- The American Conservative - http://www.theamericanconservative.com -

The Real Anti-Americans

As Democrats, after a Sunday rally on the Capitol grounds, marched to the House hand-in-hand to vote health care reform, Tea Partiers reportedly shouted the “n-word” at John Lewis and another black congressman. A third was allegedly spat upon. And Barney Frank was called a nasty name.

Tea Partiers deny it all. And neither audio nor video of this alleged incident has been produced, though TV cameras and voice recorders were everywhere on the Hill.

Other Democrats say their offices were vandalized and they’ve been threatened. A few received, and eagerly played for cable TV, obscene phone calls they got.

If true, this is crude and inexcusable behavior. And any threat should be investigated. But Democrats are also exploiting these real, imaginary or hoked-up slurs to portray themselves as political martyrs and to smear opponents as racists and bigots.

This is the politics of desperation.

Majority Whip James Clyburn accuses Republicans of “aiding and abetting … terrorism.” New York Times columnist Frank Rich compared the Tea Party treatment of Democrats to Nazi treatment of the Jews during Kristallnacht:

“How curious that a mob fond of likening President Obama to Hitler knows so little about history that it doesn’t recognize its own small-scale mimicry of Kristallnacht.”

Kristallnacht, “Crystal Night,” the “Night of Broken Glass,” was the worst pogrom in Germany since the Middle Ages. Synagogues were torched and hundreds of businesses smashed. Shattered glass covered the streets. Women were assaulted and men beaten and murdered. After that terrible night, half the Jews remaining in Germany fled.

To compare a brick tossed through the window of a congressional office and two shouted slurs to Kristallnacht suggests a growing paranoia on the left about the populist right.

Not since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 made “some Americans run off the rails,” said Rich, have we seen anything like this.

Was Rich awake in 1964? Because it wasn’t the right that went off the rails. The really big riot in 1964 was in Harlem, lasting five days, with 500 injured and as many arrested. The Watts riot in 1965, Detroit and Newark in 1967, Washington, D.C., and 100 other cities in 1968, all bringing troops into American cities, were not the work of George Wallace populists or Barry Goldwater conservatives. They were the work of folks who went “all the way with LBJ.”

Nor was it Young Americans for Freedom that burned ROTC buildings, vandalized professors’ offices, toted the guns at Cornell or took over Columbia in 1968. And it was not the Birchers who set off that 1970 explosion in the Greenwich Village townhouse that killed three radicals and aborted the terrorist bombing of the NCO club at Fort Dix.

No, this was not the New Right. This was the New Left, and it was Obama not John Boehner who used to “pal around” with one of the boys who did the Pentagon and Capitol Hill bombings.

As for calling Barney Frank a naughty name, that is not nice. But one wonders what Rich thought of the students marching under Viet Cong flags chanting, about the man who signed that Civil Rights Act, “Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?” and, “Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh, the NLF is going to win,” when American boys were dying in the hundreds every week fighting the communist NLF?

The 1967 attack on the Pentagon, where thousands tried to break through military police to get into the building, was the work of left-wing radicals. Did the Tea Party folks who chanted, “Kill the bill,” outside the House behave worse than that?

Some of us recall the anarchy of May Day 1971, when 15,000 leftists tried to shut down Washington on a Monday morning by rolling logs onto Canal Road, smashing car windows, blocking traffic circles and wilding in Georgetown. Most wound up behind a chain-link fence at the Armory.

How many were arrested on Capitol Hill Sunday a week ago?

Not one Tea Partier, man or woman.

The “mass hysteria” of the Tea Party right, writes Rich, is at root about race. “By 2012 … non-Hispanic white births will be in the minority. The Tea Party is virtually all white. … Their anxieties about a rapidly changing America are well-grounded.”

Rich is implying that when America’s white majority disappears, in 2042 according to 2008 Census Bureau projections, the day of the white conservative is over.

Given the rise in ethnic consciousness among all Americans, Rich may be right. But it is not just white folks who want illegal aliens deported and legal immigration curtailed, while 25 million of our own are out of work or underemployed.

A Zogby poll for the Center for Immigration Studies found that 56 percent of Hispanics, 57 percent of Asian-Americans and 68 percent of African-Americans think legal immigration is too high.

If the Tea Party folks think it is leftist elites who detest and wish to be rid of the America they grew up in and love, they are right.

Patrick J. Buchanan is founding editor of The American Conservative and author, most recently, of Churchill, Hitler, and the “Unnecessary War” [1].

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM [2]

Comments Disabled (Open | Close)

Comments Disabled To "The Real Anti-Americans"

#1 Comment By Jeremiah Whitmoore On March 29, 2010 @ 11:23 pm

“How curious that a mob fond of likening President Obama to Hitler knows so little about history that it doesn’t recognize its own small-scale mimicry of Kristallnacht.”

I had to double check with the original article to see if Frank Rich could have possibly written something so pathetic. He actually did write that. Amazing.

#2 Comment By Adam Rurik On March 30, 2010 @ 12:01 am

In the West Bank, every night is Kristalnacht. Every day, too.

And Pat, you’re being disingenuous in referring to “Washington, D.C., and 100 other cities in 1968.” That was in reaction to the King assassination.

#3 Comment By crypto jay On March 30, 2010 @ 9:06 am

I was eagerly awaiting a strong Buchanan column on this issue and I must say this is a bit disappointing. He should have focused on the outrageousness of making such accusations absent a shred of evidence such slurs were heard, and on the outrageousness even if such slurs occured of imputing guilt to the entire movement. He should have noted that what scares people about the Tea Party is the implicit “whiteness” of it, and he should have questioned why this group, unlike any other faction in our country, is not allowed in the eyes of elites to advocate on its own behalf. And he should not assume the predicted demographic changes are a fait acompli. A strong, unapologetic immigration policy could indeed save whites from minority status.

#4 Comment By Barney Rebble On March 30, 2010 @ 9:08 am

Sarah Palin was being sued. A typical suit was, she wore a sweatshirt that had a company name on it, and it was photographed by the media. They filed suit claiming she was advertising on State time.

She was handling much of the suit expense with family money. They had run into about half a million dollars in debt. There was nastiness about her kids, everywhere from the TAC Blogs to Letterman on TV.

Nobody had really stepped up to the plate and convinced her family that: 1 – this would stop, or 2 – that she was going to get any help with the expense of having represented the Republican Party, or that FOOL McCain.

She quit the Governorship, and said, “I’m gonna be a mommie and a wife and let God take care of my political future.” Every idiot atheist in the country, whether Republican or Democrat or Other, was mystified by that whole move. Along with atheist/lib media, they kept asking, “Is this some stealth move to position her for future office?”

During this time, her father, a professional hunting guide, among other hats that he had worn through the years, made the comment, “She’s not retreating, she’s RELOADING!” This became one of her favorite themes, as she remembered fondly time spent with her father in his role as outdoorsman and guide. The media had made fun of her ability to hunt for food and for sport.

Look for dishonest media to search for a way to pretend that Sarah Palin has suddenly come to use sporting or hunting analogies as a way of inciting tea-baggers. Look for DISHONEST POLITICIANS to pick up on that and start screaming that every insult they receive is tantamount to a death threat, and an indication of the instability of their political enemies.

There is NO tolerance for death threats, nor should there be. These should ALL be investigated and prosecuted where possible.

Just as false or exaggerated accusations should be simularly prosecuted. The late Tony Snow, in the name of President Bush, just like Janeane Garofalo, said “If you disagree with our policies, then you are either overly angry, or you are racist.” If this form of silencing dissent doesn’t offend Americans, NOTHING will.

In November, we will begin walking over you. Not to kill anybody, but to extinguish your attempted communist takeover of the US. And we will cooperate with law enforcement to see that any violence is coming FROM YOU.

#5 Comment By Chris Moore On March 30, 2010 @ 9:48 am

Buchanan: “If the Tea Party folks think it is leftist elites who detest and wish to be rid of the America they grew up in and love, they are right.”

Not just “leftist” elites. Notice that in a precursor article to Rich’s latest racial attack on whites, he attacked Ron Paul and the Tea Party movement by quoting WSJ neocon Dorthy Rabonwitz “conspiracy theorists, anti-government zealots, 9/11 truthers, and assorted other cadres of the obsessed and deranged.”

#6 Comment By Jeff Thomas On March 30, 2010 @ 9:51 am

“If Obama’s first legislative priority had been immigration or financial reform or climate change, we would have seen the same trajectory. The conjunction of a black president and a female speaker of the House — topped off by a wise Latina on the Supreme Court and a powerful gay Congressional committee chairman — would sow fears of disenfranchisement among a dwindling and threatened minority in the country no matter what policies were in play. It’s not happenstance that Frank, Lewis and Cleaver — none of them major Democratic players in the health care push — received a major share of last weekend’s abuse. When you hear demonstrators chant the slogan “Take our country back!,” these are the people they want to take the country back from.”

Frank Rich is right and we all know it….

#7 Comment By Chris Moore On March 30, 2010 @ 10:07 am

Buchanan: “If the Tea Party folks think it is leftist elites who detest and wish to be rid of the America they grew up in and love, they are right.”

Indeed, Frank seems fixated on “whites,” noting in his article that “The Tea Party movement is virtually all white,” which may or may not be true.

But it’s not just “leftist” elites. Notice that in a precursor article to Rich’s latest racial attack on whites, he attacked Ron Paul and the Tea Party movement by quoting WSJ neocon Dorthy Rabinowitz’s description of Ron Paul’s followers as “conspiracy theorists, anti-government zealots, 9/11 truthers, and assorted other cadres of the obsessed and deranged.”

What do white-hating leftist elites like Frank and right-wing neocons like Rabinowitz have in common? Why, they’re both Jewish Israel-firsters, of course.

I wonder how much of their political and racial theorizing is itself grounded in chauvinism and a desire to assert their own tribal supremacy, as they do in Palestine? They may, in fact, be projecting onto whites their own sinister motives and characteristics.

#8 Comment By tbraton On March 30, 2010 @ 10:34 am

“And Pat, you’re being disingenuous in referring to “Washington, D.C., and 100 other cities in 1968.” That was in reaction to the King assassination.”

I think you missed the thrust of Pat’s point, which was that these earlier episodes of clear, demonstrable violence did not come from followers of George Wallace or Barry Goldwater.
“The Watts riot in 1965, Detroit and Newark in 1967, Washington, D.C., and 100 other cities in 1968, all bringing troops into American cities, were not the work of George Wallace populists or Barry Goldwater conservatives. They were the work of folks who went “all the way with LBJ.”” I believe it is an undeniable fact that those riots in 1965, 1967 and 1968 were all started by black Americans, who voted then as now overwhelmingly for the Democratic Party. I guess you could contend that it was the distinct minority of black Americans who voted Republican who actually started the riots, but the burden of proving that improbable thesis would be upon you. With regard to your King assassination point, that doesn’t explain the riots in 1965 and 1967, and I certainly don’t recall any riots following the assassination of JFK or RFK or the attempted assassinations of George Wallace, Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan.

#9 Comment By Tony J On March 30, 2010 @ 2:06 pm

So let me get this straight for posterity.

You don’t believe anyone shouted “Nigger” at John Lewis, a Civil Rights hero, because you haven’t seen video of it, even though the many witnesses at the scene all reported that that’s exactly what happened, including Lewis himself?

The spitting incident – was – caught on video, but that still gets labelled by you as something that ‘allegedly’ took place?

Barney Frank was called a “Faggot”. You accept that happened, but prefer to say that he was called a nasty” or “naughty” name?

Democratic Congressmen really have been deluged in hate from the extreme right, often racist in tone, some of it threatening to murder their children, but bringing this to the attention of the Media somehow makes Democrats guilty of trying to “portray themselves as political martyrs and to smear opponents as racists and bigots”?

Then you claim that Frank Rich is wrong to portray the domestic terrorism being practiced by the Teabaggers as a kind of “small-scale mimicry of Kristallnacht”, by claiming that, since Kristallnacht was actually a much larger incident, the comparison doesn’t stand up?

You just go on and on in this vein. You actually go so far as to blank out all the well-documented hatred and violence hurled against black Americans after the passage of the Civil Rights Act in order to claim that somehow it’s only the Left that every does anything untoward, so obviously all these accusations against God-Fearing , White, Teabagger-Americans are just slander and lies.

Talk about the “politics of desperation”.

#10 Comment By A.C. On March 30, 2010 @ 2:59 pm

B.S. Eyewitnesses, but no video and audio? It’s obvious bs, and standard leftist bs, at that. And I wouldn’t care if Frank was called a fag. He calls Scalia a homophobe without provocation. At least it’s true with Frank. He turned his apartment into a brothel too, come to think about it.

#11 Pingback By The American Conservative » Health Care, Tea Parties, Racism, and Culture On March 30, 2010 @ 3:14 pm

[…] Buchanan also lands many solid blows against Rich and his ilk. Mr. Buchanan states: Rich is implying that when America’s white majority disappears, in 2042 […]

#12 Comment By Bill On March 31, 2010 @ 12:41 am

There is a video of the incident in which a tea partier spit upon Representative Cleveland. It has been shown on TV more than once.

#13 Comment By Chick Dante’ On April 6, 2010 @ 10:31 am

Tony J could not have said it better.

What could be described as being more desperate than blaming the victims of the hate filled speech and criminal conduct or rather for taking advantage of it by simply calling it out as the victims have done. How many women are deterred from reporting their rapes for fear of receiving the same scurrilous treatment being blamed for either inciting the crime or merely taking advantage of it.

Buchanan’s article is illogical. It is also incendiary as it could be used as an excuse for more of the same kind of criminal or at least uncivil behavior from the mob. To the names of Bachman, Cantor, Boehner, Limbaugh, Savage and Malkin, you can add Buchanan’s to the list of those who should be held responsible when the next Timothy McVeigh or McVeigh “wanna be” decides to inflict violence or criminal assault on innocent victims as a logical way to resolve purely political gripes.

I will wait to see how many on this post will argue that no one with whom they strongly disagree can ever be considered innocent and undeserving of criminal violence. Maybe Buchanan will eleucidate on that in his next piece.