Broder asserts Rove drank from Atwater's "magic potion," but doesn't provide its ingredients
SUMMARY: Washington Post columnist David Broder asserted that "[Karl] Rove had drunk deeply of the magic potion dispensed by Lee Atwater, the South Carolina whiz who had absorbed the anger and frustration of the white Southern blue-collar families with whom he was raised." But Broder did not mention Atwater's repeated attempts to play on white voters' sentiments about race.
In an August 23 column discussing Karl Rove's August 13 announcement that he was resigning as White House senior adviser, Washington Post columnist David Broder asserted that "Rove had drunk deeply of the magic potion dispensed by Lee Atwater, the South Carolina whiz who had absorbed the anger and frustration of the white Southern blue-collar families with whom he was raised." Broder added that his "first conversations with Rove were dominated by his encyclopedic knowledge of the shifting political allegiance of Dixie precincts as their residents reacted to the civil rights revolution and the changed positions of the national parties by migrating from Democrats to Dixiecrats and Wallace-ites to Republicans." But Broder did not elaborate on his assertion that Atwater -- who Broder noted served as "Rove's first boss at the Republican National Committee" -- "absorbed the anger and frustration of the white Southern blue-collar families with whom he was raised." In fact, Atwater repeatedly attempted to play on white voters' sentiments about race. For example:
- As Media Matters for America has documented, Atwater in 1988 promised to make "a household name" of Willie Horton, an African-American convict who assaulted a man and raped his fiancée after escaping a furlough from prison in Massachusetts, and to make Horton the "running mate" of then-Democratic presidential nominee Michael Dukakis. The Americans for Bush arm of the National Security Political Action Committee used Horton in an anti-Dukakis attack ad that drew particular attention to Horton's race. In 1991, Atwater apologized for the "running mate" comment. According to a January 14, 1991, Associated Press report, Atwater, who was gravely ill at the time, regretted the statement "because it makes me sound racist, which I am not."
- In an October 6, 2005, column, New York Times columnist Bob Herbert included an excerpt from the book Southern Politics in the 1990's, by Alexander P. Lamis, a political-science professor at Case Western Reserve University. In his book, Lamis documented an interview with Atwater:
Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that [President Ronald] Reagan does get to the [George] Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with Legal Services, by cutting down on food stamps ..."
Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" -- that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me -- because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."
- In an April 16, 1991, Washington Post op-ed column, Tom Turnipseed, a South Carolina Democratic candidate for Congress in 1980, claimed that "Atwater's antics included phony polls by 'independent pollsters' to 'inform' white suburbanites that I was a member of the NAACP, because my congressman opponent was afraid to publicly say so."
Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nig**er, ni**ger, ni**er." By 1968 you can't say "nig*er" -- that hurts you. Backfires.
Atwater was not a nice person, the racism. How divisive these people are still today.
Wasn't this the core of the "Southern Strategy"? I know that GOP apologists pretend it didn't exist, but there it is. Be ashamed...be very ashamed.
Dave,
The Chairman of the RNC admitted that it existed back at the 2005 NAACP convention when he was courting the Black vote. He apologized for the southern strategy. Rush and the guys all but put an end to that courtship. Rush chastised him Mehlman for the apology and said Mehlman wanted Republicans to bend over and grab their ankles or something similarly vulgar. Rush and others were acting like the racist uncles sitting on the porch when their niece came by with her new Black boyfriend. They couldn’t stop Mehlman’s efforts but they sure made his minority vote courting almost impossible.Perhaps those who read David Broder's column are already aware of Lee Atwater and his reputation, and don't require the historical spoon-feeding this website is asking for.
Maybe I am slow today , but I do not get the point of htis? I do not think Broder was painting a nice picture of Rove .
you and tommy seem inseperable.
and inseparable too.
I got taught early on that the key to remembering the spelling of separate is to think of what you do when you sePARate the peel from a potato. You pare it.
The point is that Broder conveniently leaves it out. Atwater is still very much a hero to the Republicans. They blame Clinton on his death.
