Right-Wing Unleashes Racism on Rep Cao
Representative Joseph Cao is a freshman Republican who won 49.6 percent of the vote against a corrupt incumbent in a district that’s 64% black and has a median income of $25,000. I think it should come as no surprise that someone in that situation might want to break with the GOP leadership now and then. For example, he voted for the health care reform bill last night. For his trouble, he’s being treated to some interesting tweets:
RT @RightBloggerPat: @AnhJosephCao You Bastard piece of shit fuck! GO BACK TO Saigon, South Vietnam where you fucking BELONG GOOK! #TCOT
There’s also a whole bunch of folks who’ve decided that it’d be hilarious to start referring to Rep. Cao as “Mao” because, you see, they’re both responsible for the deaths of millions Asians. Also this.
I think the conservative movement is going to continue to struggle in a decreasingly white American.
120 Responses to “Right-Wing Unleashes Racism on Rep Cao”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 8th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
I’d like to say that I called this a couple posts down (Do it like medicare) but really, who didn’t see this coming? Its always bubbling, just under the surface, waiting for the slightest thing to bring the ugliness boiling up.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Nutpicking, Matt? Really.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
I dunno — I have some sympathy. I feel the same way towards Holy Joe, and I don’t think it is antisemitism.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Nutpicking yes, but also, the anger is understandable: if you run as a Republican, you should vote like a Republican; otherwise what’s the point of having parties? Needless to say, this goes double for the Democrats.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Last night when C-SPAN displayed his name, the Wikipedia article stated he was the spawn of Satan.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
I like reading your blog, Mr. Yglesias. Except when you post nonsense like this. You didn’t really just quote a tweet to show how the right-wing in America is racist, did you? Come on.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
You leave out the part where Cao could very likely end up killing as many people as Mao did, after his vote degrades our healthcare system to something you’re more likely to see in Vietnam than the developed world.
Anyone who voted for this bill is nothing more than a Communist traitor, regardless of their race. Leave it to Democrats to play the race card, but most people know a spade from an ace.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Matthew Yglesias: Nutpicker!
November 8th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
That’s why I don’t worry about stuff. As a few smart conservatives understand, it’s hard to imagine conservatives being more than a loud and irrelevant minority in the America of 2020, for generational and racial/ethnic reasons.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Jindal’s next.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Hey RT @RightBloggerPat, why not pull that guys cock out of your ass so you can taste the shit off the end of penis? You’re a right wing knuckledragger, so we all know you’d rather be in an outhouse Larry Craiging it with a strange male “friend” you just met at the bar.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Ewwww. This is so much worse than the typical Yglesias fan mocking special-needs people by calling Austrian School supporters “Paultards”.
Following Little Matty’s logic, all “Progressives” must mock special-needs people, That makes sense, right?
November 8th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Well, this is a republic, and the idea is that you vote for someone who you trust to make decisions on your behalf, and not just someone who is a cipher for whatever the crazies in your district (left or right) are writing letters for that week. I mean, when people voted for him, they didn’t put a checkbox next to “Republican” on the ballot, they put it next to “Anh Cao.” They wanted an person, not a brand.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Whoa….! I see what you did there…
I will give that dipshit some credit, at least. He did get the country right. Initially I thought Cao was Korean-American. It’s important to know these things when making racist remarks.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
What’s the point of having parties, then? His party gave him money to finance his campaign, to run his propaganda; the party made him the congressman, the party owns him. If you don’t like it, run as an independent.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
Anonymous: once more, trying way too hard.
(And Al, do you appreciate that the desire to avoid nutpicking was stated with you in mind?)
November 8th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
One only has to trawl the comments section of the Daily Kos to see the mirror image of this stuff.
It’s kind of fun to watch Matt whistle past the same graveyard that Republicans spent 2005-2008 ignoring.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
You should check out the “comments policy” (no, seriously) of RightBloggerPat’s blog:
This guy’s a piece of work.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
One only has to trawl the comments section of the Daily Kos to see the mirror image of this stuff.
Ah, it’s J-Rob, last seen comparing Ann Coulter to the House of Representatives. Be warned when you bite into his apple pies this holiday season.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
That’s explicitly not how the US Constitution establishes the legislative houses. House Representatives are elected by their constituencies and accountable to them and no one else. If the Republicans want to primary Cao, they can try, but they gotta put it to a vote. He might be on the hook for their money, but he ain’t on the hook for his job, and the two aren’t the same thing.
People don’t run as independents because, at least according to Arrow’s theorem, in any multi-candidate first-past-the-post winner-take-all election, on the average there can only be two viable candidates. If the US system had some kind of proportional representation or ranking election method, this wouldn’t be as much of a problem, but we don’t so here we are.
Parties in the US don’t really stand for any consistent single interest, they represent loose coalitions of interests and trade them between each other over time.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
1. Thanks for the free traffic…and here I thought that I would have to actually buy advertising this month. You’re doing it for me.
2. Liberals do the same crap. Case in point; what was said to Jaun Williams on Bill O’s show.
3. Someone in here saw my point. Which is, the dude stabbed the Party in the back. Won’t happen again, I assure you, because in 2010, he’s gone.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
yeah, Matt, there were lots of leftist extremists saying racist things about Condi back in they day (Uncle Tom, etc.) Does this mean the left is racist?
November 8th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Cao as Mao? Really? The Vietnamese don’t agree on much, but their hatred of the Chinese is one of them. Accusing a Vietnamese person of being Chinese is like accusing a Czech of being Russian. Or a Cambodian of being Vietnamese. It says a lot about the conservative movement that they don’t know these things.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Yes, in 2010 he’s gone and replaced by a Democrat because the Republican party if void of any substance and everyone knows it. The Republicans could have blocked the House vote last night by simply NOT voting for the Stupak Amendment. Without that Amendment, more Dems in conservative districts would have voted no on the Health Reform bill. But the Republicans sold out to the pro-lifers rather than stop a bill that stands for the very opposite of republican ideology. They are bankrupt party and have no one to blame for their failures last night except themselves.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
“Go back to Saigon.”
As soon as you can show me where Saigon is on a map, I’ll send the dude directions. Figures a conservative would be too stupid to realize Saigon doesn’t exist.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
3. Someone in here saw my point. Which is, the dude stabbed the Party in the back. Won’t happen again, I assure you, because in 2010, he’s gone.
He’ll be gone for the Republicans for sure. Either he votes his conscience, gets kicked out of the Republican party and runs as a Democrat, which in a democratic district will allow him to win easily. Or he votes as a Republican and loses to his democratic challenger.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
@ ObamaWonOnChange:
Yeah, a lot of liberals feel that way about Lieberman, but I doubt many of them would excess that discontent with anti-Semitic slurs.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
Isn’t this thread kind of pointless, in that Cao has been a dead man walking from the moment he was elected? It’s basically impossible that he’ll get reelected as a Republican in the first place given the district. It doesn’t matter what he does now, so he might as well vote his conscious. Hell, he could even run as a Democrat next time around!
November 8th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
Parties in the US don’t really stand for any consistent single interest, they represent loose coalitions of interests
Well, then he betrayed that loose coalitions of interests that got him elected to vote for its interests. And people who voted for him in the district saw the letter R next to his name and they should’ve known what it stands for. Either way, he’s a traitor.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
How did you get that utility pole up your ass, abb1?
November 8th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Exactly Jon D. I call Lieberman a mf’ing cs’ing bastard piece of shit, plus some other things I’m too much of a lady to repeat in public, but I don’t put “jew” in front of any of it.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Well, then he betrayed that loose coalitions of interests that got him elected to vote for its interests. And people who voted for him in the district saw the letter R next to his name and they should’ve known what it stands for. Either way, he’s a traitor.
Bullshit abb1. He was elected in one of the bluest districts in the country, and the only reason he won was because voters were (quite understandably!) unwilling to vote for the most comically corrupt representative in the country. He was voting the interests of his voters, and he was voting in the interests of his re-election chances, such as they are.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
“Well, then he betrayed that loose coalitions of interests that got him elected to vote for its interests. And people who voted for him in the district saw the letter R next to his name and they should’ve known what it stands for. Either way, he’s a traitor.”
Fine, we’ll take him. Enjoy your dwindling core of true-believers, buh-bye!
November 8th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
abb1’s position is that the human representative is irrelevant. Just have the political party submit a position and that’s that.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Either way, he’s a traitor.
Are you kidding? I agree with others that he’s likely gone anyway so I’m not suggesting that this was some crazy act of political courage. But he votes, alone of his party, to provide the people of New Orleans, who overwhelmingly support the Democratic party’s policies, with more affordable and accessible health care, and he’s a traitor? For whatever reason, he sided with the good people of New Orleans against the tea partiers and the plutocrats.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
No one should be surprised that racists unleash racism.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Abb1.
Yes Cao is a trained to America for voting to improve america. Real patriots like the GOP would vote to make America worse.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
“Isn’t this thread kind of pointless, in that Cao has been a dead man walking from the moment he was elected?”
Probably, but if he switches parties, he might have a chance. If he can play himself as the reincarnation of Jack Kemp, he could win as a Democrat. It’s not like the Democrats have done a great job of helping the poor. There’s an opening here, and more power to him if he takes it. I may not like the Catholic Church, but when it comes to compassion, I’ll trust a Jesuit.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
The funny thing is, Cao is the type of candidate a non-crazy GOP should be running to grow their party. Young guy, religious, pro-free-market and non-white. Could give new life to a party facing demographic death. Instead they will mock him and hound him from the party. Good work guys!
November 8th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Liberals do the same crap.
Really? That’s your defense for calling him a Gook and telling him to “go bacK”, ie that he’s not a real American?
If you know it’s hateful crap, why do it? O, yeah…
November 8th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
Re: if you run as a Republican, you should vote like a Republican; otherwise what’s the point of having parties?
Yes, never mind voting for the best interests of the country, or even of one’s constituents. An if the GOP is so profoundly anti-goivernment why is no one screaming at all the GOP senators and congressmen who voted in favor of the unemplpoyment extension and the house purchase tax credit?
