rsiasoco's blog

A stupid question, but worth asking: Are there any members of the Teabag party who are also people of color? I've tried to find images of African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, or Native Americans to no avail. The right's extremely popular wingnuts don't seem to have a place at the table for non-whites. What's up with that?

Bob Cesca wrote a fantastic deconstruction of what I've sensed--but lacked the directness to state: the Teabag Party is racist. What's his evidence, you ask?

By now, we've all read the full-page ad by Rachel Maddow in The Boston Globe this past week. We know that Senator Scott Brown created the rumor that Maddow was planning to run against him. We know that Brown has stirred the pot, repeating the fictional story to conservative talk shows, campaign stops, newspapers like The Boston Herald, and his most important audience: potential donors.

He's lying. He continues to lie.

"You dragged me into this," Maddow reports. "You made up something that's not true. You have such a lack of respect for your conservative donor base around the country that you don't care if what you say is true or not."

It's troubling to witness this news story (can it even be called news? perhaps just a rumor turned into publicity--and sensationalist publicity at that?). Even more troubling is the perpetuation by Senator Brown and his staff of the rumor, after Maddow has told the truth over and over (and over) again.

For seven minutes, Maddow adeptly calls out Brown's falsehood:

* "You shouldn't get to flat out lie in the conduct of your business as U.S. Senator and get away with it."
* "Politics is more than just about politicians. Politics is about our country."
* "I don't concede that the only thing we can expect from politics is for them to lie to us, and for us to not care, because we don't expect anything better."

What's admirable in Maddow's report is her rhetorical skills. Her words may fall on the deaf ears of the Brown campaign, but the acute journalist repeats the words "lie," "lying," "liar," dozens of time in this clip to hit home her critique of the senator. Calls to mind the great speeches of MLK and President Obama, persuasive orators who utilize carefully-chosen rhetoric to convey meaning.

Driving home last night, I caught part of an episode of On Point with Tom Ashbrook. The topic was the 2010 U.S. Census. I've been interested in the forthcoming census (forms will be mailed next week): its dessimination, its implications, and, of course, the breakdown of our nation by race and ethnicity.

I can only shake my head when I see those white posters with the iconic red crosses at the campus where I work.

Give blood? Sure.

Except that my blood is not the right kind of blood. My donation, after completing the form in which I am asked point-blank about my sex life, will be summarily thrown away–despite the fact that this blood could save another life.

Senator John Kerry wrote an eloquent, reasoned editorial calling for an end to this discriminatory practice in Boston’s local gay newspaper, Bay Windows. The distinguished statesman from my home state debunks the reasons that gay men are legally banned from donating blood in the United States.

Among the reasoned arguments: