Home

Hillary Clinton, The GOP, Elitism, Race and the Real Class War

Submitted by Mark on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 7:35am.

BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG
by Mark Karlin
Editor and Publisher

May 5, 2008

John McCain and Hillary Clinton are spouting a "summer gas tax relief" in the same way that Marie Antoinette cried out, "Let them eat cake."

Ever since Nixon, the GOP game has been one of a populist bait-and-switch. It's quite simple: use the machinations of demagoguery to portray an enemy who is responsible for all the ills of the working class -- and a libertine threat to the personal "values" of "God-fearing" people, and then ride on a wave of pseudo patriotic tin "flag lapel pin" fervor to the polls.

And when denunciation of "liberal elites" won't be sufficient, appeal to fear. Use Osama bin Laden in a commercial as Bush and Clinton have done, or threaten to "obliterate" our "enemies" -- as Bush, McCain and Clinton have done. Of course, the fear factor has been a key Republican tactic since Nixon, emerging full force in the infamous "Willie Horton" ad of 1988, which combined race and fear into one neat appeal to the most base of emotions. Since 9/11, Willie Horton has morphed into Osama bin Laden and "the other": Arabs, Mexicans, and now the "angry black man" (Rev. Wright, who isn't running for any public office as far as we know, but Clinton, McCain, and the mainstream media are determined to raise the fear that Obama is a Manchurian "angry black man" candidate because Wright was his minister.) Horton has morphed into Obama "Hussein" bin Laden.

Discussing class divisions has scared the living daylights out of Democrats as the Republicans since Reagan have worked to turn America into a third world nation of the very rich and the working poor -- and just plain poor. So, instead of offering the working class the real possibility of changed circumstances that will improve their job prospects and standard of living, some candidates offer them temporary gas tax break gimmicks: "Let them eat cake."

The irony here -- and a tragic one for the so-called "Reagan Democrat" and the senior citizens who vote for Hillary -- is that the real elitists are the Bushes, Cheneys, McCains, and Clintons who believe that they have all the answers for us, that they are empowered with a special knowledge that we are not privy to, that they are smarter than us and know what is best for us. That is elitism at its core. It's about people who think that we are passive participants in a government by the entrenched ruling class who must make decisions for us because they -- in their Straussian narcissism -- believe that they have the answers of "the privileged," damn whatever we believe.

But the working class is an easy mark for the RepubliCrat elitists. Displaced by jobs sent overseas and the lower wages and standard of living brought on by the emergence of international corporations who view American labor as a downsizable commodity, victims of the largest redistribution out of their pockets and into the bank accounts of the wealthy in our nation's history, threatened by the sharing of the American pie with minorities and women, many in the white working class will succumb to fear and the offer of a free piece of cake, instead of voting for long-term solutions that can improve their lot.

And, yes, we are talking about the white working class here. The Clinton campaign in particular -- and BuzzFlash was the first Internet site to hammer away on this -- has used race (and staffers have admitted it anonymously at times) to "box" Obama in as "the black" candidate, and to create fear in the white working class mind that he is really a front for the "angry black man."

In a recent commentary in the Chicago Tribune, history professor Leon Fink recalled his days as a park supervisor in Indianapolis in the summer of 1968: "I watched as the balance of political yard signs switched from Robert Kennedy to George Wallace in the months following the former's assassination. Clearly, the community was being pulled in conflicting directions."

A political candidate can appeal to our basest instincts and fears or summon what is best in us in terms of American values of embracing diversity, legal justice, and economic justice. They can emphasize diversionary tactics of trivia in pursuit of their elitist goals or ask us to be part of the solution as John F. Kennedy did.

The GOP and the Clinton campaign have bet that the working class can again be bought with a piece of cake, and -- as Obama has noted -- Senator Clinton is doubling down on that strategy.

It's worked so often for the Republicans that Democrats such as Clinton are copying it instead of offering an alternative.

No one wants to be called a chump, but the working class white voter, in a democracy, can decide whether they want to wake up in the morning out of a job with cake crumbs on their lips -- or take the risk of working together with a national leader to create a retooled America.

The true elitists are the ones who want to make the decisions for us and divert us with insulting campaign promises of summer gas tax relief. (It doesn't have a chance of even being brought up in Congress and would take billions of dollars away from providing good paying jobs for repairing our nation's roads).

Will votes be cast in hope of a few crumbs and racial fears?

We'll see yet again on May 6.

