Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is the Right's Attack on Obama's Legitimacy New or Unprecedented?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 07:10 PM
Original message
Is the Right's Attack on Obama's Legitimacy New or Unprecedented?
Edited on Sat Sep-12-09 07:47 PM by babylonsister
I think it's unprecedented, but that could be because of the 24/7 "news" cycles we now have. Also, a black president seems to have brought out overt racism that has no parallel, because this is a first.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/09/12-11

Is the Right's Attack on Obama's Legitimacy New or Unprecedented?

by Glenn Greenwald


Several people objected in comments, emails and other places to my argument yesterday that what Rep. Joe Wilson did -- though dumb and juvenile -- was hardly some grave threat to the Republic or even a substantial deviation from standard right-wing political behavior. Some argued that Obama's race has caused the Right's hostility towards him to be both unique and unprecedentedly intense. That some people react with particular animus towards the first black President is obvious. But there is nothing new about the character of the American Right or their concerted efforts to destroy the legitimacy of Obama's presidency.

To see that, just look at what that movement's leading figures said and did during the Clinton years. In 1994, Jesse Helms, then-Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, claimed that "just about every military man" believes Clinton is unqualified to be Commander-in-Chief and then warned/threatened him not to venture onto military bases in the South: "Mr. Clinton better watch out if he comes down here. He better have a bodyguard." The Wall St. Journal called for a Special Prosecutor to investigate the possible "murder" of Vince Foster. Clinton was relentlessly accused by leading right-wing voices of being a murderer, a serial rapist, and a drug trafficker. Tens of millions of dollars and barrels of media ink were expended investigating "Whitewater," a "scandal" which, to this day, virtually nobody can even define. When Clinton tried to kill Osama bin Laden, they accused him of "wagging the dog" -- trying to distract the country from the truly important matters at hand (his sex scandal). And, of course, the GOP ultimately impeached him over that sex scandal -- in the process issuing a lengthy legal brief with footnotes detailing his sex acts (cigars and sex talk), publicly speculating about (and demanding examinations of) the unique "distinguishing" spots on his penis, and using leading right-wing organs to disseminate innuendo that he had an abandoned, out-of-wedlock child. More intense and constant attacks on a President's "legitimacy" are difficult to imagine.

This is why I have very mixed feelings about the protests of conservatives such as David Frum or Andrew Sullivan that the conservative movement has been supposedly "hijacked" by extremists and crazies. On the one hand, this is true. But when was it different? Rush Limbaugh didn't just magically appear in the last twelve months. He -- along with people like James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Bill Kristol and Jesse Helms -- have been leaders of that party for decades. Republicans spent the 1990s wallowing in Ken Starr's sex report, "Angry White Male" militias, black U.N. helicopters, Vince Foster's murder, Clinton's Mena drug runway, Monica's semen-stained dress, Hillary's lesbianism, "wag the dog" theories, and all sorts of efforts to personally humiliate Clinton and destroy the legitimacy of his presidency using the most paranoid, reality-detached, and scurrilous attacks. And the crazed conspiracy-mongers in that movement became even more prominent during the Bush years. Frum himself -- parading around as the Serious Adult conservative -- wrote, along with uber-extremist Richard Perle, one of the most deranged and reality-detached books of the last two decades, and before that, celebrated George W. Bush, his former boss, as "The Right Man."

It's also why I am extremely unpersuaded by the prevailing media narrative that the Right is suddenly enthralled to its rambunctions and extremist elements and is treating Obama in some sort of unique or unprecedented way. Other than the fact that Obama's race intensifies the hatred in some precincts, nothing that the Right is doing now is new. This is who they are and what they do -- and that's been true for many years, for decades. Even the allegedly "unprecedented" behavior at Obama's speech isn't really unprecedented; although nobody yelled "you lie," Republicans routinely booed and heckled Clinton when he spoke to Congress because they didn't think he was legitimately the President (only for Ted Koppel to claim that it was something "no one at this table has ever heard before" when Democrats, in 2005, booed Bush's Social Security privatization proposal during a speech to Congress).

snip//

Nothing that the GOP is doing to Obama should be the slightest bit surprising because this is the true face of the American Right -- and that's been true for a very long time now. It didn't just become true in the last few months or in the last two years. Recent months is just the time period when the media began noticing and acknowledging what they are: a pack of crazed, primitive radicals who don't really believe in the country's core founding values and don't merely disagree with, but contest the legitimacy of, any elected political officials who aren't part of their movement. Before the last year or so, the media pretended that this was a serious, adult, substantive political movement, but it wasn't any truer then than it is now. All one has to do is review their behavior during the Clinton presidency -- to say nothing of the Bush years -- to see that none of this is remotely new. Nothing they're doing to Obama is a break from their past behavior; it's just a natural and totally predictable continuation of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
livetohike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. I remember my Dad talking about Barry Goldwater not being
a U.S. citizen because when he was born in Arizona, it was still a territory. I was 11 years old then, so I don't know how widespread this feeling was since the media isn't what it is today, of course.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Never heard of that as any kind of sustained gripe, and I WAS old enough then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. Righties constantly claimed that Clinton was illegitimate, since he won with a plurality
of the popular vote.

I do think things are more intense, though, and that has everything to do with race.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. IOW, Republicans have been disgusting liars forever. It's the definition, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Certainly for as long as I can remember, and I'm no kid. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 07:25 PM
Response to Original message
3. Marshall Mcluhan called it Images over information ,what stupid people
want to believe .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 08:15 PM
Response to Original message
4. And the unrec means it's what?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
5. Good piece - and "primitive" is the word for them. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluerthanblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
7. I think it's always been there, but never so blatant, people seem proud
to be hate filled.

It started when Clinton was president- Rush propaganda, Gingrich, Livingston, Gulianni, Lott, Hyde hypocrisy- and dragging a twisted kind of religious fervor into the mix- But it was 2000 that really tipped it-

Something changed with bush. His arrogance and self centered posturing is something i've not ever seen in a president, not even Nixon was as offensive as him. And he has encouraged and fed a really ugly part of human nature- not the "better angels" kind- imo anyway.

I also think that as much as the internet has empowered us, it has also empowered hatred, division, gossip etc. Some people feel .... annonymous..?- a kind of freedom to behave without accountability- or self-restraint.

What i remember about the Clinton attack is that most people didn't really seem to care about the Lewinsky issue- they didn't want to hear about all the details, or watch Ken Starr loving his publicity- I don't remember people taking to the street to harass Clinton- maybe I wasn't paying good enough attention.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marybourg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-12-09 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
10. FDR was reviled by the right in his day. They called him-among other things-
"Mr Rosenfelt" implying that he was really a Jew. And you can imagine the cruel things that were said about Eleanor. Anyone who's never heard of Father Coughlin should google him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC