it!!

[flyarm]

90. we did see it in the late 60's and early 70's...eom

[defendandprotect]

92. Was listening to Thom Hartman today and he had someone on . ..

maybe someone from Southern Poverty Law? Anyway, he said more than 360 groups had formed

just this year!

The Panthers had some guns -- but they killed all of them quickly enough!

And all they were doing pretty much was feeding school kids!

[flyarm]

101. ahhh time out..they were burning down Newark and bombing in Philly and NY

killing and maiming cops..and Watts in the 1960's
I remember those riots well..as a young lady then, and the fear those riots provoked.

And lest we forget the Rodney King ( so called ) Riots in LA..( I lived through those riots and was called as a juror for the Reginald Denny case.)

Some times it stinks when you have a good memory.

[defendandprotect]

102. Thank you -- yes, I remember it as well -- they destroyed their own neighborhoods . . .

and much of it not rebuilt --

And, yes, I agree, they did provoke a great deal of fear among whites --

I don't remember all the particulars surrounding those events and would need to

refamiliarize myself with them --

but it was generally spontaneous -- "burning and rioting" -- nothing organized and they

certainly weren't "bearing arms."

If you have any particulars to add or more info why not add them here for the record.

IMO, one way or another, however, AAs and people of color are held responsible for what

they do -- and very often for things they don't do. Look at the rate of imprisonment

of AAs -- I'm forgetting the number now -- someone just offered it up recently -- 12%

of AAs/? in jail. Likely even higher.

Unemployment among AAs is huge --

Racial profiling on our highways here in NJ for a long time with deaths by officer shootings.

Think of the prison "riot" in NY -- Attica -- and Rockefeller's handling of that --

And look at what they did to the prisoners during and after the riots.

What I'm basically saying is, these well to do whites, out discussing politics with their

guns -- an intimidation for all citizens -- are being given much different treatment from

anti-war protesters and other political protesters put into special "zones" and/or simply

netted in a round up and imprisoned.

And as many have long understood, this isn't just here in America -- this is all over the

world, from Katrina and Haiti to Africa -- Pax Americana!


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/eyesontheprize/story/18_attica.html

[MannyGoldstein]

62. 16 Years of Democrat's "Who the Fuck Else Ya Gonna Vote For, Assholes?"

triangulation has gotten us here.

[abq e streeter]

64. I have to disagree---more like 30 years, when you consider the rolling over and playing dead

for St. Ronnie

[laughingliberal]

77. +1000 nt

[pundaint]

94. Yes! Is there anybody in leadership who can, and is willing, to change the course?

[Roland99]

66. There's a reason Devo has reunited

[CoffeeCat]

84. I also worry about the immigrants and Hispanics...

A few years ago, talk radio was demonizing Hispanics and immigrants in such a hateful
way--that it actually frightened me. They were accusing Hispanics of bringing in
disease to the United States. Suddenly, we heard about all of the violent crimes that
illegal immigrants had perpetrated on our country and how they were stealing healthcare
and causing our taxes to increase.

It was a very scary time. All of this was spearheaded by right-wing radio--Limbaugh,
Beck, Hannity. They were all singing from the same songbook. When that happens--when
the talking points are in sync, it's no accident. They're getting their talking points
from the neocon higher ups who are pushing those talking points to aid in some grand
plan.

We've also heard about illegal immigrants being held in detention centers and being
treated like animals, denied healthcare and experiencing indefinite detention.

Even more scary, was that some of the propaganda was working. The right wing began
hating anyone who wasn't white and a lifelong resident of the US.

We don't think that it can happen again--well it could. We must fight this with
everything we are.

[defendandprotect]

103. Same old propaganda patterns . . . and I heard yesterday that ... is it Arizona/?

is going to be asking people for "documents" -- proof of citizenship?

The message I got was that it would be anyone with Hispanic background or appearance???

Anyone else get the actual story on this?

[defendandprotect]

104. K&R --

[CoffeeCat]

105. So important!!! I saw this too!

After I wrote that post, I saw exactly what you said on the evening news.

Local police in Arizona will be asking "anyone they suspect of being an illegal
immigrant" for proof of citizenship (Hellloooo...papers please!).

And also---I couldn't believe what I was hearing last night during the evening
news. And I'm sorry but I don't recall what channel I had on. I hope someone
else can confirm this... A woman was giving a speech about the horrors of
"illegals" and she said that we must face the fact that those who committed the
terrorist acts of 9/11 were illegal immigrants.

Then the news reporter launched into a diatribe about illegal immigrants, and he
asked if the woman had a point--about Sept 11 being connected to illegal immigrants.

I mean seriously...right out of the Hitler playbook.

[Douglas Carpenter]

96. kick and recommend

[yurbud]

108. k & r