Atwater's popularity with Republicans is not the issue, what is the issue is MMFA's opinion that Broder left out details behind his strategy. However, when he states the angry, frustrating white Southern blue collar family that raised him - it's not hard to make the connection.
Personally, I think the details of the Southern Strategy don't get enough exposure. If Southern whites knew the cynical way in which they've been manipulated by the Republicans, they might actually come to their senses. But then, pigs may acquire the power of flight someday, too....
Nerzog,
And I don't mean this as an insult to southerners, but what you describe seems pretty typical. Poor White southerners fought in the civil war to maintain a social construct that was actually detrimental to their best interests. The rich slave owning class was small, rich, powerful, and they controlled everything. The poor southerners fought to the death to ensure that this small rich planter class maintain a perpetual free labor force. Hell if it wasn’t for slavery they could have had jobs working on those very plantations.Tommy,
I agree that most readers of Broder probably do know Atwater's background. I think it is also a good idea to inform those who don't.
I did not see one single media mention of Atwater's apology-- which I found conspicuously odd -- and I had to wonder how many under 40 even know who he was. Here is a link to the complete Turnipseed piece (please don't choke on the spoon, tommy): www.turnipseed.net/atwaterart.htm
The "jumper cable" incident refers to Atwater playing up to the national media the candidate's having received electroshock treatment for suicidal depression when he was a teenager. In his letter of apology, Atwater wrote: "My illness has taught me something about the nature of humanity, love, brotherhood and relationships that I never understood ..."
Perhaps Atwater's "magic potion" was vodka with OxyContin dissolved in it....
:-)
Gosh, wrong thread. Surely there must be a Limbaugh one where you can dish out your Oxy jokes.
No one should not assume that people understand ANYTHING. It needs to be spelled out.
So saying "anger and frustration of white blue-collar southern families" is just so nicey nice language to obscure the racism.
When they don't mention these highly relevant facts, it provides cover for them, and gives them a better reputation than they deserve.
Considering it's an opinion piece by a columnist who could have very easily left out the reference to Atwater altogether, I'd hardly characterize it as looking to "cover" for anything.
that's a rather interesting comment, tommy. he could have left it out altogether? but the fact is he didn't, it obviously was meant to say something. is this your new tactic? are you moving from why is this on mmfa to why is this in this column? are you out to correct the world? well, you do have all that free time on your hands.
But he didn't leave off Atwater, did he?
When he mentioned Atwater, he used code-speak to describe his racism.
Broder needed to mention that highly-relevant fact about Atwater if he was trying to draw that comparison. He did not, and because of that, he furthered the conservative agenda, and MMfA reported it.
Sue, It would be like some moveon.org contributor writing an article comparing Bush to Hitler, and being slammed by liberals for not detailing Hitler's atrocities.
Come on Tommy, the Sue thing again??
Well Lynn I agree but what about mefirst with his sarcastic remark that tommy and I are inseparable?
you know the old saying if the shoe fits? lynn replies to tommy and four minutes later you post a reply to her. sarcastic or....?
not to mention that the posts thursday were three minutes apart, and "doris" does not even show up on this thread today until tommy does, and "she" immediately answers a post to tommy. hmmm....
I am going to just go back to my old policy of ignoring you. You really offer nothing of relevance to these conversations. Bye.
give my best to tommy.
You've been here longer than I have.
How does pointing out that you noticed that Doris seems to be Tommy's defender have anything to do with Tommy calling me Sue, and Lynn objecting to him doing it?
I see those things as two different things.
No, it wouldn't be the same, and you are being delusional again.
Since it seems to pain you to be called delusional, since you cried about it yesterday, you might want to consider stopping calling me someone I'm not.
Hitler is a well-known terrible person, and Atwater is not. Hitler never admitted his flaws, Atwater copped to at least some of his own. Broder used code-speak to describe Atwater's behavior, instead of being frank, and if someone used code-speak when they described Hitler's behaviors, code-speak that hid the true nature of Hitler's actions, that would be wrong too!
You've off base with this terribly flawed analogy, Tommy. It must be those delusions that distort your reasoning.
Get over it Sue, your nastiness and claws were revealed in yesterday's Limbaugh thread for all to see. If you don't like Sue, tough.
If every post of yours includes delusional as a slam, then you will have to live with Sue....if you can't take, don't dish it out.
And your reasonings here are well, incorrect.
Get over it Sue, your nastiness and claws were revealed in yesterday's Limbaugh thread for all to see. If you don't like Sue, tough.
You must like being delusional, since you choose to act that way so often. I don't know Sue at all, so I don't know whether or not I'd like her. Clearly you didn't, but what's also clear is that when you are unable to fight fairly you pull antics like these. Those antics reflect on your discussion skills, or the lack thereof, not mine. I will let my posts speak for themselves, and will continue to post comments and replies that ignore the person that typed them and that address the issues raised in those posts. At times that might mean that I address your or your posse's snide remarks.
My claws and nastiness were revealed in Limbaugh's thread? More delusions. What I said in that Limbaugh thread was fully lucid and not nasty at all. We did not go to Iraq to protect our national security since Bush knew before we invaded that Iraq didn't have any WMD's, and we've gone into many countries to protect citizens from genocide, so there's no reason for us to not help in Darfur and we aren't wanting to help there to win black votes here, so Limbaugh was just as delusional as you are.
Here's what I said on the Limbaugh thread, for everyone to see.
"What a horrible thing for Rush to say!!!
"But you put the military -- you put the military in a position of defending U.S. national interest, and that's when Democrats and the liberals oppose it."
What a scumbag and a liar he is.
When the national interest of the USA was being defended in Afghanistan, I don't know of hardly anyone who opposed it.
Our national interest was not being protected when we went into Iraq. In fact, our national interests were sabotaged when Bush invaded Iraq.
If every post of yours includes delusional as a slam, then you will have to live with Sue....if you can't take, don't dish it out.
Every post of mine doesn't include me calling you delusional, and it's not a slam. It's an accurate portrayal of your behavior, as you're calling me someone I'm not. I only do it when you call me Sue, because when you call me Sue, you're being delusional. You're getting it backwards, Tommy, but maybe that's because you're delusional. It was you who whined about being called delusional. I don't care what you call me, since I know I'm not Sue, but when you do call me Sue, I'm going to point out that you're being delusional again!
And your reasonings here are well, incorrect.
Except they're not incorrect. This real comparison and the hypothetical one you proposed are totally different and it was not a good analogy, and because of it, your point doesn't hold water.
What we saw here was you made a faulty analogy. I pointed out its fatal flaws, and you came back with a personal attack and an insult and a restatement of your fatally flawed position. That's Tommy all over.
ALSO missing here is Lee Atwater's deathbed repentance.
The equivalent of being put "under oath", facing certain death brought Atwater to examine his deeds, his life, and his character. He found that he had made a fortune by being destructive, for lacking brotherhood and "heart".
Atwater was a rightwing smearmerchant, and there are many. Some say he was the prototype for the modern "rightwing political activist", of which ROVE is the current prime example. Atwater sought forgiveness for his harmful and cruel actions ... which was the performance of his JOB as a rightwing hatchetman.
Would God forgive him, having spent his life and made his fortune by doing sinful and evil things to his fellow man, just to obtain POWER for his masters, and money for himself? Would those he harmed over the years forgive him, considering the HARM done was not only to the targets, but also (insofar as his dirty tricks and character assassinations WORKED) deprived the citizens of America with proper choices in their leadership?
Atwater was well paid and well praised by his fellows for being effective in NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNING. This requires he engage in a myriad of sins and offenses to morality. He lied, dissembled, made up damaging stories, spread rumors, smeared people on a personal basis, and constantly attmepted to obscure the truth and influence people by misleading and untruthful portrayals of his political targets ... that is, Democrats.
The point Broder makes, SHOULD be accompanied by the statement that Rove is an UNREPENTANT Atwater. That Rove employs the same underhanded, despicable, and immoral tactics Atwater sought repentance for, but that Rove (thusfar) has not seen fit to say he is sorry or ask forgiveness. Of course, Rove does not (yet) suffer a life-threatening illness. He still has lots of time left to behave in immoral and despicable Rightwing hatchet-man manner, before he needs to worry about how his sins will affect judgment at the pearly gates.
