Monday, October 26, 2020


Limbaugh and Buchanan – The Clown Princes of Politics…

October 21, 2008 by  
Filed under News, Politics, Weekly Columns

(Akiit.com) Rush Limbaugh “did his job.”

As a syndicated radio host, Limbaugh’s “job” is to rankle the nerves of dissenting listeners and Democrats alike; while also playing to the most extreme brand of conservatism.

Limbaugh isn’t about providing intelligent dialogue, he’s about providing affirmation for those brandishing ideologies counterintuitive to constructive political discourse. His fans don’t tune in to be informed, they seek to be affirmed.

Know the difference. Affirmation is not to be equated with information.

Limbaugh expresses his listeners’ thoughts and regurgitates their often-less appreciated sentiments…regardless how inane, inaccurate and wildly insensitive they might happen to be along the way.

To be flippant, Limbaugh’s “job” is to be the obligatory clown at the pre-pubescent birthday party…complete with red wig, floppy shoes and boorish balloon art.

That is his “job” as an entertainer and he does it exceptionally well. Somehow, I believe Cole Porter would have been quite proud of Rush Limbaugh.

“All the world, loves a clown.”

Pat Buchanan, a racial arsonist of historic proportions in his own right; is charged with the task of stoking the fires of White angst, using whatever embers and incendiary devices available to generate the greatest blowback bang for the buck.

“First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known.”

Pat Buchanan – A Brief for Whitey

Really Pat? Through slavery and segregation we “reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity” we’ve ever known?

Honestly? That’s like pissing down Mo’Kelly’s leg, telling him it’s raining and becoming indignant at him for not appreciating the umbrella you tried to sell to him in the meantime.

So know that when a pill-popping clown and Mr. Molotov Race-Cocktail band together in the opinion that the recent endorsement of Senator Barack Obama by Colin Powell was because “Obama is Black;” it is what it is. It is both expected and a teachable moment about the realities of race in America. Clowns and racial arsonists do what they are charged with doing. Let’s not be surprised.

But…

Let’s surely not let the moment pass without facts and intelligent discourse making our point in rebuttal.

When Dr. Henry Kissinger endorsed John McCain, did anyone publicly query whether it was because John McCain was (also) White? Maybe a high-profile syndicated radio host has and I just didn’t hear it. And maybe another former candidate for the White House and TV commentator posed it and I just didn’t see it.

Maybe…but unlikely. Feel free to email the proof to mokellyreport@sbcglobal.net if it should ever appear.

Did anyone question whether the San Francisco Chronicle endorsed John McCain, simply because he was White?

For all the talk about Bill Ayers, there’s been relatively little talk about Senator John McCain “pal-ing around” with G. Gordon Liddy.

Breaking into the DNC offices would be accurately characterized as “un-American” in nature. If you are involved in a plot which eventually leads to the resignation of the president, you probably are questionable company at best when we assess presidential candidates’ “associations.”

At the very core of racism is the implication that African-Americans are inherently inferior, first and foremost on an intellectual level. In this instance we are somehow intellectually incapable of making informed decisions without having race trump reason, if you buy into Limbaugh and Buchanan’s misguided “logic.”

To dismiss the impeccable credentials of one Colin Powell and allege that race won out is not only shamefully insulting, it’s indicative of racism at its “finest.” To imply that Powell can not see “past” his ethnicity denies the facts and historical truths that Powell has never, ever made any political or professional decisions to appease or curry favor with African-Americans.

To question why Powell would support Barack Obama, but not also question why this country has only had White male presidents with hair parted from left to right is disingenuous. If we are going to argue the “merits” of this election season on the “merits” of race, then let’s look at the fullness of American history.

To historically allege that only White men are worthy of leading the United States of America, when half the world has already had a woman lead them at one time or another is a telling and damning fact about this country. 43 consecutive White, male presidents in a row in the face of a bevy of other female world leaders is proof positive of this country’s historical reluctance and resistance to forge forward in any truly progressive nature. The candidacies of Gov. Sarah Palin and Senator Hillary Clinton are not “historic;” not when juxtaposed against the many female world leaders over the past decades. Although we’ve been in the business of exporting democracy, we have not been honest in just how dysfunctional our own democracy has been here at home.

Yet and still, nobody publicly was asking whether such a long “streak” of 43 in a row was anyway connected to racial or gender pride. Not surprisingly, racism and patriarchy are kissing cousins.

Did Rush Limbaugh publicly question the women of Ireland who supported and voted into power President Mary McAleese along gender lines?

Did Pat Buchanan question the intellectual honesty of German women simply because they supported and voted into power Chancellor Angela Merkel?

Margaret Thatcher anyone?

We’re the ones stuck in the dark ages and I don’t mean Colin Powell.

To never have had even a choice in the HISTORY of this country other than White men is undeniable proof of racial (and gender) preference; NOT the lone exception. If Limbaugh and Buchanan want to have a discussion about the merits of race in voting allegiances, might I refer them to the photos of the first 43 presidents of this nation.

Use them as a starting point fellas and then get back to me.

Mind you, Africans, African-Americans and women have been in this country for EVERY one of our presidential elections, but the only discussion of racial preference in this election from the likes of Buchanan and Limbaugh emerges when arguably the most honorable man in all of America goes (once again) against convention on principle alone?

Really Rush…honestly Pat?

It wasn’t enough for Colin Powell to have been a professional soldier and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It’s not enough that he is a former Secretary of State. It’s not even enough that he has largely been absent from the Bush-Bashing fest, when arguably he has more reason to join in on the fun than any of us.

When it came down to Powell offering his informed, influential and most importantly…INDEPENDENT-minded opinion, the FIRST criticism leveled at him trumpeted race.

They didn’t attack his credentials and they couldn’t. They didn’t attack his record. They couldn’t attack his long-allegiance and service to the Republican Party.

The FIRST criticism leveled at him trumpeted race.

Black Republicans…take note. Use that pointed reminder about your “level of acceptance” within the party. The FIRST chance the pill-popping clown and Mr. Molotov Race-Cocktail had to attack Colin Powell, they treated him just like any other African-American and with the same level of racial contempt.

So noted.

Make up your mind Republicans. You castigated Black Democrats for characterizing Powell as a “sell-out” once upon a time. Now, you’re calling Powell a race loyalist?

He can’t be both. You “admired” him prior to now…no reason to stop. His single-mindedness is the only constant in this equation…that and classic Republican ignorance.

Written By Morris W. O’Kelly


Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!