This answer from Steve

I hope REB and the others don't mind me responding in a post as opposed to responding in a comment (I believe Ohiodem1 was looking for me to respond in this manner). I welcome the opportunity. My apologies for the length of the post, and I would have done one of those "display part, then click below the fold" type of posts, but don't know how to do it through Blogger.

I would like thank OD1 for his nice remarks about me and I believe that he and the other posters here are all decent and respectful people, and very good debaters. OK, enough from the mutual admiration society.

I would say that the behavior of some Republicans is appalling, as OD1 states. Early in his post, he mentions that a Republican candidate for an office in Columbus is running a Willie Horton-type ad. I haven't seen it, but find it irresponsible that the RNC would bankroll an ad like this, especially since the Republican candidate for Ohio's governor is Ken Blackwell, a man who is black. I would never think that Republicans like Ken Mehlman aren't prone to some stupidity, as this case evidently points out.

However, I don't believe this comes close to showing any kind of overt or covert racism on the part of the Republican Party as a whole. OD1 wrote a piece about how propaganda works, and he seems to be following it by demonizing the Republican Party for one ad that would definitively appear to be racist (the Columbus one) and attempting to portray another in the same light; that would be the Corker ad OD1 cites. I've seen the ad, and it is anything but racist. The ad attempts to show that Ford's values are not representative of the values of the people of Tennessee. I believe the part that has many abuzz about the ad is the one where a girl, who is white, winks and asks Harold Ford (the Democratic candidate and a man who is black) to call her, and it is being stated by OD1 that this is somehow trying to stoke the fears of white men who don't want white women to have relationships with black men, and OD1 cites the Emmitt Till case from over 50 years ago, when the civil rights movement was barely in its infancy, as an example. (Emmitt Till was a black teenager from Chicago who, in 1955, whistled at a white woman in Mississippi; he was murdered, by being lynched, by the locals there.) While there are still an extremely low number of people who are like those of Robert Byrd's (D-WV) former group, the KKK (you like how I threw that in?), still around in the South and elsewhere in the country, the overwhelming number of Americans, including those in Tennessee, have been exposed to enough multi-racial relationships to have become colorblind when they are depicted. As for me, that part of the Corker ad was showing a woman trying to hook up with a man. I don't believe, based on what I said earlier, I am being naive; I do know there is racism in the country, but the Corker ad isn't it. And trying to make it out as such is nothing more than the type of propaganda OD1 wrote about.

And as long as we're discussing racism by political party members, how do those who support Democrats stand on the racism of those who call Maryland Lt. Gov. and Republican Senate candidate Michael Steele "Uncle Tom", "Sambo", and "Oreo" (black on the outside, white in the middle; he's had Oreo cookies thrown at him during speeches he's given)? This is how Democrats, mostly those in Maryland of course, have portrayed Steele, even when he was running for Lt. Governor. Democrats who are black are trying to portray Steele as abandoning his race and not being a good "boy" in following the party line as they've defined it for African-Americans. Those Democrats who are white have, by and large, avoided doing this; however, even Chris Matthews couldn't help himself, in a small way, on last night's Hardball, when he was commenting on some of Steele's ads (the statement below is near the end of video link):

I love the ads, my wife loves the ads, they're really funny, some of them. And very unthreatening. An African-American guy, it seems, has to run an ad that's so unthreatening that he's almost child-like in his presentation, but it seems to be working.

Child-like? That's an outrageously insulting statement. Unthreatening? I've seen video of Steele debating and he is a tiger. He's shown himself to be an excellent candidate, and, compared to his opponent Ben Cardin, worthy of representing Maryland in the U.S. Senate. Matthews doesn't seem to have a clue.

It doesn't end here. The same treatment that Steele gets has already been visited on Condi Rice and Colin Powell (at least until he started criticizing President Bush; now he's a media darling, a maverick; kind of like John McCain at times). Bill Cosby's remarks to the black community have been met with a huge backlash from supporters of the Democratic Party who are black, notably Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. The same can be said of NPR's Juan Williams, the liberal who battles incessantly with the conservatives on the panel of Fox News Sunday, after his book Enough came out and his response to those criticisms in an op-ed in the LA Times.

Yet when Democrats have overtly racist individuals either within their ranks or listed as supporters, the media and other Democrats treat it with a negligent indifference. The Democratic governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, hired a member of the racist Nation of Islam to sit on a human rights board. A human rights board. From Louis Farrakhan's Nation of Islam. Uh-huh. A Democratic candidate for Congress in Minnesota, Keith Ellison, had been a member of the Nation of Islam for years, and is backed by the Hamas-supporting group CAIR. The Minneapolis Star-Tribune has shamefully left this little detail out in their glowing "news" reports (editorials within the news section) about him and his campaign. Democrats who have tried to paint Sen. George Allen (R-VA) as a racist have been shamed at past racist statements by their own candidate, Jim Webb, in what has to be the dirtiest campaign being waged in the country. Michigan's John Dingell and John Conyers frequently vote against pro-Israeli resolutions (even the non-binding ones; here's 2001's H.Res. 191, which passed 411-4, and this year's H.Res. 921, which passed 410-8), because they have many groups like CAIR that are counted within their constituency, and who fund their campaigns. And then, as we conservative Republicans point out frequently (and, most likely, annoyingly), there is the aforementioned Mr. Byrd.

Lincoln rolling over in his grave? I think not, as Jefferson, FDR, Truman, and JFK (and even RFK) would be rolling over in their own graves as their Democratic Party has turned to mush on foreign policy and soft on crime (unless it is crimes by Republicans). The Republican Party hijacked and moved away from the moderate center? Only if you mean that they've not gotten rid of the plethora of wasteful social programs, implemented when the Democratic Party had control of Congress and the Presidency, that have cost the nation trillions of dollars over the decades, and have even added some; they've not returned legislatively to the conservative base that stresses proper regulation, fiscal respsonsibility, and national security (although they still support the latter in a much greater level than most of today's Democrats). The Republican Party has put itself in a bit of a corner with it's use of being the Party of Family Values, and then having to answer for some of the insidious and corrupt charges of some of its members (Foley and Cunningham, to name a couple). It no way paints the Democrats as now being the party of these values as many of their members have been corrupt (John Murtha, Alcee Hastings) and perverted (Gerry Studds), and are still in office (or, in Studds case, not forced to relinquish his office, and even was rewarded with committee chairmanships). (Adding on to the Steele story, members of the Charles Schumer-led Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee admitted to committing identity theft by stealing Steele's Social Social Number to try to dig up dirt on him; neither the DSCC or Schumer have apologized for this travesty. I wouldn't consider what the DSCC did was due to any kind of racism, just the criminality of some of its members.) If anything, the Democratic Party has been hijacked by those who want to expand the federal government's power through more failed and corrupting social programs as exhibited in France, New Jersey, and Detroit, all of which do nothing but enrich the politicians, make those who are poor even poorer, would truly destroy the middle class, and who would do so by gutting the military, the element that protects this nation from foreign enemies, even more than it already has. It is they who would refer to members of our volunteer military, especially those who have died fighting the war against Islamist (Islamofascist) terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan, as children; yet, continue to push for unrestricted abortions for minors and don't want laws that would allow their parents, those responsible for their children, to be notified. While I'm not in the same league as those who are against almost all abortions, I find this to be despicable. Who is the government to tell parents when it is right to perform this "medical procedure" on their own children; yet, this is constantly harped upon by members of the Democratic Party as an infringement on the "rights" of these minors. And when asked about what their positions are on many issues, the response is "we're not Republicans", as if that is an answer.

