I was delighted and extremely moved that we finally elected an African-American for our President, however, I just wish he were a Republican. I am a Conservative who happens to disagree with President Obama, not because of his skin color, but because of his policies. Does that make me a racist? I was offended too that some Americans were called “un-American” when they spoke out against President Bush and the war in Iraq. It is American to speak out when we think our government is doing something wrong, because it is “we the people” who make up this nation, and it is through our speaking out that we can sustain what is good about America, change what is bad and fulfill the vision of our forefathers – “to form a more perfect Union”.
I am grateful for our constitutional right to free speech, However, when are we going to get to a place in our political system when our words and assemblies (another constitutional right) are not misjudged and publicly displayed to create more confusion and division, especially by the media and so-called movies stars? I refuse to be labeled, especially with such a hate-filled and inaccurate view of Conservatives such as that authored by Garofalo. Unlike Garofalo and Olbermann, I don't categorize them personally or hate them for being Liberals; I am just criticizing their judgment and prejudice in this particular case.
We’ve come a long way against racism in our society and still have a ways to go, however, since we do have an African-American President, let’s not turn everything into a racist commentary – Obama doesn’t -- for which I admire him. Grow up Americans (or should I say Garofalo and Olbermann); we have more important things to do with regards to racism, resolving the evil within that controls the real racist!
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dave Nalle
She certainly is remarkably ill-informed and bigoted.
Interesting bit of news came over my screen yesterday. Apparently she's been invited to and may be attending the Dallas July 4th tea party.
I see riots...
Dave
2 - Diane Branch
I'm suprised about Dave's response. This read more like information that was filtered by a personal viewpoint - thus called an Opinion piece in the Blog Critics family rather than a skewed biased bit of propoganda. Riots? Certainly not based on this.
3 - Dave Nalle
Diane, I was referring to what might happen if Garofolo actually shows up at the Dallas Tea Party on the 4th.
And yes, this is an opinion piece, but if you watch the Garofalo video it's hard not to react similarly.
Dave
4 - Christine Lakatos
Yeah, I was extremely offended by Garofalo and I had to tone it down a few times before my submission to Blog Critics. And, If she showed up at a Tea Party, well wouldn't want to be there! LOL Guys
5 - Mr. Dock Ellis
"let's not turn everything into racist commentary- Obama doesn't"
I have to disagree. Much of what Barrack Obama is about is playing the race card. He's very clever about it. He joked about his race on the campaign trail. This allows him to bring it up. Then he implied McCain better not use the race card against him, implying that McCain is a racist just waiting for his chance. McCain said nothing and Obama smeared him anyway.
This man has been using race all along from affirmative action at Columbia and Harvard Law to his mentor Rev. Wright to sandbagging his own grandmother by saying "she's no more racist than the average white person." Come on. And this is a post-racial president? Baloney.
Actions speak louder than words. Repeal affirmative action. That's post-racial.
6 - Jordan Richardson
Janeane Garofalo was pretty good on that one Seinfeld episode, so I guess she does deserve to be taken seriously in the political realm.
I bet Dane Cook has some interesting political thoughts, too.
7 - Christine Lakatos
Hey Jordan, point well taken, however, I think these are opinions of more than just Garofalo. Plus it speaks volumes to the irresponsibility of MSNBC and celebrities that spread such nonsense. You never know who is watching and may believe the BS! Hey by the way I like Dane Cook, he is funny!
8 - Jordan Richardson
If they are the opinions of more than just Garofalo, let's air those out and let's bring that discussion to the forefront and talk about why celebrities are given so much value in the political sphere. This article just seems to continue to promote the idea, giving her words more validity than they deserve.
If MSNBC wants to do that (I like Olbermann and MSNBC, so let's get that out of the way right now), that's their choice. It isn't as though the other networks don't do the same thing, as the spread of misinformation or "nonsense" on FOX is just as astounding and the celebrity worship (Chuck Norris? Chuck Norris?!) is similar, too.
I think Garofalo was trying to be shocking and possibly even trying to be funny. She doesn't appear on these shows because she is well-informed or because she has a degree in political science or whatever. She appears because she's "entertaining" and therefore expected to say or do something "entertaining." That we sit here and ruminate over what she said simply speaks volumes about the desire to follow celebrity in America.
Up in Canada, if hockey players began to talk about Stephen Harper or something, we probably would laugh it off entirely.
9 - Dave Nalle
Garofolo has to get taken a little bit seriously because she has one of the few surviving left-leaning radio talk shows and people do listen to it and they take her at least as seriously as many on the right take Rush Limbaugh, even if they are smaller in number.
With a public platform for her opinions she influences others and presumably speaks for some of them as well, which suggests that this sort of bigotry is more widespread than we'd like to believe.
Dave
10 - El Bicho
Why would you be "delighted and extremely moved that we finally elected an African-American for our President" if you "disagree with President Obama, not because of his skin color, but because of his policies"?
As phrased that makes absolutely no sense.
11 - Dave Nalle
Makes sense to me, EB. We can all embrace the concept of racial diversity in the White House in general. While some of us may feel less sanguine about the policies of this particular administration -- having nothing to do with race.
Dave
12 - El Bicho
btw, love the irony of extolling people in the media for using confusion and division matched with a book by Laura Ingraham, who does just that. Intentional?
13 - Jordan Richardson
Janeane Garofalo still has a radio show, Dave? Last I heard she was off the air in 2006.
14 - Bliffle
The article states:
"I am open-minded and I don’t always agree with my political party, thus I prefer to get the news and political commentaries from both sides (left and rightâ€"Liberal and Conservative). That way, I can form balanced opinions on issues (political or not) of the day."
I'm going to argue against the strategy of reading both leftwing and rightwing sources to try to see The Truth and form your own opinions.
In fact, IMO I think that this strategy is BOUND to lead one into error.
IMO both left and right have vested interests in bashing each other, and thus they ferret out information with which to belabor the other side. Thus we learn a lot about what each dislikes of the other. But we usually (in my experience) learn little about the issues that can inform our own choices. It's anti-liberals vs. anti-conservatives.
Do you suppose that by studying the Arctic and Antarctica that you would learn anything about the temperate zones or the equator? I don't think so.
Right and left commentors WASTE all their time trying to 'one-up' each other, and refute the others argument, thus leaving things more uncertain than before, and the truth more difficult to discern.
Have you ever tried to use Photoshop (or some other such editing program) to correct a distorted picture? This is nigh impossible even with simple color distortion, to say nothing of spatial distortion. Just as "two wrongs do not make a right" so two distortions do not make it right.
And that leads a person down the wrong path in pursuit of Red Herrings: indeed, the Red Herrings were usually created by the commentors.
Even reading adversaries for citations (in those few occasions where provided) is a frustrating experience. Very often they are just political "echo chambers" that the opponents favor. Sometimes they even refute the advocates point!
So, I encourage you to cultivate your own sources, hopefully with accurate and impartial data. Opinions alone are useless, even when you access a universe of opinions.
15 - Dave Nalle
I didn't realize she was off the air, Jordan. Air America as a whole went off the air here some time ago, so I'm not entirely in touch.
IMO she was one of the more listenable people on Air America from my limited exposure, if you could stand her views. Not as boring as Franken or as idiotic as Randi Rhodes.
Dave
16 - Inquisitive
Where is the love?
17 - Christine Lakatos
Dave and Diane, thanks for understanding what I was trying to say in this article. I realized this article would generate some controversial commentary, however, IMO I don't think ALL the news sources (whether right or left), are distorted. And I never stated that they are my ONLY source for gathering information. But I do appreciate your point, Bliffle. Where is the love? LOL
18 - Bliffle
I'll be interested in reading one of your articles when it's not about the latest pissing contest between left and right entertainment stars.
19 - Christine Lakatos
Bliffle, I have one here on Blog Critics in the Sci Tech category that has nothing do with politics, movie stars, and the media. Diets: Hope or Hype?
20 - Fernando Escobar
Is it me or do those BC Posters tilting to the left seem to be fixated and/or more focused on race than the more conservative posters?
21 - Baronius
Fernando - heh. It's not just on BC, either.
By the way, are you new to this site? If so, welcome aboard.
Hello also to Christine. It looks like this is your first Politics article. You and Fernando will find that we're kind-hearted people who merely seek each other's destruction.
22 - Dr Dreadful
Fernando and Baronius:
And yet, what's the declared political viewpoint of this article's author?
23 - Christine Lakatos
Baronius, thanks for the warm welcome, however, not all comments are that warm! All Good though! LOL
Dr. Dreadful: are you asking me, the author of this article?
24 - zingzing
fernando, it's just you. everyone around here seems to be fixated on race. just go see the articles about the new scotus appointment.
christine, decent article, if a bit of hyperbolic frothing over something a little minor. there were, of course, some racists present at the tea-bagging ceremonies. it's a given that racist republicans are going to be some of the most outspoken opponents of obama's policies. (and there were plenty of them to see on television and in print, the ones with placards with "obama=islamofascism" or "hussein=fashionista is lambo turkey" or whatever.)
no one really thinks they were ALL racists, or anywhere near, not even ms. jg. however, they ALL must have flunked history if they think they were mimicking the original tea party in any way. they completely missed the point, or totally screwed it up. silly republicans.
25 - Christine Lakatos
Thanks zingzing, but do you really think the entire article is "deliberate and obvious exaggeration just for an effect"? I don't think it is minor when Conservatives are labeled as racist, but then again I am one of the sensitive types. But maybe I shouldn't be, considering the source-- Stockholm Syndrome??
You may be right about the tea party statement: The Boston Tea Party had to do with the 1773 protest by colonists in Boston against the British government: the resistance to taxation of tea , but I thought is was a party in Boston! LOL