If Ohio and Pennsylvania are any precedent, Clinton's elitist belief that only she can save America -- the ultimate elitism -- will triumph once again (at least in Indiana).

In the last few weeks, the Clinton campaign has started to do something well: out-fear the Republicans.

But what the working class needs is someone who offers hope and solutions for the future, with citizens working as partners with their elected officials.

We've had enough of lies, evasions, and people who think that they are the only ones with the right answers.

BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG

Bookmark/Search this post with:
buzzflash buzzflash | delicious delicious | digg digg | technorati technorati
Technorati Tags:

» login or register to post comments | printer friendly version

Time For Our Survival Instincts To Kick In

Submitted by crackerjack on Tue, 05/06/2008 - 1:26am.
"Why?" "We either end the Iraq War or it'll be the end of us." "But how?" "We elect someone president who'll end the Iraq War, negotiate with Iran plus turning things around here at home." "And then what sort of world?" "It'll be up to us."
» login or register to post comments

elite

Submitted by Gregory Lynn Kruse on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 9:28pm.
All this arguing about "elitism" is just stupid. The elite are simply the chosen, the preferred, or the first choice. An elitist is one who refuses to accept the second or third best. Because I am an elitist, I choose Obama, and refuse to accept the other two choices. The end effect of the trashing of Obama by the Clinton campaign is that John McCain will be the next president. If that happens, I think I will be applying for citizenship back in my father's country of Denmark. I'm sure none of the working-class whites, the Johanna-come-latelys, the corporate butt-kissers, or the robot army fans will miss me.
» login or register to post comments

Universal Soldier

Submitted by vtjozef on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 8:01pm.
Buffy Saint Marie wrote in her song, The Universal Soldier, that the soldier must take responsibility, and so must we. I support PEOPLE but not warriors. ---- He’s 5 foot 2 and he’s 6 feet 4 And he fights with missiles and with spears He’s all of 31 and he’s only 17. And he’s been a soldier for a thousand years ----- He’s a catholic, a Hindu, an atheist, a Jane A boarders, a Baptist and Jew. And he knows he shouldn’t ‘ve killed And he knows he always will kill You’ll for me my freind and me for you ----- He’s fighting for Canada. He’s fighting for France. He’s fighting for the USA. And he’s fighting for the Russians. And he’s fighting for Japan And he thinks we’ll brought an end to war this way. ----- He’s fighting for democracy, he’s fighting for the reds He says it’s for the peace of all. He’s the one, who must decide, who’s to live and who’s to die. And he never sees the writing on the walls. ----- But without him, how would Hitler have condemned him at Dachau? Without him Caesar would have stood alone He’s the one who gives is body as a weapon to the war. And without him all this killing can’t go on ----- He’s the universal soldier And he really is the blame But his orders comes from far away no more. They come from him. And you and me. Oh, brothers can’t you see. This is not the way we put an end to war
» login or register to post comments

BS from BF

Submitted by vtjozef on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 2:52pm.
More BS from BF. Obama is in the same elitist class as Hillary. McCain, and yes, his big backer, Zbigniew Brzezinski. Let them eat eat cake, eh? How about a cream pie in the face of BF. You deserve it. What the working class needs is a candidate that is not beholden to the multi-million and billion dollar corporate interests and lobbyists. That is not Obama, the flip-flopper on public financing. There is one, and only one non-corporate candidate. Sorry BF, but that is NOT Obama. It is Ralph Nader. Obama's "retooled America" will make us more of the same, tools in the grand corporate scheme that masquerades as democracy. Obama and Clinton, both corporate puppets. Both flip floppers. See: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/dem_flipflops.html
» login or register to post comments

More republican trolling from vtjozef

Submitted by VettaKing on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 7:18pm.
Nuff said. You suck at the tit of Rove, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc... You are an excellent neocon mimick.
» login or register to post comments

Sure I am

Submitted by vtjozef on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 8:04pm.
Look me up and see if I'm a Republican. Use your brain. You lose me and millions like me and you have a snow balls chance in hell of getting Saint Obama into the White House. The website is http://www.metaphoria.org Do some research before you shoot your mouth off.
» login or register to post comments

Unbelievable BS !!!!!!!

Submitted by Thomas M on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 3:30pm.
Mark...In your biased writings for Obama, I have seen you print a awful lot of BS!! You said...""The Clinton campaign has used race (and staffers have admitted it anonymously at times)"". I would like you to verifly that!! You won't & you can't, unless you make something up. Give me a instant that they have said that!! Obama played the race game in this campaign & you won't, can't see it, because your head is in the clouds for your "Messiah". The race card was played after Obama lost New Hampshire & Nevada going into South Carolina. The Comments of Bill Clinton & Hillary were twisted around, to what the Obama camp wanted them to mean. In a debate, Tim Russert nailed him with 4 pages of race baiting ideals his campaign, had put out during the S. Carolina election. He flat out asked Obama if he was going to stop it. Sheepishly Obama said yes. Why is it you can't see this?? It's because the "clouds" are too thick!
» login or register to post comments

To heck with blue-collar

Submitted by ardie on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 11:53am.

The urban vote is what counts (80%). Blue-collar, who traditionally vote Republican, is 20%. Going after the blue-collar voter is a waste of time. This is a good read: http://www.agoravox.com/article.php3?id_article=8124

» login or register to post comments

Scaredy Fat-Cats

Submitted by cagey on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 11:39am.
The rich and powerful elites view the majority of the American people as unsophisticated ignorant consumers who can be manipulated into "voting" for them based on fear. The thing we are supposed to fear varies from poverty to terrorism to illness etc and is tailored to whatever group they want to appeal to. They do this because it works. The truth is that those people who live their lives only to acquire wealth and power are the ones who are the most afraid. They project their own fear onto other people in order to assuage it, and they surround themselves with wealth and power to keep their self-delusion of safety in place. Real power comes from within, and real safety comes from living in peace and cooperating with other people. So when someone like Obama comes along "who offers hope and solutions for the future, with citizens WORKING AS PARTNERS with their elected officials", the power elites are scared,scared,scared.
» login or register to post comments

Hillary Clinton...

Submitted by Clemsy Diggs on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 8:18am.

...a true example of the victim identifying with the abuser or, as the saying goes:

If you can't beat'em, join 'em.

I lost a lot of respect for Clinton, and every other Democrat who voted to give a loaded gun to a lunatic, but the rest of any that was left is now gone.

This has nothing to do with "hate," as her supporters are want to bring up whenever someone disagrees with her, and everything to do with making a decision based on her behavior.

Demonizing "elitism" really is the final proof. She's decided what works is what worked against her and her husband.

And I'm supposed to tell my children that the ends don't justify the means. Thank god she has no way of winning this nomination.

I would not vote for her.

» login or register to post comments

The Elitist Herself

Submitted by darlenem on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 10:16am.
Every time I see her playing this elitism card, I just shake my head. Her behavior that further divides the party can't be excused. I hope the party elders remember this long after this election is over.
» login or register to post comments

Clemsy, the Clintons Didn't LEARN to Behave Like Rethugs

Submitted by drprodny on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 8:59am.
They've always been closet Rethugs, just like the whole damned DLC. Look at "Holy Joe" Lieberman openly stumping for McCain - the only difference between him and the Clintons is that he's finally tossed off the threadbare rags of liberalism the DLC wraps itself in and outright said, "HEY! I'm PROUD to be a Korporate Fascist!"

For me, the Dems have only one choice: They can either re-embrace the Roosevelt/Kennedy/Johnson vision of progressivism and become a genuine alternative to the American Khristan Nazi - er, "Republican" Party that is currently tearing itself apart...or they can keep "Me, too!"ing until they become irrelevant, and we True (by which I mean liberal progressive antiwar) Americans form a new party with the legs to Fight The Right!
» login or register to post comments

OBAMA SUPPORTED JOE LIEBERMAN

Submitted by BBF on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 9:50am.

Am not understanding this. If Joe Lieberman is so bad for "stumping" for McCain, then why did Obama the candidate of change and sometimes anti-war, go out of his way to campaign for Joe Lieberman against an anti-war candidate and ask his fellow Democrats to support Lieberman:

He lent his politically influential and financially rewarding assistance to neoconservative pro-war Senator Joe Lieberman’s (“D”-CT) struggle against the Democratic antiwar insurgent Ned Lamont. Obama has supported other “mainstream Democrats” fighting antiwar progressives in primary races (see Alexander Cockburn, “Obama’s Game,” the Nation, April 24, 2006). He criticized efforts to enact filibuster proceedings against reactionary Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.