Re: But the Republicans sold out to the pro-lifers
The pro-Life movement is one of the most reliable interest groups on the GOP team– and has not gotten much for it either. Pro-lifers are a key (and fairly large) segment of the GOP base. Are you really saying the GOP should vote against the wishes of such an important group to please the tea party nutjobs, or Big Insurance corporate poobahs? Now that will be a recipe for conservative civil war!
November 8th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
40 comments in and nobody’s pointed out the latest Yglesias typo?
“I think the conservative movement is going to continue to struggle in a decreasingly white American.”
There’s something funny and clever to says about this, right there on the tip of my tongue, but it eludes me. C’mon Yglesias Nation! Help me out!
November 8th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Well, one thing we know is that this sort of thing makes Matt feel better about himself, which is really all his politics reduces to in any event.
Meanwhile Matt as a matter of policy and not anonymous internet chatter actually favors discriminating against Cao because of his ethnicity.
November 8th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
Hey! That’s my Congressman!
For most people around here, Cao has been seen as basically a placeholder until the next election, but really nobody knows too much about him. He was elected as a protest vote against Jefferson, after all. But this is being covered here in New Orleans, and for most people the only thing they know about him is that he was the only Republican to vote in favor of UHC, which will be one of President Obama’s signature accomplishments. He might have pissed off national Republicans, but from a purely political perspective, this was an incredibly smart move. And the more he is attacked, the more courageous his vote will seem. Note that in this district, there is an ongoing scrum for who will replace Jefferson (yeah, they don’t even think of Cao as an obstacle), which was exactly what doomed the Dems last go around.
Also, I am pleased to see one of my representatives actually voting in a way I prefer, which is kind of unusual for me.
November 8th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
@ #42:
“the conservative movement is going to continue to struggle in a decreasingly white American.”
This reads like some kind of perverse fortune cookie.
I’m surprised by how many Republicans in here are talking as if Cao “must” be taken out in the primary. That seems strange to me, because there’s no way a conservative will win in that district. But whatever; they can run their own party.
November 8th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
But whatever; they can run their own party.
Don’t you mean ruin – the GOP couldn’t organize a piss up in a brewery so they can’t even run their party.
November 8th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
MY
Have you read any of the posts here? Anti-immigrant, anti-Jewish, anti-rural, anti-white, racism isn’t just a right-wing thing. This place is littered with people who think gutter language, insults, name-calling is responsible argument.
November 8th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
It doesn’t take much for the sheets to be pulled back on conservatives. Or pulled on, as it were. The question is, how long can they continue to dupe mainstream America into thinking that they aren’t racists?
Funny how the conservative trolls here ignore the most salient part of Matt’s argument:
I think the conservative movement is going to continue to struggle in a decreasingly white American.
Is conservatism a white value? And is it going to be increasingly marginalized?
November 8th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
Hey Bob Roddis, are you sure it’s not just “critique of culture”? Go back to yelling about GOOOOLLLLDDDD or the Confederate dollar or whatever.
Mike K., anti-white racism? Total bullshit.
November 8th, 2009 at 9:49 pm
How do we raise money for him? Any website which has started to do that for him? Matt can you point that please as a follow up? That will be the single most important thing for us to do – start contributing to this man who has shown some spine here.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:00 pm
Nice thought but its still better strategy to make sure the seat goes back to democratic hands next election, as it almost certainly will. Besides this vote I don’t think he is nearly as progressive as an average democrat from that district would be.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:00 pm
How do we raise money for him? Any website which has started to do that for him? Matt can you point that please as a follow up? That will be the single most important thing for us to do – start contributing to this man who has shown some spine here.
Not really. He’s almost guaranteed to lose to a Democrat in the next election, and having a Democrat is better than having a reasonable Republican.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
“having a Democrat is better than having a reasonable Republican.”
That’s not always true. I’d rather have Lincoln Chaffee than Mary Landrieu or Ben Nelson. Sometimes, the Democrat has to be more conservative. That said, Cao has to switch parties now or he’s toast. Anyone to the left of Glen Beck is doomed in a Republican primary now.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
The Twitter dude calls Michael Steele “Amos Jones”. But don’t you dare call him a racist!
The GOP is dead. It just doesn’t know it yet.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:57 pm
That’s not always true. I’d rather have Lincoln Chaffee than Mary Landrieu or Ben Nelson.
I disagree. Chaffee woudl be a vote for Republican leadership in the Senate, Republican control of committees, etc. I will always vote for any Democrat over any Republican.
November 8th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
That’s foolish, what if the democrat was the one in Cao’s district (Jefferson)? I would just not vote, or vote third party.
November 8th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
That’s foolish, what if the democrat was the one in Cao’s district (Jefferson)?
O, sorry, I was thinking if the choice were between a Chaffee-type and a Landrieu-type. If there’s obvious corruption or criminal behaviour, that’s a different story. I should’ve been more clear.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
“Chaffee woudl be a vote for Republican leadership in the Senate, Republican control of committees, etc”
So?
The republican leadership slate would lose 41-59 instead of 40-60
big deal
But Chaffee would be a vote to break the filibuster, Landreu maybe not
November 9th, 2009 at 12:41 am
So?
The republican leadership slate would lose 41-59 instead of 40-60
big deal
Sometimes the Senate is, you know, 50-50, and you don’t always know until after the election.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:34 am
If you go back to the 80s, Lowell Weicker was infinitely preferable to Joe “endorsed by the National Review” Lieberman.
Landrieu doesn’t seem any worse than Breaux or any other major electable (i.e. white) Democrat from Louisiana. Compared to this Melancon guy that’s running for Senate she looks progressive.
She’s from a state where David Duke won 40% of the vote. To win, she needs conservative cred and buckets of special interest cash.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:40 am
Here we go again with the “conservatives are demographically doomed” argument. It doesn’t work that way.
First of all, the growth of the black and hispanic populations are thankfully slowing. Blacks aren’t having as many kids and Hispanics aren’t pouring into the country at their usual rate because of the crappy economy.
Secondly, even if current demographic trends hold (which is doubtful), whites will still be casting over 60% of Presidential ballots by 2050.
Third, Democrats are going to lose more and more white votes as their party gets browner. In fact, I will guess that the Democrats will never nominate a white person for President ever again. As soon as the Democratic Party starts nominating guys like Sharpton and Guitierez for president, they can kiss goodbye around 70% of the white vote.
America is still a white country, and it is going to stay white for a long, long time.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:48 am
Yes. Absolutely. That is why Republican outreach to minorities is such a joke. The Republican elites think that the problem is that blacks and hispanics just don’t understand conservatism. In fact, the opposite is the case: blacks and hispanics reject conservatism because they do understand it.
It doesn’t matter because the white American mainstream is racist themselves. This is something liberals seem incapable of understanding, no matter how many times it is demonstrated.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:53 am
Otis look up the post by Nate Silver on 538.com called “Operation Gringo”. The demographics are not quite so rosy as you think.
Link: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/05/operation-gringo-can-republicans.html
In short, the Republicans need to have a candidate that can win Ohio, Florida, NC, Virginia, and Iowa.
November 9th, 2009 at 2:12 am
But he votes, alone of his party, to provide the people of New Orleans, who overwhelmingly support the Democratic party’s policies, with more affordable and accessible health care, and he’s a traitor?
Yes, of course he is. Like I said: he ran as a Republican, financed by the Republican party, and he won as a Republican. The people spoke – they wanted a Republican. And then he betrayed everybody, he made a mockery of the American political system.
He must be taken out and shot in the outhouse, if they have those on Capitol Hill.
November 9th, 2009 at 2:13 am
Conservatism as in “the resentments of white Catholic/evangelical Americans” will die out as a powerful political force probably around 2030.
Conservatism as in “protecting the interests of America’s Owners” will survive forever.
They’ll just adapt. They’ll play to Hispanic resentments, or even black resentments the second it becomes the slightest bit politically useful.
Otis, sorry to say, but never mind what Sarah Palin told you, rich white CEOs and their allies don’t give a shit about Joe Sixpack. They’ll fuck them the same way that blacks and Hispanics have been fucked over the years once their proportion of the population drops and other voting blocs become more important.
November 9th, 2009 at 2:31 am
“And then he betrayed everybody, he made a mockery of the American political system.”
Don’t know if it’s because of your soviet predilection or what, but you place way too much emphasis on party control in the American political system. The American political system, unlike most Westminster-style western democracies, was initially devised with almost no role for parties at all. They were formed for reasons of convenience. I’m happy when a guy like Cao crosses the aisle and angry when a guy like Lieberman does it, but that’s a reflection of my political beliefs, it doesn’t make a “mockery” of anything.
As stated above, Cao was the only viable alternative to a dramatically corrupt incumbent, so he got the job. He will likely be gone in a year. No one is going to get shot out by the outhouse. Sorry.
November 9th, 2009 at 3:11 am
don’t get your panties in a bunch liberals, the bill never gets by the senate. $1.3 trillion, where you gunna get that? hahahhahahahahaha. obama money? why not just make a trillion dollar bill, with obama’s face on it? in about a year when inflation hits you all be saying you never voted for him.
November 9th, 2009 at 3:21 am
It doesn’t matter how it was devised originally, this is how it works today. Also, the idea that it’s a matter of “convenience” is ridiculous: billions (if not trillions) of dollars are funneled thru the party apparatus every election cycle to implement agendas of the party sponsors. This is a very serious business, and people are shot every day for much less than that; like, for 20 bucks and an ipod.
November 9th, 2009 at 3:33 am
[...] Right-wing Unleashes Racism on Rep. Cao, Think Progress [...]
November 9th, 2009 at 3:36 am
Now we’re getting somewhere. I have great respect for Mr. Silver but his analysis totally ignores the effect of the Dems nominating an openly anti white canidate like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or Luis Guiteriez would have on the mass of white voters even in liberal states. And let’s be honest, we all know it is only a matter of time before the Democrats do in fact nominate somebody like that. If you really think that more than 30% of whites would ever vote for someone like Al Sharpton, I’m sorry but there is no other way to say it: you’re wrong.
