I was reading the Huffington Post this morning. I usually skip the celebrity gossip stories and most of the pieces on TV shows and entertainment. There were a few interesting stories to note. Sharon Angle claims Unemployment Insurance ‘Really Doesn’t Benefit Anyone’. A puppy saved a boy from a bee swarm. And Glenn Beck admitted to lying (which is really like reporting that the sun is hot). I read the entry on how Unemployment Rate Rises In August For First Time In 4 Months As Labor Force Expands. And then I went to the comments.
Every time there is a story on the Huffington Post about the downturn in the economy, increase in unemployment, a stupid bill, political corruption… any of these types of stories… the comments section is flooded with an immediate deluge of anti-Obama, anti-Democratic comments. I noticed in an unofficial capacity that this phenomena has been increasing over the past few months.
I can’t help but wonder “why”? I mean, trolls are trolls. You cannot avoid trolling on any website. And I’m sure plenty of right-leaning sites get their fair share of leftist trolls. I have even seen a troll or two on the racist websites, like Stormfront. But when the trolls out-number the regular subscribers, what is going on?
So, first, I’m wondering if these people sit and wait, or just wake up and start posting on the Huffington Post. I’m wondering if they are getting any incentives, or doing this of free will. Are they being prompted by Fox News and FreedomWorks? Like I said, I go to racist websites and peruse the content. I even go to Lawrence Auster’s website and read, and sometimes comment on here about them. I can understand that. But dozens, if not hundreds, of people going to sites that they are typically opposed to? Are they addicted to animosity?
And then, I notice too, that there are several central themes. They refer to President Obama with disrespectful names, such as “Barry” or “Barry Hussein Obama” or something similar. They make references to “Change.” And they comment on how all of the problems in America are the fault of this administration, with no mention of the previous administration.
I often comment about how the United States got in this economic mess, and point out that President Bush started passing the stimulus packages, and how President Bush signed the Patriot Act. I point out that President Bush gave tax breaks for the wealthy and the middle class shrunk. Debt for the bottom 80% of America grew during Bush. Jobs were disappearing before President Obama was elected. And I ask why there is no anger or hostility towards the corporations and wealthiest 20% who are sitting on (hoarding) their money instead of letting it “trickle down.”
The response is always that I’m trying to defend President Obama. I don’t see how that is really the case. I’m just giving other people blame, too. But even more the case, if they are so blind that any blame outside of President Obama is defense of President Obama, are they really just corporate sycophants? or Republican sycophants? Or both? Do they love the wealthy and Right so much that any complaints against them is blaspheme?
What is even crazier to me, is the way they deluge the comments page with anti-Left propaganda. According to people like Sarah Palin, this is a violation of the First Amendment. On Halloween of 2008, Sarah Palin accused the media of violating her First Amendment Rights by calling her complaints against Candidate Obama “negative.” (Here is the article on ABC News.) Palin has continued this logic, complaining that those protesting her speaking engagements were violating her First Amendment rights. (Not too long ago at UC Stanislaus.) Well, aren’t these people filling up the Huffington Post (or this site) with anti-Left comments violating the Left’s freedom of speech?
What is really concerning is this false sense of the sentiments of the American public, and the purposeful shifting of sentiments. Do people really feel this way? Or this this some Carl Rovian way of directing sentiment? I really don’t know. But I do know that this is odd.
It is similar to how the Right derided Obama for using “grass roots” organizational skills, and utilizing student groupds, Facebook, Twitter, email campaigns and the like, and now you have Glenn Beck and every other New Right ad on all of these sites. Palin doesn’t even update her website, but makes comments to everyone via Twitter and Facebook. How’s that for “grass roots”?
And in a similar area, these are the same people that want to “kick the bums out.” They are tired of “partisan politics” in DC. Really? Because it really appears that anyone who disagrees with you is a “Leftist” or a “Communist” or a “Liberal Fascist” or whatever dismissive term you can throw at them. No need to accept complexity of issues, I guess, when we can turn them into an “US vs. Them” issue… but then to turn around and accuse your opponents of using the same tactics. It’s not a phenomena of an entire group of people getting Borderline Personality Disorder. If you are really tired of partisan politics, why don’t you stop making me defend everyone on the Left? Why don’t you stop assuming the Left has any cohesion at all?
Indeed, the Right is not that simple. The GOP has been tearing into the Tea Party for a little while now. It is pretty obvious that there are several rifts on the Right. So, I guess, this is my way of saying, forgive me if I give the impression that I believe the Tea Party Movement, The Libertarians, The GOP and the DINOs (Democrats In Name Only) are all one ideology, or cohesive movement. I accept the nuance of difference and identify that every person has their own views, whether shaped by another or not. If anything, the GOP looks like the Weimar aristocracy that just realized what a bad idea it was to give the Sturmabteilung any power or political mobility.
I also will not accuse dissent of violating my “First Amendment Rights,” nor will I suggest in “Second Amendment Solutions” in protecting these delusional rights to “freedom from disagreement.”
35% of Huffington Post visitors are moderate Democrats – not right wingers like myself and not Marxist egalitarians like you. For you, Obama has been no further to the left than Nixon. That’s only because a nation that still polls as being mostly conservative hasn’t allowed him to implement the classic revolutionary form of Communism he advocated publicly while in college and less publicly while seeking office. But whether that 30% at the Huffington Post are outraged with the results of Obamanomics, how extreme to the left they now realize it is that he would like to go, the headaches his policies are giving Democrats trying to get reelected, bringing Chicago style thuggery to the White House (which happens to be the most upsetting thing to my Democrat friends) there is much that is upsetting to that segment of HuffPost followers and commenters.
With 72% of the U.S. in favor of Arizona anti-immigration laws, an equal number against the Mosque, 60% wanting to repeal Obamacare (predominantly for it’s overreach of govt. and hardly at all for it’s underreach) it shouldn’t be too hard to understand that many Democrats, readers of the HuffPost, now also have ‘buyer’s remorse’. Yes there are many on the far left like yourself that criticize him for not having been effective in immanentizing your utopia. But with so many enraged in his own party that are to the right of Obama, you don’t need to get paranoid looking for right wing trolls on that blog.
When I say most of these entries are “rough draft,” this is an excellent example. I neglected to depict the type of comments on the HP. I know that the Huffington Post is a left-leaning publication. (Which is one reason I frequent it every morning.) But I do not believe anyone center-to-left are posting comments such as “How’s that change working out for ya?” or “You Libs are never happy” or “In November we are going to show you.”
“That’s only because a nation that still polls as being mostly conservative…”
In Conservative polls, the nation polls as Conservative. Imagine that. When polls are released by “Liberal” poll organizations, do they validate majority of the country is Liberal? Even if you were to get the opinion of every single person, it would be skewed, which is why the US does not have a direct democratic system. More people live in urban centers, such as NYC, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, etc… and gives an inflated number based on location. According to the Census Bureau, in 2009 there were 8,391,881 people in New York City and 2,818,747 people in the state of Kansas.
Talking about the people against the immigration law, the mosque (that isn’t even really a mosque), or gay marriage, seems to be a flawed plan of action. If 80% of the country wanted to ban Christianity, would that be ok? Or is that a violation of the First Amendment? If 99.9% of the population was against short people getting married, would it be ok to pass that law?
Regarding the healthcare: 52% of the population voted for the candidate that supported Universal Healthcare as a main platform. Even in August of 2009, the Right leaning Rasmussen Reports polled that “54% Say Passing No Healthcare Reform Better Than Passing Congressional Plan.” This is not lack of support for Universal Healthcare, just the plan that Congress proposed. Many were extremely disappointed that the President compromised and removed the single-payer option.
As for the far-Left, like myself, and Obama’s implementation of a Utopia: I have not met 1 Radical that believed President Obama would ever implement any Radical Left policies. I knew quite a few people that would adamantly vocalize their opposition to the “imperialistic pigs” running on the Democratic ticket. I would ask them if they would prefer McCain and Palin.
But what is it? Is Obama a Socialist, or is he disappointing to the Socialists? Is he far left or not?
“For you, Obama has been no further to the left than Nixon.”
It’s not just me. Look at both of their platforms and policies (after election). But really, President Obama is more like Tony Blair than Richard Nixon. But where is this notion that President Obama is a Communist really coming from? I have not seen 1 real Socialist or Communist proposal yet. The Health Care Reform Bill might have been, had it not been amended so much that it bears nothing to the Universal Healthcare in those Socialist empires of the UK, France, Sweden, and Germany. Germany’s healthcare was started by the Prussians in the 1800s. Can we call the Prussians “Socialist” or “Communist” in any way? (We saw how they dealt with Communism, and it was not pretty.)
“…hasn’t allowed him to implement the classic revolutionary form of Communism he advocated publicly while in college…”
There was a period in the mid-90s, that I advocated an alliance with the grey aliens to overthrow the FreeMason Illuminati to prevent them from putting barcode tattoos on our foreheads. I also wrote a paper in college on the effectiveness of fascism in pre-War Europe. I wrote a paper on Megatron once, too. (Does this make me a Deceptacon?) Really, this whole thing about what people said in College, or the people a person has met is really not concrete evidence of anything. Farther, even if President Obama was friendly with Communists and Socialists (which is really all there is evidence of), what is the big deal?