Obama “dismissively” referred—in a “tone laced with contempt”—to the late progressive and populist U.S. Senator Paul Wellstone as “something of a gadfly.” He chose the neoconservative Lieberman to be his “assigned” mentor in the U.S. Senate. He posted a long article on the liberal blog Daily Kos criticizing attacks against lawmakers who voted for right-wing Supreme Court nominee John Roberts. He opposed an amendment to the Bankruptcy Act that would have capped credit card interest rates at 30 percent. He told Time magazine’s Joe Klein last year that he’d never given any thought to Al Gore’s widely discussed proposal to link a “carbon tax” on fossil fuels to targeted tax relief for the nation’s millions of working poor (Joe Klein, “The Fresh Face,” Time, October 17, 2006).

» login or register to post comments

And, don't forget

Submitted by camisita on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 10:53am.
that Obama voted for the Bush/Cheney Energy Bill. Clinton didn't. Then, there was the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) that the Republicans wanted for so long. This takes class action lawsuits out of state courts which tend to be more favorable to class action plaintiffs. This act passed with the help of four Democrats. Obama was one of them. Clinton voted against it. Besides supporting Liberman,Obama has often supported conservative actions. He is still portrayed as the candidate of hope and change and against the status quo. It's interesting to see self-delusion at work.
» login or register to post comments

Factcheck

Submitted by Captain Jessie on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 1:18pm.
Oil Tax Breaks. Clinton's ad faults Obama for voting in favor of the 2005 energy bill, which she voted against. She misleads, however, by describing it as "the Bush Cheney energy bill." By the time Obama voted for final passage, many of the Bush administration's original proposals had been stripped out, and in fact most Senate Democrats (including some of Clinton's most vocal supporters) sided with Obama in supporting the bill. Clinton was one of only 19 Democrats to vote against final passage. Obama was among the 25 Democrats who voted in favor. It's true, as the Clinton ad states, that the bill "was called a piñata of perks." That was from a Washington Post report from 2005, which discussed criticism of the bill. The ad also is correct to say that the bill was called "the best energy bill corporations could buy," a criticism that came from Public Citizen, the consumer advocacy organization. But it's also true, as we've noted a number of times, that the Congressional Research Service later calculated that the oil and gas industry lost more tax breaks than it gained in the 2005 legislation, resulting in a net tax increase that CRS put at $300 million over an 11-year period. Not mentioned by Clinton is the fact that (as we've noted several times before) the $14.3 billion in tax breaks in the bill included large incentives for alternative fuels research and subsidies for energy-efficient cars, homes and buildings. So while Clinton and Obama were on opposite sides, her ad is misleading to suggest that his vote represented support for "Bush Cheney" perks for oil companies. Obama also considered his corn growing ethanol state of Illinois as bringing in revenue to his state.
» login or register to post comments

energy bill

Submitted by Thomas M on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 3:35pm.
Regardless of your points.....It's still a "crap" energy bill for the American people.
» login or register to post comments

What's the alternative?

Submitted by Norm on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 10:49am.
I just hope that progressives are not locked out of a Obama Administration, as Bill Clinton did in key areas. There is a real good reason that former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich supports Obama over Hillary Clinton. Bill Clinton handcuffed Robert Reich and didn't let him properly do his job.
» login or register to post comments

Well...

Submitted by Clemsy Diggs on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 9:48am.

I'd say Karl's playbook taught them a thing or two we haven't seen from them before. I'm quite aware of their DLC heritage.

Perhaps they would have always endagered their own party for their own ends, but this current display is, as you infer, out of the closet.

» login or register to post comments

PNAC

Submitted by Captain Jessie on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 9:42am.
... and the Project for the New American Century finally got up on its feet through Bush/Cheney. [PNAC: a dangerous group of republicans who want the US to take over the world just because they believe they can] No single country should rule the world. If Iraq and Afghanistan are examples of the first steps of ruling the world, boy, are we in trouble! As result, we are witnessing an America in decline. The rest of the world justifiably hates us ... the economy stinks ... many leaders are corrupt ... health care is moving toward being an elite commodity ... the media propagandizes the people and no one knows what to expect next. History books tell us of the Ottoman and Roman Empires. The bottom line there was both faded into oblivion. America (the super power empire) is in the midst of doing the same without reaching PNAC goals of taking over the world. Strange how these empires were all lead by nuts.
» login or register to post comments

drprodny, Your comments are right to the point

Submitted by Norm on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 9:10am.
I couldn't have said it better myself! p.s. Minor point. Johnson was a mixed bag in that he knowingly threw the South to the Repuglickens when he signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and he did escalate the Viet Nam War - which Kennedy was ready to bail out from. But Johnson was responsible for all the Great Society legislation and he did make a real difference by alleviating much senior citizen poverty with his War on Poverty.
» login or register to post comments