The main thing is to FIRST be EVIL, every day, and to lie and smear to gain POWER for your friends. THEN, there will be time to repent later, after all the harm has been done over decades.
Forgiveness is not in my heart for these rightwing hatchet men. They KNOW what they are doing, they KNOW it is wrong, and yet they continue. As you sow, so shall you reap. They give and practice hell on earth for US, they should receive no less eternally for themselves. Rove. Kristol. Coulter. Limbaugh. Hannity. Etc. Etc.
Gosh Tex, There's plenty of brotherhood and heart in your post.....not only do you offer a thinly veiled wish for Karl Rove to suffer a life threatening illness, but you damn certain pundits who don't share your liberalism to a life in hell.
What a hideous display of vitriol, hate and slime.......a disguisting post that you ought to be ashamed of. But you won't.
So forgive me if I discount as preposterous any subsequent posts you put up here about the heartless rightwing. Nothing any of them would ever do could equal your immense disrespectful abhorent hatred.
"Nothing any of them would ever do could equal your immense disrespectful abhorent hatred."
Not so sure about that. Ann Coulter and Michael Savage have made a good living peddling such "disrespectful abhorent hatred". Rush does it, too, but he dresses it up in lame humor. Karl Rove has helped create a cottage industry for such political poison. Just because he doesn't publicly make such statements doesn't absolve him of responsibility for orchestrating these smear campaigns.
I don't see anything to indicate that Tex is wishing a fatal illness on Karl Rove. It sounds more like an observation that Rove has such a putrid soul that he will likely not repent unless he does find himself in such a predicament.
Minor difference, but worth noting.
Nerzog,
I don't defend Coulter or Savage for any of their hateful remarks, you know that. But it's one thing to vehemently disagree with someone who doens't share your POLITICAL views, but it's quite another to wish them a life of eternal hell. I'm sorry, that crosses any line of decency for me. It is reprehensible. And I disagree about what Tex's wish for Rove is, it isn't far off his hell wishes for others, in fact he's quite consistent.
You and I have our differences, and disagree most of the time, but I cannot imagine you ever wishing such evilness on anyone because they don't believe as you do politically. You have far too much class for that, it's too bad Tex does not.
No, I would never wish ill health on anyone, even Karl Rove. Now, I do wish professional embarassment and even jail time for him (if deserved), but not ill health.
I guess my reaction to Tex's Hell comment is not so vehement since I don't believe in Hell anyway. I've often heard people say "There's a special place in Hell reserved for___." It doesn't offend me, since I consider it nothing more than a rhetorical flourish.
Nerzog, As I said you seem like a very decent guy based on all your posts. You are very passionate in your opinions, but I have always respected you because you are fair and reasonable. When you post, I always read your opinions and consider whatever you are saying. I give you props.
And of course those that broke the law should be punished for their crimes, everyone should share that sentiment, but for anyone to wish death and suffering for another person is shameless and sick.
Tommy,
I believe you mischaracterize Tex's post by claiming that he is "wishing such evilness on anyone because they don't believe as you do politically".
It is clear that he is condemning them to eternal damnation for their actions, not their political beliefs.
While I commend your attempts to defend Tex by splitting hairs, their actions are based on their political beliefs.....and for anyone to wish what Tex wishes on his political foes only demonstrates his unbridled and unparalleled hatred, that he so ironically rails against here in nearly every post.
He is a hypocrite, and that is the best I can say about him at this point.
Their actions are based on a lack of morality not on their political beliefs.
It's not splitting hairs. It's you projecting your attitudes onto someone else.
Not all of us have hatred towards our opponents simply because they are our opponents. I hate the way that Karl Rove has poisoned our political debate with his behavior.
Not all of us have mass-knee-jerk-hysteria disease, and we actually contemplate our reactions to others' behaviors based upon sound judgements.
Another thing. Their actions which we find reprehensible are not based upon their political beliefs.
Their actions which we find reprehensible are based upon the way they try to entrench their political beliefs upon America. It's the way they slime other people and diss reality and promote lies and liars. They took that to a whole new level, unlike any previous mainstream politicians or political parties. The "repeating a lie until it seems to be true" people, or the SwiftBoat Vets as a surrogate attack group are just two examples of it.
Those behaviors have nothing whatsoever to do with their political beliefs, and have everything to do with the way they methods they used to have their political beliefs promoted.
Nothing any of them would ever do could equal your immense disrespectful abhorent hatred.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not true there is nothing that has ever been said on this board they could equal they king and queen of hateful nastiness , Savage and Coulter. NOTHING!
I just hope and pray that none of my words on these boards, or anywhere, will ever be compared in any stratosphere to Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, or Tex.
Sorry Lynn, if that's your defense of Tex, he shouldn't be too proud to be in the company you're giving him, with his vile post.
TOMMY has plenty to say. PART I.
Tommy: “Gosh Tex, There's plenty of brotherhood and heart in your post…”
RESPONSE: Atwater asked for forgiveness for a life of evil deeds as a rightwing hatchet man. This is a FACT. Rove has not YET repented. This is ALSO a fact. My “brotherhood and heart” is entirely for the American People, who suffer at the hands of Rightwing tactics, rightwing smearmerchants, and the POWER they seek. The American people then suffer greatly from the POLICIES the rightwing bring to their jobs. The list is long of the misery rightwing policy brings to Americans, but an unnecessary war in Iraq, unrelenting mortgaging of our future so the wealthy can become wealthier TODAY, ignoring environmental concerns, destroying collective bargaining, apathy towards the sick and the poor and the elderly, dwindling jobs and prospects for our middle class … this is the rightwing LEGACY. Smear and lie in order to gain power to bring heartless policies to America, this is the rightwing record. My sympathies are for a great many people, but rightwing smearmerchants … no.
Tommy: “....not only do you offer a thinly veiled wish for Karl Rove to suffer a life threatening illness,”
RESPONSE: I expressed no such wish, veiled or not. Atwater had his mortal illness that led to his repentance. Rove has not. This is a fact. Will he EVER? I don’t know, but he hasn’t YET. That’s all I said, and it’s just a FACT.
Tommy: “… but you damn certain pundits who don't share your liberalism to a life in hell.”
RESPONSE: I said “forgiveness is not in my heart” for these rightwing hatchet men. This does not “damn them to hell” as you so dramatically insist; I do not have that power, only GOD does. Should we humans accept all apologies offered? Only if sincere, for one thing. And some things are unforgivable TO ME. And it has NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING to do with “sharing my liberalism” … it’s all about actions and tactics. True Conservatives can behave in an honorable and moral manner, and they have my admiration. Rightwing smearmerchants do NOT.
Tommy has plenty to say, and so do I; PART II:
Tommy: “What a hideous display of vitriol, hate and slime.......a disguisting post that you ought to be ashamed of. But you won't.”
RESPONSE: I am not ashamed in the least of my post or anything I said here. Your attempts to misinterpret what I said, create straw men, use of weasel words (“thinly veiled”), and misrepresentations are clear to all. They are, shall we say, the tactics of the rightwing smearmerchant. You know them well.
Tommy: “So forgive me if I discount as preposterous any subsequent posts you put up here about the heartless rightwing.”
RESPONSE: Sorry, can’t forgive you. You are disingenuous, and engaging in hyperbole. First off, you have never FAILED to discount posts you consider “liberal” as “preposterous”, so you offer no change in your behavior. Second off, you offer the false reasoning that if you can show ME to be “heartless”, then you can discount the Rightwing ever behaving in a heartless manner. This is not reasoning at all, because you have failed to prove the first premise, and the second does not follow from the first. I am NOT heartless, and BECAUSE of this I scorn those who would harm the weak, the ill, the poor, while lining their own pockets. And rightwing policies stand as heartless, based on their merits and results, independent of anything I might say. So your “discounting” cannot be forgiven.
Tommy: “Nothing any of them would ever do could equal your immense disrespectful abhorent hatred.”
RESPONSE: I have not smeared decorated combat vets. I have not sent thousands to die based on lies. I have not ignored burgeoning rolls of the uninsured. I have not ignored environmental protection regulations. I have not cripped America with debt. I have not said 9/11 widows ENJOY their husband’s deaths. I cannot hope to equal the long list of rightwing verbal atrocities, but that’s not whe worst: THEY SET POLICY that harms people and causes suffering and death. I do not have the power to do such things, so nothing I say can equal their immense impact on our lives.
There IS “immense disrespectful abhorrent hatred” in America, and it is falling from the rightwing onto the rest of us. The facts are clear, the record is intact, and I have only scratched the surface of the examples. Your hyperventilated outrage is of the type recognized by Shakespeare, when he said, “methinks he protesteth too much”, or as they say in the schoolyard, “he who smelt it, dealt it.” Atwater and Rove are YOUR smearmerchants, and it is THEY (and perhaps YOU) who are in need of forgiveness. God may forgive them. I won’t.
Tex, I have no interest in furthering a discussion with you on this - you have made your feelings very clear in your original post, to try and backtrack now and rationalize your seething soulless hatred is a waste of time.
But just one thing, you say you did not wish Rove ill, not even a thinly veiled one? - read your post again, you specifically put YET in quotes > (yet) when pontificating on the possibility of his acquiring a life threatening illness. If that isn't a thinly veiled wish, I don't know what is. I stand by my assessment of your character with that statement alone.
We both know your intent, why don't you be a man and just admit it? In any event, you have to live with your conscience, I don't.
I hope you're satisfied.
TOMMY goes after “loose ends”:
Tommy: “Tex, I have no interest in furthering a discussion with you on this - you have made your feelings very clear in your original post,”
RESPONSE: So far, so good …
Tommy, “… to try and backtrack now and rationalize your seething soulless hatred is a waste of time.”
RESPONSE: No backtrack; it’s called “clarification” and “rebuttal” of false characterizations, of which you utter many. I have no “seething soulless hatred” to rationalize, so that’s just namecalling on your part. As you say, it’s “very clear” in my posts what I have said, and what you IMAGINE or INVENT that I have said is clear in YOUR posts.
A waste of time, talking to YOU? If you say so. I write for the thread, not the poster, anyway, so just go away if you’re of a mind to. No problem.
Tommy: “But just one thing, you say you did not wish Rove ill, not even a thinly veiled one? - read your post again, you specifically put YET in quotes > (yet) when pontificating on the possibility of his acquiring a life threatening illness. If that isn't a thinly veiled wish, I don't know what is. I stand by my assessment of your character with that statement alone.”
RESPONSE: Atwater apparently needed a mortal illness to repent. The comparison in this thread is ROVE to ATWATER. Will Rove ultimately repent, as did Atwater? I don’t know. It took a mortal illness for Atwater. I don’t know what it would take, if anything, for Rove to see the error and evil in his ways. In any event, I don’t give a rat’s ass if Rove repents or not, so wishing an illness on him SO he would repent is a speculation on your part that fits nothing said anywhere.
Tommy: “We both know your intent,”
RESPONSE: That is a bald-faced LIE.
Tommy: “why don't you be a man and just admit it?”
RESPONSE: What is preventing YOU from being a man, and being honest?
Tommy: “In any event, you have to live with your conscience, I don't.”
RESPONSE: I’ll live with mine, you live with yours. That’s the best deal ever.
Tommy: “I hope you're satisfied.”
RESPONSE: As long as rightwing smearmerchants and their sycophantic supporters like yourself are plaguing our airwaves, as long as heartless rightwing policy-makers are causing pain and suffering in our population, I will not be “satisfied”. Bringing Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, and other Administration liars and crooks to justice would be very satisfying, however.
SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!
Lee Atwater is a bitter pill for the Neo-Cons as he is certainly one of its Founding Fathers whom as ussual came to God, and confessed his sins, that he was wrong headed all along, and did great harm to his country.
Thats what it takes to bring a corrupt Neo-Con to come to his senses, thier pending death, or a prison cell!! Our Leadership, any wonder that we're floating around in a circle like a turd in a bowl!
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady