The Republican Party Is Turning Into A Cult

Something strange has happened in America in the nine months since Barack Obama was elected. It has best been summarized by the comedian Bill Maher: "The Democrats have moved to the right, and the Republicans have moved to a mental hospital."

The election of Obama -- a center-left black man -- as a successor to George W. Bush has scrambled the core American right's view of their country. In their gut, they saw the US as a white-skinned, right-wing nation forever shaped like Sarah Palin. When this image was repudiated by a majority of Americans in a massive landslide, it simply didn't compute. How could this have happened? How could the cry of "Drill, baby, drill" have been beaten by a supposedly big government black guy? So a streak that has always been there in the American right's world-view -- to deny reality, and argue against a demonic phantasm of their own creation -- has swollen. Now it is all they can see.

Since Obama's rise, the US right has been skipping frantically from one fantasy to another, like a person in the throes of a mental breakdown. It started when they claimed he was a secret Muslim, and -- at the same time -- that he was a member of a black nationalist church that hated white people. Then, once these arguments were rejected and Obama won, they began to argue he was born in Kenya and secretly smuggled into the United States as a baby, and the Hawaiian authorities conspired to fake his US birth certificate. So he is ineligible to rule and the office of President should pass to... the Republican runner-up, John McCain.

These aren't fringe phenomena: a Research 2000 poll found that a majority of Republicans and Southerners say Obama wasn't born in the US, or aren't sure. A steady steam of Republican congressmen have been jabbering that Obama has "questions to answer." No amount of hard evidence -- here's his birth certificate, here's a picture of his mother heavily pregnant in Hawaii, here's the announcement of his birth in the local Hawaiian paper -- can pierce this conviction.

This trend has reached its apotheosis this summer with the Republican Party claiming en masse that Obama wants to set up "death panels" to euthanize the old and disabled. Yes: Sarah Palin really has claimed -- with a straight face -- that Barack Obama wants to kill her baby.

You have to admire the audacity of the right. Here's what's actually happening. The US is the only major industrialized country that does not provide regular healthcare to all its citizens. Instead, they are required to provide for themselves -- and just under 50 million people can't afford the insurance. As a result, 18,000 US citizens die every year needlessly, because they can't access the care they require. That's equivalent to six 9/11s, every year, year on year. Yet the Republicans have accused the Democrats who are trying to stop all this death by extending healthcare of being "killers" -- and they have successfully managed to put them on the defensive.

The Republicans want to defend the existing system, not least because they are given massive sums of money by the private medical firms who benefit from the deadly status quo. But they can't do so honestly: some 70 percent of Americans say it is "immoral" to retain a medical system that doesn't cover all citizens. So they have to invent lies to make any life-saving extension of healthcare sound depraved.

A few months ago, a recent board member for several private health corporations called Betsy McCaughey noticed a clause in the proposed healthcare legislation that would pay for old people to see a doctor and write a living will. They could stipulate when (if at all) they would like to be withdrawn. It's totally voluntary. Many people want it: I know I wouldn't want to be kept alive for a few extra months if I was only going to be in agony and unable to speak. But McCaughey started the rumor that this was a form of euthanasia, where old people would be forced to agree to death. This was then stretched somehow to include the disabled. It was flatly untrue -- but the right had their talking point, Palin declared the system "downright evil", and they were off.

It's been amazingly successful. Now, every conversation about healthcare has to begin with a Democrat explaining at great length that, no, they are not in favor of killing the elderly -- while Republicans get away with defending a status quo that kills 18,000 people a year. The hypocrisy was startling: when Sarah Palin was Governor of Alaska, she encouraged citizens there to take out living wills. Almost all the Republicans leading the charge against "death panels" have voted for living wills in the past. But the lie has done its work: a confetti of distractions has been thrown up, and support is leaking away from the plan that would save lives.

These claims have become so detached from reality that they often seem like black comedy. The right-wing magazine US Investors' Daily claimed that if Steven Hawking had been British, he would have been allowed to die at birth by its "socialist" healthcare system. Hawking responded with a polite cough that he is British, and "I wouldn't be here without the NHS." Frank Laffer, the right-wing economist lauded by David Cameron, claimed on CNN that it would be a disaster if the government got its hands on Medicare, the program providing healthcare for the elderly, paid for entirely by... the government.

This tendency to simply deny inconvenient facts and invent a fantasy-world isn't new; it's only becoming more heightened. It ran through the Bush years like a dash of bourbon in water. When it became clear Saddam Hussein had no Weapons of Mass Destruction, the US right simply claimed they had been shipped to Syria. When the scientific evidence for man-made global warming became unanswerable, they claimed, as one Republican congressman put it, that it was "the greatest hoax in human history", and all the world's climatologists were "liars". The American media then presents itself as an umpire between "the rival sides", as if they both had evidence behind them.

It's a shame, because there are some areas in which a conservative philosophy -- reminding us of the limits of grand human schemes, and advising caution -- could be a useful corrective. But that's not these what so-called "conservatives" are providing: instead, they are pumping up a hysterical fantasy, that is only a thin skin covering raw economic interests and base prejudices.

For many of the people at the top, this is mere cynical manipulation: one of Bush's former advisors, David Kuo, has said the President and Karl Rove would mock evangelicals as "nuts" as soon as they left the Oval Office. But the ordinary Republican base believe it. They are being cruelly manipulated into opposing their own interests through false fears and invented demons. Last week, one of the Republicans sent to disrupt a healthcare town hall started a fight and was injured -- and then complained he had no health insurance. I didn't laugh; I wanted to weep.

Indeed, if you spend any time with American right-wingers -- as I have, reporting undercover on events like the National Review cruise and the Christian Coalition Solidarity Tour of Israel -- you soon find that your arguments don't center on philosophy. You have to concentrate on correcting basic factual errors about the real world.

They insist Europe has fallen to Islam, since Muslims immigrants are becoming a majority and are imposing sharia law. In reality, Muslims make up 3 percent of the population of Europe, and most of them oppose sharia law. They insist Franklin Roosevelt caused the Great Depression, and should have cut government spending. In reality, whenever he did cut spending -- as he tried periodically throughout the 1930s -- the economy began to tank. But explain this patiently -- with a thousand sources -- and they simply shriek that you are lying, and they know "in their heart" what is true. They insist gay marriage would cause the institution of the family to collapse. In reality, where it has already been introduced in Europe, heterosexual families continue just as before. On the list goes: evolution is a lie, a blastocyst is akin to a baby, torture produces actionable intelligence...

How do they train themselves to be so impervious to reality? It begins, I suspect, with religion. They are taught from a young age that it is good to have "faith" -- which is, by definition, a belief without any evidence to back it up. You don't have "faith" Australia exists, or fire burns: you have evidence. You only need "faith" to believe the untrue or unprovable. Indeed, they are taught that faith is the highest aspiration and most noble cause. Is it any surprise this then percolates into their political views? Faith-based thinking spreads and contaminates the rational.

Up to now, Obama has not responded well to this onslaught of unreason. He has tried to conciliate the elite economic interests, and joke about the fanatical fringe they are stirring up. He has shamefully assured the pharmaceutical companies that an expanded healthcare system will not use the power of government as a purchaser to bargain down drug prices, while wryly saying that he "doesn't want to kill Grandma." Rather than challenging these hard interests and bizarre fantasies aggressively, he has tried to flatter and soothe them. His healthcare plan is weaker and harder to explain as a result.

But this kind of mania can't be co-opted: it can only by over-ruled. Sometimes in politics you will have enemies, and they must be democratically defeated. The political system cannot be gummed up by a need to reach out to the maddest people with the maddest fears. There is no way to expand healthcare without angering Big Pharma and the Republicaloons. So be it. As Arianna Huffington put it, "It is as though, at the height of the civil rights movement, you thought you had to bring together Martin Luther King and George Wallace and make them agree. It's not how change happens."

However strange it seems, the Republican Party really is spinning off into a bizarro-cult who believe Barack Obama is a baby-killer plotting to build death panels for the grannies of America. Their new slogan should be -- shrill, baby, shrill.

Johann Hari is a writer for the Independent. To read more of his articles, click here . You can email him at johann -at- johannhari.com

Comments

[policyhack]

The Cult has decided to replace its Un-American mascot.

http://axisofreason.com/2009/09/03/gop-mascot-un-american/

[MrGrave]

I disagree when you say Obama should be more aggressive. Martin Luther King impacted the civil rights movement through non-aggressive change. He met resistance with solidarity rather than reaction. I think the more Obama tries to fight these wing-nuts, the more steam he'll give them. It's absolutely useless, all he can do is call them to arms. The only option he really has is to ignore them and continue to push his agenda.

[srt123]

I have not read the proposed health care reform yet so can't comment on it. But I am sure that Obama is definetely the most hardworking president in the country's history. Most presidents usually go around saying hello to other world leaders in their first 6 months. But this guy hit the ground running and is really tackling the real problems. No wonder it pisses of republicans.

[2Foxxie4U]

Don't you dare blame religion as a whole for the actions the fucking Fundies have done. I, myself am a Christian, and I HATE it when people lump us into the same group as them. IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE A BRAIN AND BE CHRISTIAN AT THE SAME TIME. Insisting otherwise is fucking judgmental and simply is NOT RIGHT.

Think about it - if some random conservative said that all homosexuals were disease-spreading, dysfunctional animals, most people would be all up in their case. It's wrong both ways. Please don't stereotype - it is hurtful to others AND your argument.

[Julia Bailey]

The argument was that religion is "a belief without any evidence to back it up". Which it is. And therefore, people who have 'faith', have no problems believing in things that can't be backed up. Its not a stereotype. Its the definition of faith.

There is no comparison to homosexuality, which is a biological state of preferring to be with someone of the same sex.

[blindfaiths]

Want to make a difference????? STOP supporting the media, and products who support this deception as PAYING ADVERTISERS...and tell all your friends to do the same. MONEY is what they understand, not human dignity, rights, or ethics. MONEY and with it, power. TEN CENTS in their pockets keeps the machine RUNNING at YOUR expense. The outrage the CEO of Whole Foods received is a hint that YOU can stop this UNAMERICAN and TREACHEROUS activity of the right (be it Republician or otherwise), but it requires that you have the will to keep your financial conviction. When a political party resorts to the practice of faithlessness, lies, deception, perfidy, the betraying of trust of the American people as the historical evidence shows all the way back to Nixon, then it is time that the FINANCIAL SUPPORT of ALL ITS PRACTIONERS ........ENDS. The religeous right calls it "bankrupting the beast" and it works, after all it is being practiced on YOU right now..

[blindfaiths]

As George Bush said " you can fool some of the people some of the time, and THOSE are the ones you need to concentrate on". The world is full of blindfaiths, only self awareness can cure blindness. When 30% of "Republicans" have less than a high school diploma, when 5 of 35 can not tell you why winter is cold and summer is hot ( this is a FACT), can ANY of you REALLY be surprised at the lies they hold as truth? As a FORMER card carring member of the extream right leaning William Buckley's Young Americans for Freedom, I can tell you how EASY it is to "enlighten" those to a "JUST CAUSE" who have choose to be ignorant in the name of stopping all you 'anti-American", socialist, communists out there. Look at how the rightwing (like FOX) media helps in the crusade to confuse. How can a "entertainment and opinion show" become the NEWS, that "Legitimate News Organizations" repeat? They rely on their soldiers to make noise and confusion to "win", to wear you. Trust me, they are laughing at America right now, at how easy it is for them to fool the public.

[nonofyabusiness]

Fanned!!!!

[Perry Callas]

Our country has a significant number of maniacs who crave human sacrifice. In my lifetime, representatives of this group have killed two Kennedys, a King, an Evers, a Meredith, and many less-famous leaders. The brutes have bullied their way into political influence through unrelenting intimidation, propaganda, and violence.

Their examples of leadership include George Wallace, who sought to keep slavery alive, Richard Nixon, a liar and paranoid megalomaniac who organized a White House palace guard, Ronald Reagan, a cold and unimaginative operator who hid behind a smile, George W. Bush, who waged illegal war on Iraq and on the Constitution, and propagandists who spew the Big Lie with the backing of corporations.

Next on their list is Barack Obama, because he represents apartheid’s worst nightmare- black literacy, sophistication, leadership, intellect, and courage. Psychopaths, incited to violence by commentators of the far right, now appear, armed with rifles, where the President of the United States holds meetings to solicit discussion about today’s issues. How long before one of these “patriots” gets a clear shot and plunges us into banana republic status?

We can bandy words, but we need to confront the far right and require they act civilized. Are their rifles why we hide, waiting for a somber bulletin to inform us of the tragic death of our President? Who has the contract for the funeral coverage?

[wmramlal]

I totally agree with Johann Hari's article "The election of Obama -- a center-left black man -- as a successor to George W. Bush has scrambled the core American right's view of their country. In their gut, they saw the US as a white-skinned, right-wing nation forever shaped like Sarah Palin. When this image was repudiated by a majority of Americans in a massive landslide, it simply didn't compute. How could this have happened? How could the cry of "Drill, baby, drill" have been beaten by a supposedly big government black guy?"

The vast majority of people against healthcare are the same people that voted against Obama in the first place. Most of them are uninformed and argue that Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are not government programs and shout that they want the government to keep his hands off their social security and Medicare/Medicaid.

The bottom line is that these people are racist and the fact that America has a black President has rocked their world.

[tundramonkey]

It is a mistake to label Obama as any kind of leftist, center leftist or suchlike. Obama is center right and never pretended not to be. The constant misapplication of the label "leftist" is an embarassing misunderstanding of exactly where we are politically in this country and why. Obama has consistently avoided reigning in industry and capital in ways that even Nixon considered acceptable, let alone FDR or Woodrow Wilson.
Nixon rejiggered the world monetary agreements at Bretton Woods, enacted wage and price controls, and established the EPA. So politically Obama is less leftist and less liberal than Richard Nixon.
Wilson nationalized industry and forced the railroads under the USRA, for example, to begin to standardize on equipment, which increased their profits by lowering costs; they hadn't been willing to do that in 100 years of existence.
Roosevelt nationalized industries, created jobs programs, regulated banks and Wall Street and set up a system that provided prosperity for decades and created a trusting relationship between wealthy elites and an empowered working class, only broken completely when Reagan settled the PATCO strike with scabs and finally destroyed blue collar wages for the benefit of his wealthy cronies and backers.
Obama is about as leftist as Reagan, so far.

[FairBalancedPatriot]

Really? Opposing socialized medicine is racially-motivated?

Living in America, I know a lot of Americans, and I'm not really sure where you're getting your data about how many of us are racist. Not to mention the fact that I know a number of black people that oppose socialized health care...

Care to explain how you arrived at your conclusion?

[rf-hawaii]

Opposing 'socialized medicine' is mindless in our current situation.

[Cleanerman]

Great article and right on. I live in a Bible belt state and the general belief system of the religious fundamentalists here is beyond the beyond---this is the best way I can say it. And they are all Republicans (no surprise). They do not believe in reason. Reason was discounted long ago in there minds by their religious beliefs which is based on "faith". For them to "reason" is unreasonable. But their "mean speak" and blatant bigotry is evidently a part of their "faith". The hatefulness they spout is part of their religion (Christianity?). It is an astounding mindset--yet it is very prevalent and not just in the South-- as witnessed at many of the town hall meetings. But the Republican Party has rapped itself around this notion in a long-term plan to maintain the status quo. The GOP is for the rich and the large corporations---they have no intentions of "delivering" to their religious and idiot base--just "conquering" them.

[MoscowMoo]

FBPatriot's posts below are PERFECT illusations of the point that the author above seems to be trying to make. FBPatriot's talking points were not taken from actual studies or credible articles. Look at the links he cites and you can see this his information was derived from editorials (read: written opinions). This is how conservatives can believe the nutty things they do -- because they don't research anything (too much work, I guess). They just believe whatever somebody from their own belief system "tells" them to believe. So, the end result, as the above author brilliantly points out, is that we have an entire party of people who readily believe all manner of absurdities -- the president is secretly Muslim, he likes terrorists, he hates white people (despite the fact his mother is white), and on and on and on. Lions and tigers and bears, oh my! Remember, folks, these are people who still consider anonymous "please forward" emails to be credible sources on which to base their political opinions.

[lw1899]

Mr. Hari's comments are spot-on, and the self-proclaimed Patriot's comments validate them as you said. It's like trying to reason with a brick wall - just an exercise in futility. Why listen to reason when conservative propaganda suits just fine. Facts are an option to be taken lightly, or not taken at all.

[FairBalancedPatriot]

Actually, MMoo, my statistics were not taken from mere editorials. Yes, I posted a link to an opinion column that contained health care statistics "1 - 4" but the actual points came from the National Center for Public Policy Research; a very highly-respected think tank. The poll data was extracted from the Gallup site, which is arguably one of the top three most reputable polling agencies in the world. Information regarding patient care in Britain and Sweden was collected directly from those countries.

I find your comments regarding the group-think among conservatives to be unsubstantiated and unfair. I said nothing about Barack Obama's nationality, character, or racial biases (rather, whether he even has any)--I find no merit in making such ad hominem attacks.

In fact, I said very, very little about the President AT ALL. The majority of my comments were centered on the effectiveness of a public health system. ...none of which were addressed in your response, let alone repudiated.

[K M D]

So yeah - Hi From Europe.....

Dear Mom,

Still not Muslim. Enjoying the healthcare.

Love,
Your Daughter

[lw1899]

Good one.