On this we are agreed, but you are confusing the dynamics of the Republican party with that of the Democrats. The Democrat elites are, for the the time being, still firmly in control of their party. The Republican elites, however, have lost control of their party completely. Look at the behavior of all of the Republican elites over the past 6 months and it becomes clear that they are terrified of their own base. They would love to make the Republican party pro Hispanic (and in fact, tried to do so during Bush’s term) but they cannot because the base will not let them.
The Left’s hatred for Bush is funny, because in a few years, you’re going to be wishing that the GOP would return to the “moderate” era of Bush jr.
November 9th, 2009 at 3:56 am
The Democrats will never nominate Al Sharpton. There’s actual empirical evidence on this. He ran in 2004 and lost even the black vote in a landslide.
To win a Democratic primary you need money. The black community isn’t wealthy, so for a black candidate to win he has to be able to raise the requisite buckets of corporate cash. See: Obama, Barack.
GOP elites have not “lost control” of their party. They’re driving the teabagger bullshit with FOX News and astroturf campaigns like FreedomWorks.
Is it possible that it will get out of control and Joe Sixpack will actually take control of the party? I guess anything is possible. But at that point FOX News and Rush will be preaching relative moderation. They won’t be egging on the insurgents like they are now.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:18 am
“the idea that it’s a matter of “convenience” is ridiculous: billions (if not trillions) of dollars are funneled thru the party apparatus every election cycle to implement agendas of the party sponsors.”
The very fact that billions are being funneled to the parties simply underscores that they are a convenient arrangement for all involved. If there were longstanding ideological distinctions between them, why would corporations often make donations to both parties?
Currently, the two main parties are as ideologically distinguishable as they have ever been in my lifetime, but that’s a historical anomaly. From the 1930s to the 1960s, the Democrats were the party of choice for both black people and white supremacists. How is it even possible to “betray” a party built on a coalition this vast? Same can be said of many GOP coalitions.
The American electoral system, because it is not designed to accomodate parties, basically means every election is contested between two huge, unwieldly groups that are just large coalitions of convenience. This means there is plenty of room for Rockafeller Republicans, Dixiecrats, Log Cabin Republicans, etc, etc, etc. I don’t always like that – lets in too many unreliable weasels who you can’t count on to vote the party line – but that’s just the way our political system works. Parties don’t exist to advance clear ideological systems, but for convenience.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:30 am
sweaty guy, you’re right on some level, but your scope here is too wide to analyze this particular incident.
Yes, of course, the two parties overlap, and businesses can (and do) work with both of them.
Nevertheless, at any given time each party is paid to perform specific tasks; party leaders are assigned and trusted to maintain discipline, and to produce the desired results. Or to make the best attempt anyway, the best attempt on every level, by every enforcer, by every soldier on the ground. It’s a matter of management, just like any other management, and there is no room for renegades.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:32 am
Honestly, Matt, where do you find these racist pieces of shit who foul up your comment pages?
November 9th, 2009 at 4:45 am
But what constitutes a renegade? Who’s definition matters? The US political system really only allows for two major parties, smaller ones historically just revolve around individual personalities out or have their message co-opted by larger ones. There is no way you can tell me, with that little choice in a political system, that any politician owes absolute loyalty to either party. In a country as large as this one, that is simply not realistic.
Sure, parties are obligated to try and crack the whip occasionally. I think the Dems are right that anyone who caucuses with them and gets to head the fancy committees of their choosing owes it to the party to let important bills be voted on, but that’s just how I feel. It is not a question of right, or wrong, or “betrayal”, it’s about whether or not the Dems can put the fear of God in Joe Lieberman. Or anyone else, for that matter.
Same goes with Cao. If the GOP can’t make it in his interest to tow their line, then fuck them. Do you think Arlen Specter has missed a night’s sleep this year after “betraying” the GOP? In America, parties need winning pols more than winning pols need parties. So it will remain until we remodel our system to allow more parties to realistically compete, which isn’t happening soon.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:53 am
Well, obviously it was all tongue in cheek on my part anyway, and now you totally fucked it up, thank you very much. I was expecting at least a couple more interesting responses.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:59 am
“Well, obviously it was all tongue in cheek on my part anyway, and now you totally fucked it up, thank you very much. I was expecting at least a couple more interesting responses.”
Ah, the thankless plight of the lefty contrarian. Cursed to be earnest when all others are full of shit and full of shit when all others are earnest. Live by the smirk, die by the smirk I guess…
November 9th, 2009 at 5:10 am
Touche. Someone like Sharpton may prove to be too much of a clown, even for black voters. However, Jesse Jackson (a slow witted oaf who almost all white people despise) did very well in the Democratic primary in 1988, somebody like him would surely do even better today. I don’t think that there is any question that the Dems will nominate a black canidate in 2016 and that he will probably have a Hispanic running mate. Had it been up to white Democrats, Hillary would have been the nominee in 08, but she found out the hard way that the Democratic Party is property of blacks now.
As for your point about no black canidate (except for a unique man like Obama) could hope to raise enough money to make a serious run at the Democratic nomination, I will admit that I had not considered that and I will look into the matter further.
Woah, woah, woah, slow down there, man. Fox News, a network that features Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck can in no way be considered part of the GOP elite. In fact, the GOP elites (Rove, W Bush, Jeb Bush, McCain, Grahamnesty, Noonan, Crist) hate Fox almost as much as liberals do. It is true that they have helped nurture Fox for years, but now it has become Frankenstein’s monster and turned on them. Men like Dick Armey are not part of the establishment but rather represent the vanguard of a type of cypto-fascist alliance between big money corporations and populist white angst. It seems that the big money has realized that the era of Bush and McCain is over and has decided to bet on the stronger horse.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:37 am
There seems to be a general amnesia on the borderline racist stuff said about President Obama and the over the line sexist stuff said about Secretary Clinton during the primaries.
Or the stuff said here about both Israelis and Palestinians every time that subject comes up.
I mean, since we’re all being cherry-pickin’ mofos here.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:46 am
Well, obviously this post doesn’t deserve any serious response, so I don’t know who these “all others are earnest” are and why they would want to be earnest here.
But if you want serious, here it is: I really do prefer to vote for a party with a clear platform and predictable politics, rather than for some guy to make him a baron, duke, or king for 2, 6, or 4 years to rule over us peasants. No question about that.
I don’t care about the names of people who cast the votes that I want them to cast. They can be a bunch of monkeys for all I care, as long as they are trained to press the right buttons – and so much the better. At least then I don’t have to worry about GE or GM giving this guy’s brother in law a 500K/year no-show job in exchange for his votes. Make sense?
November 9th, 2009 at 7:54 am
“The point”?
There is no point, they do not help.
They’re a bug, not a feature.
November 9th, 2009 at 8:07 am
No, the parties are a fundamental feature; large segments of the population organized to achieve their political goals.
The guy who votes against his party is a bug.
November 9th, 2009 at 8:23 am
matt:
you take one random tweet from some nutcase and use it to brand anyone opposed to the health care bill, or maybe even conservatives more generally, as racists too.
you are becoming a living proof that ideology impairs cognition.
November 9th, 2009 at 8:52 am
you take one random tweet from some nutcase and use it to brand anyone opposed to the health care bill, or maybe even conservatives more generally, as racists too.
How many times can you dismiss this stuff as “one random whatever” until you see a pattern? The fact is, it’s not random; elected GOP officials don’t turn away from similar crap (such as the Holocaust sign) or dare criticize it.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:04 am
Err, Otis.
You’re going back and forth. It’s not race, it’s the money.
The reason that Barack won the primary has very little to do with his being black, and very, very, very much to do with the fact that the Pritzkers, Daleys and Crowns backed him to the hilt. He had the last powerful machine in America, and two of its richest families behind him.
Finally, he had Paul Volcker’s endorsement, which was unbelievably important regardless of how Tall Paul was handled post-election, and the support of Bob Rubin.
Rubin essentially torpedoed Dean in 2004, not out of spite, merely because he felt him unable to win.
Why do you think Barack was able to get more donations from Wall Street, and thus more donations than Hillary, well before he was anything like a “sure thing”? It was because of Rubin.
What the Democrats are now is the property of New York and Wall Street. As a New Yorker, I’m not too upset about this.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:08 am
going to continue to struggle in a decreasingly white American.
That’s like the opposite of the condition Michael Jackson had, isn’t it?
November 9th, 2009 at 9:39 am
It’s important to note that abb1 has, sincerely and without clear sarcasm, advocated the murder of a U.S. Representative. I hope that Matthew Yglesias plans to contact the D.C. police and alert them to this instance, so that the relevant information can be provided to the FBI.
I certainly intend to make contact and ensure the appropriate authorities have this information, but surely it makes more sense for the blog writer to make that contact.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:03 am
It’s important to note that abb1 has, sincerely and without clear sarcasm, advocated the murder of a U.S. Representative.
Except for the part where he said it was all tongue in cheek, which was obvious anyway. Abb1 is an obtuse ass, but really, come on.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:01 am
He-he, that’s a good one; right, I’m sure the FBI is going to jump on this one toot sweet. And you’ll probably get a medal, 87.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:06 am
even if current demographic trends hold (which is doubtful), whites will still be casting over 60% of Presidential ballots by 2050
What you’re missing here is the large number of Americans who believe that race isn’t a legitimate way to draw political lines (that whole Fourteenth Amendment thing). The Democratic Party as it presently exists is pretty strongly committed to the idea that there shouldn’t be any one ruling race. There’s lots of whites in Obama’s cabinet, which just wouldn’t happen if he really intended to turn the Democratic Party into a black power party (which he has no intention of trying and would fail if he did try).
But if you have a white power party, nonwhites are going to vote against it whether they believe in race-based politics or not (most don’t, because it’s obvious that approach will never fly for a minority race except in some extremely unusual historical circumstances like South Africa), because it’s against their race, and whites who don’t believe in race-based politics will *also* vote against it. That’s what dooms white power politics in the long run — nonwhites unite against it, but whites don’t unite in favor of it because many of them are repelled by the idea of drawing lines based on race in the first place.