OD1 asked me if I still want to belong to this party (the Republican Party). I answer yes (although I don't give money to candidates and haven't sent any money to the RNC in over a dozen years). The "racism" being presented is on the fringe and needs to be stamped out, just as it is on the Democrat side. It means that there are too few of these types of "candidates" in both parties, but it does seem to be the Democrats who will propagandize the so-called "racism" of Republicans, despite evidence to the contrary. It will be up to the voters to see if this "strategy" works for Harold Ford. There are enough conservative Republicans in Congress to build what I consider a properly run federal government, despite liberal Republicans such as Lincoln Chaffee, Chuck Hagel, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Colin Powell, Mike Bloomberg, George Pataki, and even George W. Bush with some of his programs. And this shows the real diversity of those elected as Republicans. The US is seeing less and less of that on the Democratic side, although Ford has a voting record that is more akin to conservative Republicans than that of a Lincoln Chaffee. But, Ford is an exception, as is Hillary Clinton at times (she still is way too much of a socialist for me to ever want to see her in elected office, especially President). In too many cases, the Democratic Party is represented by those who would support a Ned Lamont over a rock-hard liberal patriot like Joe Lieberman. So, it's my turn to ask; does OD1 still want to belong to the Democratic Party? This is more of a rhetorical question as I believe I know the answer already.

QuestionItNow Blogs

This question is for Steve

This will be my last post before the election.

I want to ask Steve if he is proud of the Republican Party with its overt campaign of racist appeals to voters?

In Columbus we have Willie Horton ads. In Tennessee, the ads against Harold Ford are what I must say are more like an appeal to those who might have murdered Emmitt Till. Look around the country, and you will see this poison on our TV air. Search YouTube for Harold Ford. Look around the country, and you will see this theme repeated over and over again.

You live in Emmitt Till's city. You live in the Land of Lincoln. Your licence plates proclaim it.

Your party claims to be the Party of Linclon. I believe Mr. Lincoln is spinning in his grave as his "party" plays this race card over and over again, all over America. It cannot be denied that this is coming straight from HQ, as many of these overtly racist ads end with the statement that 'The content of this ad is the responsibility of the National Republican Committee' (paraphrased).

Do you want to belong to this party? Do you condone this kind of advertising? Is your party so morally bankrupt that their appeals to the war in Iraq, the War on Terror, Taxes, Personal Responsibility, Values no longer move the voters, and that the basest emotional strings must now be plucked? Is there a shred of decency left in the Republican Party?

I belive your party has been hijacked, and it has moved away from the moderate center of your party which produced responsible leaders like Everett Dirksen, Dwight Eisenhower, Colin Powell, Edwin Brooke, even Barry Goldwater. I believe you, despite your strong support of the Bush agenda, are a decent person who is likely to be appalled by the behavior of your party, which clings to power so desperately, it is willing to forgo its principles. What say you?

Please think about this when you cast your secret ballot on November 7. OD1

QuestionItNow Blogs

Cross Posted as "A Question for Republican Voters" at Bring It On!

"A Question" from: Ann

Ann's question "If you lived outside of America, what would you think of America?" is a fantasy question for most Americans because most Americas don't have a clue about what it is like to live in a foreign land. Most of us have never left our borders, let alone this continent.

I have been fortunate enough to have seen a bit of this big world. From what I have seen, and what I know, I would feel the same about America if I lived in the Middle East, or Europe, or in the USA.

I feel sad for America. We deserve better. For example, we deserve better homeland security.

Big City Cops and Fire-Fighters are getting laid off all over America. Is this because we are safer and we don't need them any more? Dream on. Clinton provided federal funding for cops on the street. Bush has diverted resources - including the National Guard - to fight an elective war in Iraq and build the bloated Homeland Security Dept. bureaucracy.

What the hell is going on? Our cops, firefighters, and National Guard are supposed to be the first responders in the event of a man-made or natural disasters. What happens if we call and there is no one there to answer the phone?

I guess then we will know how someone in Iraq feels today. Maybe Ann's question for tomorrow should be. "If you were an average Iraqi in Iraq, what do you think of America now?"

QuestionItNow Blogs

"The Enemy Within"

PRESS RELEASE

FRONTLINE EXAMINES LODI TERROR CASE TO GAUGE
U.S. RESPONSE TO HOMEGROWN THREAT

FRONTLINE presents: THE ENEMY WITHIN
Tuesday, October 10, 2006, at 9 P.M. ET on PBS

Soon after 9/11, an FBI informant made an alarming claim: Osama bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, had visited the town of Lodi, Calif., in the late 1990s and attended a mosque there. Moreover, two Pakistani imams preaching at the mosque came from a conservative Islamic school, or madrassa, linked to the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan. According to McGregor Scott, the U.S. attorney who led the federal anti-terror investigation, this was "an attempt by a group of radical Islamic religious figures to come to this country and ... establish a madrassa to serve as a recruiting ground."

However, a deeper look at the evidence creates uncertainty about what kind of threat actually did exist in Lodi and provides a case study of America's response to the threat of domestic terrorism. FRONTLINE and New York Times reporter Lowell Bergman examines the Lodi case and interviews FBI and Homeland Security officials to assess U.S. anti-terror efforts in The Enemy Within, airing Tuesday, Oct. 10, 2006, at 9 P.M. ET on PBS (check local listings).

The Lodi case drew the attention of senior U.S. officials. "A network of Islamic extremists in Lodi," Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte told Congress in February 2006, "maintained connections with Pakistani militant groups, recruited U.S. citizens, ... [and] allegedly raised funds for international jihadist groups."

But when Bergman interviews one of the defendants, Umer Hayat, an ice cream truck driver in Lodi, about the terror investigation, the story seems less clear. "I just make [up] a story, that's all," says Hayat, "because they would not believe me when I was telling the truth." At the trials of Hayat and his son, Hamid, the FBI showed a videotape in which the Hayats confessed to attending a terrorist training camp in Pakistan, but questions remain. After arriving at the bureau's Sacramento office voluntarily, the Hayats were interrogated nonstop for 15 hours without a lawyer present. Separated, they gave different accounts of the camp they had visited, and the FBI did not conduct a follow-up investigation in Pakistan. "You can hear the agents literally dictate to [Hayat] what it is that they thought he was involved in," says James Wedick, a retired 35-year veteran of the FBI, who reviewed the videos for the defense. "And then he mimics back to them what he thinks that they want to hear."

According to Wedick, from the beginning, the case was based on bad intelligence. He tells FRONTLINE that the idea that Zawahiri had visited Lodi was "totally ludicrous," and prosecutors now admit that the informant was mistaken. The trial ended April 25 with the conviction of Hamid Hayat for attending a training camp and lying to the FBI; the defense has filed an appeal. After the jury deadlocked over charges against Umer Hayat, he pled guilty to an unrelated charge of making a false claim on a customs form and was released.

Critics of the U.S. war on terror, both in and out of government, fear that cases like Lodi demonstrate that the Bush administration, the Justice Department and the FBI have exaggerated the terrorist threat inside America. "Terrorism itself can be a rallying cry for political purposes," says John Brennan, founder of the National Counterterrorism Center and 23-year veteran of the CIA. "There is a legitimate concern about terrorism. However, you don't want to overhype it, and I think there has been some of that over the past couple of years."

The Enemy Within is a FRONTLINE co-production with Cam Bay Productions in association with The New York Times. The film is written and produced by Lowell Bergman & Oriana Zill de Granados. The correspondent is Lowell Bergman. FRONTLINE is produced by WGBH Boston and is broadcast nationwide on PBS. Funding for FRONTLINE is provided through the support of PBS viewers and by The Park Foundation. FRONTLINE is closed-captioned for deaf and hard-of-hearing viewers. FRONTLINE is a registered trademark of WGBH Educational Foundation. The FRONTLINE executive producer for special projects is Michael Sullivan. The executive producer for FRONTLINE is David Fanning.

pbs.org/pressroom
Promotional photography can be downloaded from the PBS pressroom.
Press contacts
Diane Buxton (617) 300-3500
Andrew Ott (617) 300-3500

QuestionItNow Blogs