H.G. Wells was a Socialist. Albert Einstein was a Communist. So were Hellen Keller, Susan B. Anthony, and John Lennon. Francis Julius Bellamy (the author of the Pledge of Allegiance) was a Socialist. Similarly, many Marxists and Socialists have been more critical of Communist and Socialist governments than anyone in the West. Hannah Arendt is a magnificent example of someone who leans radically Left and still opposed Stalinist Russia. (She even went so far as to compare Stalin’s Soviet Union with the Nazi party, in that they were both rooted in antisemitism.) Ho Chi Minh was inspired by the “Founding Fathers” of the United States and the US Constitution.
Since when does a Socialist preclude one from wanting what is best for humanity, the United States, or one’s family? There are many shades of gray between black and white. Just because a person is not defiantly on one side of an ideology does not mean they are the polar opposite.
So, allowing this fallacious tautogology for a moment: What “form of Communism” does Obama support? The same form as utilized by the United Kingdom? Or the kind currently implemented in Germany? And where is this evidence? In college papers? In out-of-context sound bites? In the use of quoting someone who leans this way? Is everyone who quote’s Thomas Payne a British Loyalist/Torrie?
None of this addresses why so many of the New Right are monitoring “Leftist” websites and publications and commenting en masse.
Please excuse the length of this comment; I cut out as much as I could.
What “form of Communism” does Obama support?
Firstly, unlike you, Obama didn’t just write some paper. Not only is his autobiography rife with references to his radicalism but he was a BMOC known to express his beliefs. And he doesn’t just have friends who think this way. By his own words, for many years and the formative ones, he refused to associate with anyone who wasn’t a radical. And not only was his mother a committed Communist but the ONE male figure who he was mentored by was Frank Marshall. (and please don’t repeat that a conservative once gave you some talks-there is no equivalency).
In college, Obama spoke his mind freely on this subject with 2 openly avowed and strongly Communist professors. One of them, started out as the simplistic revolutionary type – you’ve alluded to it – the people will rise up and destroy their oppressors variety. But after that professor did a stint at Cornell, he came to realize that in the U.S., a more subtle approach is needed but with the same ultimate goal of total equality of material goods for everyone. One night in an intense discussion with Obama, having seen the light from what he learned at Cornell, he tried to enlighten Obama on the subject. He was taken aback that Obama would have none of it. Obama was sticking to his guns; the U.S. could be changed to have the classic Communist revolution.
The other Communist professor is whom Obama most revered at college and he has continued his relationship with him, having him over to the White House. According to the first professor, Obama, in becoming a community organizer was following the most proper path for someone with that set of beliefs. Obama has of course never renounced, or said anything whatsoever to make public that he has modified his beliefs. And of course as I’m sure you would approve of, he has never allowed the public to be made aware of all the courses on Communism and Alinsky that he took at college.
No doubt, you are wondering how all this could be true yet you’ve not ever heard it elsewhere. First let me say as with any facts that I set forth, if you are skeptical, all you need do is put up some money and I will provide the unassailable proof. Now in this case there’s not much need for that because you could easily learn of it by googling a few of the keywords in this account I gave. But in the same way that you couldn’t give a tinkers damn if Obama was ineligible to hold office, you like the rest of the MSM would have no reason to want to know if this were true. It could only make the MSM to be of no journalistic integrity if they only now investigated and published this. (It appears that Fox did report it but the info is so cognitively dissonant there was no follow up.)
Again, nothing Obama has ever done controverts the political philosophy he openly advocated in his early adulthood. Thus it is no accident that his political career was launched in the home of a famous Communist/terrorist. His overwhelming number of votes of ‘present’ both in the Illinois and U.S. Senate are in keeping with that philosophy. He either didn’t want to expose his extreme leftism or the measures were just not far enough left for him to support.
You ask why he hasn’t proposed Communist legislation. He may be an idiot but he is not stupid. He goes as far left as a conservative nation allows him to go. As I recounted previously (so I shouldn’t have to repeat it and more importantly why don’t you follow politics closely enough to not this?): On the campaign trail he once promoted single payer but then hid that(probably after the bad reaction he got) but all that matters is that without Lieberman’s vote there would be no Obamacare because Lieberman made it absolutely clear he would not vote for it with the single payer option included.
Your contention that only conservative surveys show that the nation is naturally conservative is 100% false. Again, it is annoying that you follow politics so superficially to not be aware of the non-conservative poll that came out about this about 6 weeks ago. But you know how I get rich so please, just test me on this one.
This whole betting thing is lost on me. Maybe it is regional. If I were to wager money, to what end? If you are not interested in discourse for the simple objective of having discourse, then please stop wasting my time.
“Your contention that only conservative surveys show that the nation is naturally conservative is 100% false.”
Well, I have stated previously that, in the political spectrum, the United States has no “Left.” I can point out where I said that, but what is the point? How about we wager money on if I stated that or not?
And, yes, I studied politics, and I know that a poll really doesn’t prove much. I actually can’t recall ever using an opinion poll to validate anything as the only single evidence. Polls are highly flawed, especially opinion polls. For instance, if they use landline telephones, you have excluded a huge demographic. I do not have a landline, and probably do not know more then 10 people that do have one. And the way questions are proposed also leads a slant. (Rasmussen is notorious for this.)
As for the single-payer option. I recall President Obama wanted a public option, not single-payer. Sorry, I gave him too much credit. (Of course, we wouldn’t want to be Communists like the U.K. or Canada.)
A Google search is not research. You can find various sources of information on the internet. Many of them are not highly reliable. Prison Planet has wonderful information on how Lady GaGa is a weapon of the Illuminati. I also found an interesting article in the Des Moines Register about how the Police Officer that claimed there was a “Beat Whitey Night” at the fair had no evidence that this was true and has been demoted for making the public statement.
As for the Communist statement on Obama. If you have evidence and refuse to divulge it, what is the point? I’m basing my assertion on the evidence that I have available. I don’t see any evidence. What the President did while he was in college? That’s like bringing up George W. Bush’s prior cocaine use, drunk driving and failed businesses. Roy Ayers committed acts that were questionable in the 1960s and 1970s. It has been 40 years. How many acts of violence has he committed since 1978?
And, I did more than just talk to Conservatives. I have had close friendships with Conservatives. I have had prominent Conservatives give me advice and I have given advice. We have a few ideological differences, but underneath it all, we accept that we all want the same things. I can’t really pretend to know the intricacies of President Obama’s past friendships/relationships with other people any more than I can contend I understand the relationship he has with his wife. What I see is a politician that has had many opportunities to pass Radical Left reforms, and did not do so.
As far as President Obama not being stupid as rationale for not disclosing Radical Left ideology… well, Bernie Sanders is a United States Senator for Vermont, and a Socialist. As well as the others I mentioned? Do you say the Pledge of Allegiance? Should children say it? The author was a socialist.
Mark Twain was a socialist. Noam Chomsky is an Anarchist. None of these people are “anti-American,” or suffering because of their ideology.
“Obama has of course never renounced, or said anything whatsoever to make public that he has modified his beliefs.”
I have never renounced faeries, or made public any modified beliefs about them. (But someone did find this site searching for them.)
“(It appears that Fox did report it but the info is so cognitively dissonant there was no follow up.)”
Or maybe they realized it wasn’t all that relevant.
“No doubt, you are wondering how all this could be true yet you’ve not ever heard it elsewhere.”
I have heard it elsewhere, but no one has provided credible sources or reason to believe there is any problem involved. Where is the grand plan to start the Communist revolution? Having studied Marxism, I do not even see the seedlings. What I do see is a President with brown skin that is not very different from any other center-Left politician. Talking about comments he made in college almost 30 years ago really doesn’t seem to be very poignant.
Maybe it was Communist for Senator Obama to vote on the Attacking Viral Influenza Across Nations Act of 2005 or Designating July 12, 2007, as `National Summer Learning Day’ or Attacking Viral Influenza Across Nations Act of 2005.
“First let me say as with any facts that I set forth, if you are skeptical, all you need do is put up some money and I will provide the unassailable proof.”
Unassailable? You do know that no such thing exists, right? Even academic journals are not unassailable. You could
publicpublish a text on the events that happened in your back yard last week, and it would not be unassailable. The process of getting information peer reviewed is a tormenting process. And even if you eventually get it published, it is still open to critique…pretty much forever.None of this has much to do with the Conservative trolls that police every Left leaning website to launch comments to inflate the perception that Americans are turning on them.
also, this statement: “but with the same ultimate goal of total equality of material goods for everyone.” shows a lack of understanding in Marxism/Communism. It’s ok, though, it’s a common misunderstanding of “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” In reality, this statement means that everyone contributes as best they can, and only takes what they need. It’s hard to disassociate yourself from the current system and imagine a new one like this… sort of like tasting purple. There is no “distribution of material goods” in Marxism.
With that said… I don’t think I would condemn anyone for being a Communist, any more than I would condemn them for simply being a Capitalist, or a Republican or a Socialist, or a Christian, or a Muslim, or a Hindu, or a Jew, or a non-Theist, or Black, or White, or Gay, or Straight. Why does it matter what label we want to slap on them? As I said, there are many shades of gray… so many options between Castro and Mussolini.
And do not worry about brevity. I am too verbose to complain about anyone else not being concise.
How come’s you’re moderating the replies??
I’m not moderating comments or replies, but I do have a spam filter. Your IP is in a database of spammers. I removed your website URL, if you feel you have been unjustly targeted as Spam, please contact the website administrator and explain.