In the process, they ensure that all races are represented in the opposition party (currently the Democrats), which further undermines the attempt to make politics a racial exercise.
In order to sustain a racial supremacy party you need either a race majority that is so large you can peel off the principled dissenters of the majority race and still have a majority overall, or an antidemocratic power structure like South Africa’s. America doesn’t have either anymore.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
They’re not the republicans anymore.
They’re the American Nationalist Party, or ANP, much like the BNP in England and their moronic leader, Nick Griffin. They’re certainly displaying the same stupidity.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
There seems to be some thought that a congressperson’s party label should take precedence over the well-being of the constituents that congressman is sworn to represent. I don’t understand that attitude at all. It certainly isn’t anything in the American tradition, possibly in some oligarchy somewhere. When it becomes obvious that a particular bill will benefit a vast majority of a congressperson’s constituents then that person is morally obligated to support the bill no matter what the plutocrats who own the party leadership want, especially when the bill will also benefit the nation as a whole.
Senator Liverwurst’s opposition to the health bill isn’t so repulsive because he is going against the Democratic Party, but rather because he is giving his constituents the shaft in order to protect the private medical insurance corporations from having to provide a service in exchange for their premiums. It’s his betrayal of his constituents that is so disgraceful and disgusting, not his betrayal of the Democratic Party.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
It’s his betrayal of his constituents that is so disgraceful and disgusting, not his betrayal of the Democratic Party.
No, it’s both.
Senator Liverwurst
Come on. In a post about racism directed against Cao? Really?
November 9th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
What was extra cool about Cao’s voting the right way was *my* Congressman, Democrat Mike Honda, crossing the aisle after the vote, wading into all those scary Republicans and and hugging his Cao for doin’ the right thing.
Forgive me for bein’ racial about all this.. but seein’ other Asian-Americans defying threats from their bosses and crossing party lines to do the right thing for the country and then support each other for it.. kinda brings a lump to my throat.. (sniff)
November 9th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
[...] [...]
November 9th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
But, but, but he was their little darling last November…..
Just like Dems in red states, Cao is a Republican in a blue district. He has a thought to get re-elected. Ergo if he could vote in such a way that he could vote for something his constituents might like while at the same having no real affect on the outcome why not?
At this point Cao is going to get the education in Washington GOP politics I knew was coming. I truly don’t think he had a clue last November what he was getting into.
November 9th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
[...] is now learning a little something about conservatives. At least the loud bigoted ones. From Matthew Yglesias: There’s also a whole bunch of folks who’ve decided that it’d be hilarious to start referring [...]
November 9th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
abbj, are you a spoof or an idiot? You really expect someone to tow the party line for each and every vote?
November 9th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Wow. “He should have voted against it because he’s a Republican!”? Everyday the R’s move closer and closer to being Bolsheviks. Good thing they’re too incompetent and spineless to launch, let alone win, a revolution.
Here’s a tip jerkwads; read Robert Conquest’s The Great Terror and be ashamed that you, a person who’s had all the advantages incumbent to growing up in a real democracy, are advocating the politics of Lenin. Ignorant, purblind, fools.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Interstign is that the ones that spout fears of communism nazi-ism etc are actually performing the biggest acts of totalitarianship imaginable !
November 9th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
ET@et: If Mr. Cao is anything like the Vietnamese and Taiwanese pols typical of Houston, Tx, he’s got more than enough stones to stare these asshats down and pursue his constituents’ interests. Godspeed, I says.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
abbj, are you a spoof or an idiot? You really expect someone to tow the party line for each and every vote?
Answering your questions seriatim: no; I don’t think so; yes.
I vote for a party and I expect the party to vote as a block.
Otherwise, like I said already about a thousand times here – what’s the point of these parties? Drop the pretense and elect Joe Cao for his nice smile and firm handshake or something.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
Hey Anonymous! I KNOW you don’t like FACTS to get in the way of a good STORY but…
You leave out the part where Cao could very likely end up killing as many people as Mao did, after his vote degrades our healthcare system to something you’re more likely to see in Vietnam than the developed world.
The DEVELOPED world all HAVE government health care…
November 9th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
@Obama Won on Change
I feel the same way about Holy Joe, but not because he is a Jew (I’m one myself) but because he is a narcissist, sanctimonious, hypocritical, traitorous self-important a$$hole. Did I mention I don’t like him? That’s not antisemitic, that’s just anti-narcissist, sanctimonious, hypocritical, traitorous self-important a$$hole-ic. When I lived in MA I went over to work against him in CT and now that I live in NJ, if he runs again, I’ll do the same. I dislike a lot of Repub politicians, and a few Dems, but him I despise.
Did I mention a don’t like him too?
November 9th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
This anti-Obama, anti-government obsession in the right wing — and the violent, mean-spirited and defamatory attacks that flow with it — are disgusting and perverse, and convince me that it will be decades before the GOP comeback gets any traction (if ever).
Why is that the right and teh GOP are unwilling to admit what they are really about when they run for office and propose alternative plans to address issues Americans are concerned about and want their government to do something about? Why are they scared of admitting that they are deeply xenophobic (at least those who actually understand what that word means)? Why are they scared to admit to their social conservatism (could it be that most Americans do not support a socially conservative agends)?? We are they so scared to be truthful about how much they hate the idea of their precious tax dollars being spent to help out somebody less fortunate than them, particularly if the government plays any role in making it happen (but have no problem with billions of tax dollars flowing into the coffers of their corporate overlords, through government largesse, no bid defense and homeland security contracting, faith based initiatives, etc.)? Why should the government stay out of economic affairs, but intrude in the bedroom??
If everybody is so in synch with the conservative movement, why do they invest so much time hiding who they really are during election season? It is my experience that those who shout the loudest are usually the ones with the weakest positions (they make up for substantive weakness by ratcheting up the volume). The current conservative movement is no exception.
November 9th, 2009 at 8:37 pm
Representative Cao may be the only decent individual left in the Republican party. The Republicans (with one exception) are an embarrassment to this country – a group of people more impenetrably ignorant and self-destructive would probably be impossible to find outside of an insane asylum.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:10 pm
Oh come on! No way he wins all those primaries in the South without black voters. Obama is a very charismatic man, but had it not been for the racial solidarity of his demographic, he would just be another Senator right now.
Yes! And those Americans are all white. Blacks and Hispanics absolutely believe politics should be drawn on racial lines. The problem, as I stated, is that even most liberal whites despise the leadership of the black and hispanic communities, and as the black and hispanic populations grow the more power they will have to force the Dems to nominate somebody like Jesse Jackson. Remember, Jesse Jackson was at one point the frontrunner in the Democratic primary in 1988, imagine how well somebody like him could do in 2016. We have already reached a point where no white person could seriously hope to win the democratic nomination, the only question now is, how politically toxic will the next Dem nominee be to white voters?
Yes they will… unless the Democrats force them to vote Republican by nominating an incompetant and explicitly anti-white black or hispanic man, which we both know damn well the democrats will do. Maybe not in 2016 but certainly by 2020… but probably 2016.
And I don’t predict or advocate that the Republican party offically become the white party, but rather that the present situation continues, where everyone knows that the Republicans are the white man’s party but the Republicans themselves deny it. That nobody actually believes the Republican’s denials is beside the point.
So in 2020 when Dems nominate some borderline retard like Jesse Jackson Jr. running with whoever is the current president of “La Raza” and the Republicans nominate a right wing hack like Mike Pence who decides to run with a total loony tune like Michelle Bachmann, the overwhelming majority of white voters will hold their nose and vote “R”. Whites will never vote for a “real” black or hispanic canidate.
Barrack Obama is the first black president. And he’s going to be the last.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:46 pm
Blacks and Hispanics absolutely believe politics should be drawn on racial lines.
Yet another ignorant statement from an oblivious racist – who votes Republican. It’s OK for you to make blanket statements about Blacks but your precious whitey is a multi-colored quilt of interesting?
Whites will never vote for a “real” black or hispanic candidate.
Obama is smarter than anyone in Republican politics. I’m white and I voted for Obama.
Hey Republicans: Racial politics is an EPIC FAIL. But keep on bringing it up – you’re a living joke.
November 10th, 2009 at 2:07 am
?
What does that have to do with the price of apples? That a minority (about 45%) of white people voted for Obama in 2004 proves nothing. The question is how many white people will vote Democrat when men like Jesse Jackson are at the top of the ticket? Would you even be willing to vote for Jesse Jackson?
I think Michael Dukakis would beg to differ.
November 10th, 2009 at 8:46 am
[...] Matthew Yglesias » Right-Wing Unleashes Racism on Rep Cao [...]
November 10th, 2009 at 9:59 am
[...] now back to your normal Republican crap, like racist attacks on Republican Rep. Joseph Cao by the right wing extremists. There’s plenty for sane [...]
November 10th, 2009 at 10:24 am
[...] RSS feed for updates on this topic.Powered by WP Greet Box Easy AdSense by UnrealThe barrage continues: RT @RightBloggerPat: @AnhJosephCao You Bastard piece of shit fuck! GO BACK TO Saigon, South Vietnam [...]
November 10th, 2009 at 10:25 am
such bravery from the fightin keyboard commandoes!
someone shines a light on their racism, and all the links at thinkprogress go dead.
I wonder why? I thought they stood behind their beliefs, but now it looks like they’re trying to hide them.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
This is not american should act like when you do not agree with someone. I Glad that Representative Joseph Cao shows some stones when did what was right. He may not do what I want, but I know he will what it take to take care of his district.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
So the correct way to show your unhappy is to throw a temper tantrum and start calling people names.
So proud of the country we fight and die for.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
[...] question “¿Por qué no te callas?” Definitely a handy-dandy phrase for dealing with the clueless (the ones who don’t speak Spanish, [...]
November 10th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
[...] Matthew Yglesias » Right-Wing Unleashes Racism on Rep Cao [...]
November 12th, 2009 at 3:42 am
Are…you…really…quoting…a…tweet?
Wow!
November 12th, 2009 at 3:42 am
Are…you…really…quoting…a…tweet?
Wow.
November 12th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Neocons~DO NOT BREED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES!
Gracias