[mephillipsr]

This is all because the Republican party now lives in the State of Denial, country of Chaos. God I love politics!

[FairBalancedPatriot]

(3 of 3) Just last week, the Canadian government announced that their health care industry is on the brink of utter collapse and that, in an attempt to save it from total destruction, they will be reforming their policy to include a private option.

There ARE valid, non-racist reasons for opposing a completely-public health care system!

Opposing ObamaCare is NOT the same as opposing health care reform. Many conservatives believe that reform is absolutely necessary, just not on the terms Obama has proposed. Gallup reports that "[m]ore Americans disapprove (49%) than approve (43%) of Barack Obama’s handling of healthcare policy," and have for many weeks (http://www.gallup.com/poll/122255/Amid-Debate-Obama-Approval-Rating-Healthcare-Steady.aspx).

...but let me guess--they only polled members of the RACIST right?

[nefariouschafe]

I thought Repubs were supposed to be Twitter masters.

Concise scare tactics, please! I simply don't have time for such long-windedness.

[FairBalancedPatriot]

Ah, that explains a lot -- if you tried reading sources longer than headlines, you'd probably have enough info to write a better response. Hell, maybe even one that makes a valid point! (but don't worry--no one is holding their breath.)

[Charl]

Keep in mind that when they say in the poll that more Americans disapprove of the President's handling of healthcare than approve of it, there are a VERY healthy amount of them that are PROGRESSIVES that say he is not going far enough, and don't like that he is caving to conservatives as much as he is... so, remember THAT before you pat yourself on the back for being in the 'majority'. It's extremely disingenuous to add all those that disapprove neatly into the GOP column... it's absolutely not the truth.. not by a LONG way!

In a nutshell, the majority of the population, I believe want PROGRESSIVE reform, and some are unhappy that it is not progressive enough. THAT is your majority!

[FairBalancedPatriot]

but see, that misses my point entirely -- I wasn't arguing for or against any one plan for health care so much as I was trying to establish that there are reasons for opposing H.R. 3200 other than being a racist.

I, personally, know a number of people who are unhappy with Obama's handling of health care policy because they don't think he's going far enough; I know that they're a sizable part of the disapprovers.

Moreover, disregarding policy, itself, supporters and opponents alike are frustrated with the White House's recent equivocating on the public option.

Perhaps it wasn't clear enough in my original posts, but I was reacting more to Hari's broad, unsupported, and offensive generalizations about conservatives.

[Kolors]

No, the Canadian government did NOT say that their health care industry is on the brink of collapse! It was the incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association that said that, NOT the government.

This yet another example of phoney "facts" in the health care debate.

[FairBalancedPatriot]

I apologize for misspeaking and attributing my statement to the government; I was writing quickly and should've reviewed my comments more closely before posting.

As for the state of the health care system, one of the articles I read had projections for what would happen to the system if a private option is not added. The system cannot survive (financially) as is. When I read it and bookmarked it, I was at work, and I can't find it now. I apologize for that, as well.

...but at least my statement was *based* on facts, and I concede that the inaccuracy was my fault, not my source's; Mr. Hari pulled the majority of his conclusions out of thin air!

[sippewissett]

No one is calling for an all-public healthcare plan here. And apart from the hysteria you are trying to invoke about the Canadian plan, your "facts" aren't true. Each province has its own public health care plan, some now with private options. The main obstacle for implementing a fully public plan is the shortage of doctors for everyone. Instead of staying away from implementing a publich-health OPTION, we should be looking for ways to incentivize people to become doctors, particularly GPs (internists).

And could you not rush to judgement as to Obama's popularity and the future of health care reform based on the poll "flavor of the day" when current opinions are being shaped by a lot of LIES that are being deployed ($$$) by the insurance industry? If we can get straight FACTS to the public, we'd have a better chance at a plan that works. Stay tuned. It ain't over yet because "Yes, We Can."

[JNagarya]

SUBSTANTIATE.

(It's interesting that an article exposing the Republicallons as being loons attracts the looney comments of those very loons.)

[FairBalancedPatriot]

(2 of 3) As for health care, I'm happy that the UK system has worked well for you. but have you read much about how it works for those who are seriously or terminally ill in Britain and other countries with similar programs? Or the elderly? Or anyone who simply hasn't had the good fortune you've had when it comes to your health? Try these facts:

"1. Fifty (50) percent of women in Britain and New Zealand diagnosed with breast cancer die from it. By contrast, about one-fifth of American women diagnosed with breast cancer die from it.

"2. In England the system decided to halt knee and hip replacements for overweight people.

"3. In Australia a man has been on a 90-day waiting period for two years to get surgery to fix his hands, shoulder and ankle crippled by rheumatoid arthritis.

"4. In Canada patients have been denied life-saving medicines that are standard treatment in the United States." (Source: http://www.reporternews.com/news/2009/aug/16/obamas-plan-to-waste-money-destroy-health-care/)

5. "60 percent of hip-replacement patients waited longer than three months to get surgery and the median wait time for heart surgery was 55 days. A Swedish study found that reducing waiting time for heart surgery would lower the death rate of patients by more than 50 percent." (Source: http://www.gjsentinel.com/hp/content/news/opinion/stories/2009/07/15/071609_4A_wagner_column.html)

[sippewissett]

You should be ashamed for trotting out these phoney stats as truths. Moreover, whatever the real stats are about the Canadian and British and Australian (What, no French or German or Swedish stats?) are, they are in countries where there is universal public health care, not here where public health care might become an option.

Do you realize how poorly the US. ranks internationally in terms of the performance of our CURRENT system? We should collectively be ashamed of how we are pouring monies into a system that's broken instead of trying to denigrate the health care systems of other countries -- unless you are posting on behalf of the insurance industry that made a huge profit last year during a recession!

Check out this terrific way of looking at health care reform simply and clearly: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/20/health-care-explained-on_n_264529.html

[sherwoodforest]

You are quoting opinions from opinion pages in newspapers. And not even from a medical expert-
Dr. William P. Dukes is a professor of finance in the Rawls College of Business at Texas Tech University.
I wonder what endowments for that college are and from what corporations?

[Onegina]

Show your maths for one and two. Utter utter bullcrock hateful nonsense. The survival rates in the UK for breast cancer are 80% and rising. We spend tons and tons of money on research. Cancer Research UK is one of the best charities in the world for this and there are many many others.
http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/types/breast/survival/

BE INFORMED CORRECTLY. Early detection is the key. It may just be a throwaway remark for you but these happen to be our personal experiences you are trampling all over to make your partisan polemic point.

As for the second. Do you mean Britain or the UK or England? Or are these just interchangable terms for you? What about Wales. Or maybe Scotland? Again - no source. Hysterical propaganda.

[Marco Salvatori]

It's obvious from your ridiculous "FairBalanced" name that you get your "facts" from Fox News, which is neither fair nor balanced.

And the "facts" you're quoting are actually from an OPINION column. You do know the difference between fact and opinion don't you?

The author of that column cites the National Center For Public Policy Research, a well know right wing think tank, as the source of his data so right there you already have some bias.

Give us non-partisan facts and maybe we'll start listening to you, otherwise you'd be smarter to just shut up.

[indywoman]

Does this professor also write for the Star Magazine? The Us magazine? The Enquirer?? He sure has about the same credibility as the worst tabloid sleazy story-maker-upper.

[FairBalancedPatriot]

(1 of 3) I understand that this piece is a commentary and, thus, the author does not need to cite his works consulted, but, Mr. Hari, when a journalist fails to report the facts accurately, it is a slap in the face to the notion of journalistic integrity and detracts from the credibility of valid points the author makes.

For example, you attributed Barack Obama's victory in the Presidential election to "[votes from] a majority of Americans in a massive landslide." Obama may have won a substantial number of ELECTORAL votes, but he only took 53% of the POPULAR vote.

Moreover, to say that "[the American right] saw the US as a white-skinned, right-wing nation forever shaped like Sarah Palin" is not only unsubstantiated but disgusting. Consider how many liberals loathed George W. Bush for his policies and the things he did. Because Barack Obama is half-black, the right can't disagree with his actions or proposals? Any opposition simply MUST be racially-motivated? Your suggestion is offensive and in incredibly poor taste.

[johnie2xs]

"Your suggestion is offensive and in incredibly poor taste."

But true, for many of the people who voted for McCain/Palin,

even if you were not among them with that feeling.

[Marco Salvatori]

People of good sense and decency, not just liberals, hated George Bush's policies because they were criminal and illegal, not to mention despotic.

And to see how far gone the extreme right wing you just need to turn on the TV. Ideologically motivated murders, insinuations of violence and intimidation in public debates, calling people with whom they disagree "Nazis" or "Fascists" or "Communists".

Obama did win by a landslide, considering all the non-sense and vitriol that came out of the Palin-McCain camp that was incessantly repeated by Fox News and the rest of the corporate media.