I Am Hussein Too

You have got to watch and hear this; it is sad. Funny, but I am currently teaching my students about Richard Hofstadter’s class and economic thesis on the construction of the United States Constitution and why the framers feared the uneducated masses. It is a good thing they are dead and cannot watch this clip. Here is Hofstadter’s contention:

My Advanced Placement United States History classes are currently reading The American Political Tradition by Richard Hofstadter. In this historical intellectual work, Hofstadter brings a more revisionist and realist account of America’s historical figures. Hofstadter, much like the Marxist historian Howard Zinn, taught and wrote history from the perspective of non elites: blacks, women, immigrants, workers, and the poor, who all had a voice in shaping the hitherto. Moreover, Hofstadter looked to end the romantic notions often used to describe the traditional white male hero of American culture (or WASP). Here is an example from his chapter on the founding fathers:

Democratic ideas are most likely to take root among discontented and oppressed classes, rising middle classes, or perhaps some sections of an old, alienated, and partially disinherited aristocracy, but they do not appeal to a privileged class that is still amplifying its privileges. With a half dozen exceptions at most, the men who had considerable position and wealth, and as a group they had advanced well beyond their fathers.

One of the things Hofstadter writes about in his many works is that of economic elitism. He described the framers as men who created an oligarchy via the Constitution only as an instrument to protect their wealth and status; he questions the democratic nature of the founders and the Constitution. Moreover, he discusses history as an entity protected by the very men who used it to enhance their status. Here, as also noted by Sociologists James Loewen, Hofstadter is critical about the intent for which elites built this (United States) country upon; he works to do what most textbooks and movies fail to do, eliminate historical heroification of dead white men.

H/T: Mark Elrod


65 thoughts on “I Am Hussein Too

  1. “A constitution has been acquired which, though neither of us think perfect, yet both consider as competent to render our fellow-citizens the happiest and the securest on whom the sun has ever shone.” – Thomas Jefferson (dead white man) in a letter to John Adams (another dead white man), 1813

    Educated, successful (and probably wealthy) people helped make the Constitution? (Stunner!) They were all white guys at the time? (Surprising!) They wanted to protect EVERYONE’S wealth and property from being summarily taken by a government or monarchy? (Oligarchy!) The framers were imperfect human beings influenced by life experience and their social environment, thus one of the most successful constitutions in human history should be considered as merely a monetary protection ploy? (Good to know!)

    The next video in my Netflix queue: The framers of the Constitution transported to 2008, listening to a poor, uneducated white woman rambling on about a successful, black man running for President of the United States. Five stars!

    Regarding the dangers of the bright and not-so-bright in our representative republic: the key to keeping educated politicians from gaming the system is having equally educated voters.

  2. This video disgusts me almost as much as the thought of this woman in front of an eSlate. At least she is a Hillary supporter…that came as a surprise.

  3. Okay, blaming the framers for not having democratic ideas is ridiculous. This country was meant to be a REPUBLIC not a democracy. Questioning a republicans democratic ideals is an oxymoron.

    And also Mr. Carson, excuse me for being disrespectful, but someone like you who believes in the middle and lower classes as being the base of our society should in no way be insulting the “uneducated” (although they are in some cases) lower class. (in reference to your response to Dillon’s post.

    And furthermore, you of all people who I’ve heard several times speaking against racism is refering to our framers, God bless their souls, as “dead white men”. Sir that sickens me. (please diregard this paragraph if you were simply stating his opinion instead of agreeing with him and understand that I am bringing up arguments not attacking you personally)

    I also find it a little strange that an Obama supporter would be talking down to elitists. That just makes me laugh.

    I hold nothing against you personally sir. I hold you in the highest respect, but that respect is challenged when I see you contradict yourself.

  4. Thou dost cling to McCain’s words too much.
    Do your research about McCain before claiming Obama is an elitist (if that is what you were doing, if not I apologize for the misunderstanding).

    I agree with Hoftstadter and Carson for that matter. Our country was based on the ideals of white elitist men, looking to further their political, social, and economic power. Although this is the case, some of the elitist things put into place such as the electoral college, help keep mobocracy out of the United States. Oh, and having democratic ideals doesn’t necessarily make it a democracy. It just means that they had some democratic ideals in their planing. Is John McCain, the original maverick, a liberal for voting against some republicans. No. Hope that enlightens you on that subject.

    Oh, and Carson correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that Carson wasn’t insulting the uneducated. He was criticizing ignorance, not to mention the extreme racist archaic views that this witless woman holds.

    Finally… I assure you.. and if I’m wrong about this assumption then you can hold me accountable.. but do you really believe Carson is being a bigot when he refers to the founding fathers as “dead, white men?” I think there is a place for humor in this, and we need to take it as such

  5. Pardon me for being white.
    Eddie this is offensive.
    What would you do? Get rid of the Constitution? I’m not sure I get your point. What country has a better system of government than the United States. You *****(edited) about how this country is founded and offer no alternatives? Is Barack Obama going to change the nation and create “economic justice”? You need to pull your head out of the Communist Manifesto and quit thinking that everything has to do with class and race.
    I hope you had a good laugh at the great unwashed.

  6. Sam Driver,
    I do not quote Sen. Mccain, or not intentionally. If I do it is only because I believe he is correct. Blame me for that if you can. I do admit I made some mistakes in my assumptions. You are right and I apologize. However I agree with Mr. Brown that this is offensive and Mr. Carson has his head too far into the communist manifesto. Again no offense to you Mr. Carson. And I take back NOTHING in my regard Mr. Obama.

  7. Josh – Carson was not insulting the “uneducated.” He was stating that this woman is stupid, and she obviously is. Just listen to her…BAY-RACK OBAMA is an AY-RAB. There is no way you can argue that this woman is even remotely intelligent.

    I am also having trouble finding the basis for your disgust at Carson saying “dead white men.” It is a fact – the framers were white, they were men, and they are now dead. What is the problem?

    Also, I suggest you look up the definition of “elitist” in a dictionary. I already have. “Elitist – n. a person who believes that a system or society should be ruled or dominated by an elite.” Barack Obama is not an elitist; he does not believe that the United States of America should be dominated by an elite. Unfortunately, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and the like have all distorted mainstream America’s understanding of elitism. The conservative media believes that Barack Obama is an elitist just because he is a strong orator and went to Harvard. Intellectualism and elitism are not the same thing.

  8. “You need to pull your head out of the Communist Manifesto and quit thinking that everything has to do with class and race.”

    “You are supposed to be a Christian educator, not a promoter of Marxist propaganda.”

    Communism and Marxism are not the same thing. Being a Marxist does not make Carson a communist.

  9. I am soooooo glad her vote doesn’t count. Democracies are just another form of despotism shrouded under the cloak of majority rule. Our founding fathers were smart in creating a republic, not selfish.

    And seriously are we going to bring up the whole Christian educator argument here again?
    Carson is an educator that happens to teach at a Christian school… if you change the order of those things then you might as well just not call him an educator.

  10. @Jim Brown

    Please, please, PLEASE tell me how Carson putting his middle name as ‘Hussein’ makes him a promoter of Marxist propaganda? If you believe Obama to be a socialist, communist, pinko, or whatever, you’re just as bad as the woman in the video.

    And you’re strawman most certainly fails. In no way does Carson state that the nullification of the Constitution would be a positive action. Merely is he stating that the heroification of the framers is far too overrated. What would offering an alternative do to the already solidified base that is America? There ARE no alternatives.

    Again, nowhere does Carson mention Obama. Oh dear. Apparently you don’t get his point.

  11. wow jim. i think hofstadter wrote his book just for people as narrow-minded as you are. even if there is a shred of validity in your argument, what would you propose carson do- teach the history of the united states as it was and is, or tell everyone that everything will be ok and read a story from the children’s bible all day?

  12. I find it odd that the trend undertaken by the founding fathers continues on even today in people with the democratic mindset. Enough cards have been turned over that the story of today’s economic crisis is now clear. The economic history books will describe this episode in simple and understandable terms: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac exploded, and many bystanders were injured in the blast, some fatally.

    Fannie and Freddie did this by becoming a key enabler of the mortgage crisis. They fueled Wall Street’s efforts to protect subprime loans by becoming the primary customer of all AAA-rated subprime-mortgage pools. In addition, they held an enormous portfolio of mortgages themselves. In the times that Fannie and Freddie couldn’t make the market, they became the market. Over the years, it added up to an enormous obligation. As of last June, Fannie alone owned or guaranteed more than $388 billion in high-risk mortgage investments. Their large presence created an environment within which even mortgage-backed securities assembled by others could find a ready home. The problem was that the trillions of dollars in play were only low-risk investments if real estate prices continued to rise. Once they began to fall, the entire house of cards came down with them.

    Take away Fannie and Freddie, or regulate them more wisely, and it’s hard to imagine how these highly liquid markets would ever have emerged. This whole mess would never have happened. It is easy to identify the historical turning point that marked the beginning of the end. Back in 2005, Fannie and Freddie were, after years of dominating Washington, on the ropes. They were enmeshed in accounting scandals that led to turnover at the top. At one telling moment in late 2004, captured in an article by my American Enterprise Institute colleague Peter Wallison, the Securities and Exchange Comiission’s chief accountant told disgraced Fannie Mae chief Franklin Raines that Fannie’s position on the relevant accounting issue was not even “on the page” of allowable interpretations. Then legislative momentum emerged for an attempt to create a “world-class regulator” that would oversee the pair more like banks, imposing strict requirements on their ability to take excessive risks. Politicians who previously had associated themselves proudly with the two accounting scoundrals were less eager to be associated with them.

    The clear gravity of the situation pushed the legislation forward. Some might say the current mess couldn’t be foreseen, yet in 2005 Alan Greenspan told Congress how urgent it was for it to act in the clearest possible terms: If Fannie and Freddie “continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road,” he said. “We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.” What happened next was extraordinary. For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.

    If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, a blizzard of terrible mortgage paper fluttered out of the Fannie and Freddie clouds, burying many of our oldest and most venerable institutions. Without their checkbooks keeping the market liquid and buying up excess supply, the market would likely have not existed. But the bill didn’t become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn’t even get the Senate to vote on the matter. That such a reckless political stand could have been taken by the Democrats was obscene even then. Wallison wrote at the time: “It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit. The Democrats and the few Republicans who oppose portfolio limitations could not possibly do so if their constituents understood what they were doing.”

    Now that the collapse has occurred, the roadblock built by Senate Democrats in 2005 is unforgivable. Many who opposed the bill doubtlessly did so for honorable reasons. Fannie and Freddie provided mounds of materials defending their practices. Perhaps some found their propaganda convincing. But we now know that many of the senators who protected Fannie and Freddie, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd, have received mind-boggling levels of financial support from them over the years. Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000. Clinton, the 12th-ranked recipient of Fannie and Freddie PAC and employee contributions, has received more than $75,000 from the two enterprises and their employees. The private profit found its way back to the senators who killed the fix. There has been a lot of talk about who is to blame for this crisis. A look back at the story of 2005 makes the answer pretty clear.

    Oh, and there is one little footnote to the story that’s worth keeping in mind while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4: Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess. In short, the entire economic crisis today has it’s roots in one common denominator, the two-to-three years since the democrats took control of Congress.

  13. I mean in regards to the people of higher status trying to safeguard their own holdings and using the lower classes as a means to do that by creating a sense that all of the new policies that they are trying to enact are going to help those lower class citizens when in actuality those citizens will only be hurt by those new regulations. 🙂

  14. – Hofstadter’s book is worth discussing as another perspective on the men that helped shape our country. Disagree with the book? Fine, but keep in mind Carson is a well-mannered host on HIS blog. Defend your point of view with logic and good humor.

    – Conservatives do not find Obama’s intelligence elitist. They find comments like “they cling to religion and guns” to be elitist.

    – I had to laugh as partway into the video, the guy on the back of the ATV decides it might be a good idea to cover his face.

  15. Dillon- I’m a bit confused as to how having an accent or mispronouncing words makes one an idiot. I’ve got a Southern accent and while a lot of things about me are true, the fact that I’m an idiot is not one of them. I also have an inability to pronounce many Asian names correctly due to differences in language and dialect; does that make me an idiot? I’m not saying that she’s not an idiot, but I would certainly hate anyone to show three minutes of footage about me to the entire world and then let everyone decide on my intellect. There are many three minute segments of my life that I would be loathe to allow the world to see and perhaps this woman feels the same way. You should probably also feel the same way.

  16. Patrick – you have a colleague in the American Enterprise Institute? Next time, when you copy and paste an article, quote it. Not that the economics lesson was relevant, anyway.

    Kristi – I understand your point. But, I do not think that knowing when to use a long a versus a short a has anything to do with accent. This poor womans lack of education is not really her fault, but that is for another day.

  17. You called her stupid. You didn’t call her uneducated, and the two are completely different things. Also, pronunciation of words has great deal to with accents. I take longer to say a lot of words than my Northern counterparts because of my accent. They come out sounding differently because of my accent. That’s what an accent does: it changes how you say words. I’m appalled at everyone making judgments about this poor woman when you’ve seen a three minute video clip of her life. What I did that about all of you? What if you did that about me? We would probably all hate each other, especially given some of the three minute segments that I know are in my life.

  18. Kristi, I completley agree with you. I have said many things that I am ashamed of, and I would be horrified if videos of me saying these things ended up in YouTube.

    However, as much as I hate to admit it, I have a Texas accent. Yet, since I have watched the news and completed kindergarten, I know to pronounce both Barack and Arab. I would imagine that you do too. In my opinion, this woman’s repeated incorrect pronunciation of these words proves that she is not only uneducated, but ignorant and stupid.

  19. President Bush I knew how to pronounce Sadaam, but we all thought he was so clever for mispronouncing it in a way that was derogatory to him. Perhaps it’s the same thing for this lady. I know that when I don’t like something or someone I try to make it sound as stupid as possible. Or, I suppose it’s possible that President Bush I was uneducated, ignorant and stupid.

  20. Fair enough, I have done the same thing before.

    Although, I do think that President Bush is uneducated, ignorant and stupid. But, that is just me…

  21. Dillon- Why is it that when you copy and paste from one source, it’s called plagiarism but when you copy and paste from many sources it is called research? 🙂 While i did get much of the content and ideas from my good friend Kevin Hassett, i did nothing more than quote a source that I endorse (in the same way that Carson does with Hofstader) and interject my own ideas. And I do believe that it was a very relevant comment because the same philosophy applies today where the rich delegates and politicians are trying to protect their own wealth and using the lower classes as a means to do so.

    Follow me on this for a second. Obama proposes more than 1 trillion dollars in new taxes for all people in the top 5% of the nation. Do the math, that’s 15 million people which means that each of those individuals will have to make up about 70,000 dollars extra in taxes each year. Now consider that some of those people were part of single income households where someone will have to pay for their partners, that’s 140,000 dollars. Now consider that some of those may be children. In the best of circumstances, a single income family would ONLY see a tax increase of 210,000 dollars. I know he’ll leave Iraq which gives us an extra 120 billion per year and he will go through the tax code and eliminate all extraneous costs. Guess what, the bible (the guide to my life) is 774,746 words in length and Obama hasn’t even read it all. The tax code is over 7 million words in length.By the time he finished reading it, his term in office would be far past over. Face it, Obama’s only appeal is that he’s a good liar to the American People.

  22. Patrick,

    You are not the only one who occasionally reads Bloomberg.


    You did not “interject your own ideas.” You typed two of your own sentences, and then copied and pasted an entire article. Then, you failed to both quote the article and give credit to the author, and you altered the original formatting of the article. One could almost venture to say that you were attempting to pass this article off as your own work.

    As far as your tax lesson goes, I do not really understand your point. First of all, if you are one of the 15 million richest people in this country, $210,000 is nothing. Also, you take the words of politicians to literally. Barack Obama does not literally mean he will personally go through the tax code. But, he will use some of the 295,859,883 people employed by our government to do it for him. When John McCain claims that he will go through the entire federal budget, do you think he means that he will personally go through the entire federal budget?

    Last night, I was reading The Political Cartel, a great blog that I found through this one. Since the Bible is “the guide to your life,” I suggest you read this article. You might like it…


  23. Dillion, I don’t think in any way that this women was even remotely intelligent. And I believe that in my last post I apologized for my assumptions, which I think were the result of my obvious misinterpretation of what Mr. Carson was saying. You have to understand that it was late and I was distracted when I made my first comment.

  24. Oh and jonothan magiera. Sen. Obama is a socialist. Through his economic policies it is clear that he has very socialist beliefs. He believes in universal healthcare, that is also a very SOCIALIST idea.

  25. Well, apparently the American people like Obama, since when does a name matter about how the person is? It is wrong to just to judge by their name. SO WHAT HE HAS AN ARAB NAME, it does not mean he is terrorist or something. Today not all Muslims are terroists or all terrorists are not Muslims. from my point of view this crap about all people who have arab names similar to those of Islamic Terrorists, who i am ashamed to call Muslims, or that sounds like a name sounding like a terrorists name.

  26. I am one who believes in the masses participating in the political processes; however, I have found not only those who are not well versed to be ignorant, but many who are quasi educated to be just as bad as it relates to politics. People watch too much TV on this stuff and do not read enough to know. This lady is clearly a biggot.

    Driver — Your interpretation of my view is very correct

    Jim Brown — Did you study the same history that I did? What courses and research in methods and historiography did you take, write and read? Those of us who are a part of my elite group knows and understand that you do not study history without injecting or at least looking at the approaches of Darwin, Hobbes, Locke, or Marx. Come on brother you are too educated to think this way. I will leave Marx’s work once you at least read a book about or from him. Pay attention: Classic historical studies and analysis draws from the complex elements of class and race. I love you brother but I had to delete one of your comments.

  27. Dillon-I used the bible as a gauge for people to understand how many words that actually is. So what if it is a guide to my life (i admit that it was a bit extraneous)? From previous posts, i hardly think that anyone on this blog hasn’t already gained that bit of information about me from previous posts. And about the $210,000, lets be realistic, only 9.4 million people in the United states are worth in excess of $1,000,000. What about the extra 5.6 who will also have to make up at least the $70,000 per person. And consider this, it is not at all impossible for someone to become a millionaire within 10 years on a salary of about $110,000 per year or less as long as they practice the same “frugality” as those who make far less. Those people would be paying more in taxes than they were actually generating for their families. You speak as if everyone in the top five percent of society were billionaires when that certainly is not the case.

    And what makes you think that Obama and Biden actually care for the lower classes anyway? In 2002, Obama made $259,000 as a senator. You know what his charitable givings were? $1050. In 2006, Obama made about $1,000,000 and you know what his charitable givings were then? about $60,000. Obama is all about politics. He doesn’t care about you, me, or anybody else but himself, his family, and his political allies and that will surely prove true if he is allowed a place in office. Biden’s track record is even worse. He brought in over $2,400,000 dollars over the past ten years. You know what his charitable givings were over that time period? about $3,000 dollars. I gave more than that last year and I’m only 16 years old! He cares as much about the lower class as he would about a piece of dust on his shoulder. Obama and Biden are lying about their care for the lower class and in the end, everybody will be taxed, not just the rich because it is logistically impossible that over a trillion dollars in new taxes can be made up by a mere 15 million people.

    Oh, and to keep you from getting your pantyhose all balled up again, I got my charity giving information from.


  28. BRzlfan1012, I am so glad you said that. I myself am not an Obama supporter, but it really bugs me when people judge him by his name. After all Obama did predict “they’re gonna tell you I have a funny name”. Even if his remark was said to gain sympathy and bring race into the picture, which I firmly believe he did on purpose so don’t argue with me on it because I will not respond, he was wise to foresee peoples arguments.

  29. ORLY?

    Universal healthcare is a very socialist idea? So EVERY other developed nation in the world is socialist?

    Maybe I am misinformed, maybe I am ignorant. Please enlighten me in telling me which one of Obama’s policies are socialist.

    Obama is not socialist enough for me. I do believe I know what socialism is, and socialist he certainly is not.

    And good job Dillon, I like your arguments. Patrick, the whole “Obama/Biden don’t give enough to charity” thing as been debunked. Sorry. Try again.

  30. Explain yourself Magiera. I don’t quite understand how you might think that the Charity point has been debunked.

  31. How? Because first of all, not everyone receives tax exemptions when giving to charity. That somewhat defeats the purpose of the word “charity,” does it not? That is giving someone an incentive other than good will to be charitable. Not everyone has to publicly announce their alms giving.

    And I think Obama does care for the poor. His early position in Chicago was community organizer, so I guarantee he’s done a LOT more for the underprivileged than many people. Oh wait, I forgot; the great moral beacon that is the GOP likes to make fun of community organizers. ‘scuse me, I forgot.

  32. lol. I must admit that i do enjoy your dry wit Jon. But I must disagree about the purpose of Charity. Not everybody gives because they don’t want to pay taxes. People should, and some do, give because it is the right thing to do. Not because there is something that we are going to receive in return, but because it is our duty as Christians to use whatever resources God has so graciously given us to create more believers in him. I know, I know, I’m playing the Christianity card again and that doesn’t apply to everyone. Whatever, I’m just speaking (or writing :)) my beliefs.

  33. Patrick,

    Do you know why John McCain’s tax returns say that he gave an average of 28 percent of his money to charity in 2006 and 2007? His PR geniuses devised a great plan for him; he donates all of the royalties from his books to charity. Thus, on paper, it looks like McCain is the most generous man in America. If you do not count these royalties, McCain donated 11.27% to charity in 2007 and 2007. While that is nearly twice as much as Obama donated to charity over those two years, McCain does not have to pay for any living expenses, such as the mortgages on his ten (is that right? I lose count) houses. Cyndi McCain, the woman of $5,000 dresses, made $6,066,431 in 2006.

    Plus, Jon is right – not everyone receives tax exemptions when giving to charity.

    It is not necessary for you to cite your sources; this is a blog, not a research paper. I “had my pantyhose balled up” because you copied and pasted an entire article without quoting or citing it and attempted to pass it off as your own thought.

  34. Actually, your count is wrong. McCain doesn’t own any of the houses that he and his wife live in. They are all under the name of Cindy McCain and their children. Who cares if she has done really well for herself as an Anheuser-Busch Owner. And when exactly did it become against the law for someone to live the American dream anyway. I see the Obama vs. the Citizens crisis in much the same way that I view the Kyoto Protocols. Countries like the US have to make up the difference for all of the pollution that overpopulated 3rd world countries like China and Mexico create every year. Case and point, Obama is fine with raising taxes and being reckless with our money as long as it doesn’t infringe on his own income. And i never intended to pass off what my colleague Kevin Hassett as my own work. You most likely know what is said about the word “assume”

  35. I’ll leave this to you and the rest of the proletariate.
    I’m just tired of hearing people moan about the instituional racism and inhertent unfairness of this country. People act like its a sin or a surprise that people protect their own self interest and property from being confiscated by “the masses”.
    So what if wealty white people made this country? I’m glad they did.
    I don’t like the term WASP. I see it as degrading.
    “Herofication” of white people?
    You are acting like this is cutting edge stuff. Its more difficult to find a book written in the last 40 years that DOESN’T call the Founders racist, elitist pigs that just don’t want to pay their taxes. That’s why the few books that come out that offer a balanced view are so noteworthy.
    I think historians/teachers are just supposed to present the facts and let student think for themselves. (Yes children I’m a teacher.)
    I guess I’ll continue to “cling to my guns and religion” (if I owned a gun) and hope for the best.
    I’m truly sorry you feel you live in a nation where they entire system from its very roots has been stacked against you. I guess you can continue to point out the negatives as is your right, but I guess I’m just more of a glass-half-full kind of person. My students won’t be ignorant of the problems that America has faced, but they will know that we have overcome those obsticles as best we can. All kinds of people have made that happen. Race/sex/victim studies have never been my cup of tea. Maybe if you DID focus more on the sacrifices (read wars) that this nation has made to overcome these obstacles maybe your perspective would be different. Freedom isn’t free. I know its bumper-stickery sounding but its true.
    As for pulling down my other post. I guess its your right to censor me here. It just bugs me to no end that you feel like you have to identify yourself so closly with Obama. YOUR value is not tied to HIM. It just seems very strange to me. If the nation does not choose him it doesn’t mean anything other that we (me) have rejected his positions on the issues and his plans to “change” the country. We don’t need to vote for Obama to prove something about ourselves as a nation.

  36. “McCain doesn’t own any of the houses that he and his wife live in. ”

    That is my point. John McCain does not have to pay for a house. Therefore, he can donate more money to charity that Barack Obama, who has to support a family. I never said it was wrong to live the American dream; I believe that Barack Obama is living the “American dream.” Speaking of American, I will pretend that you did not just call China, the most populous country in the world with the second largest economy in the world, a third world country.

    Last time I checked, raising taxes to improve our country’s failing education system, crumbling infrastructure, and corrupt health care system is in no way “being reckless with our money.”

    By the way, you and Kevin Hassett are not colleagues. Maybe you are, but I am assuming that you are neither a member of the AEI nor have a part time job with Bloomberg.

    Ooops, I forgot that I should not assume things.

  37. im not saying that because a country has universal healthcare it means theyre socialist im saying its a very socialist idea.

  38. more-so with my father who has actually had short conversations with him when we donated to Bush’s campaign rather than me who was too young to know much about who I was meeting, but you get the picture. Maybe I misspoke by calling him a colleague, sorry if you got my meaning wrong.

  39. You don’t have to agree with me but here it is. Universal healthcare is a good idea, but, one it puts too much power in the hands of the governments and two its terribly impractical. I mean Dillon was dead on when he said we had a corrupt health care system. Look what the government did with that. The FDA has even gone far enough to suspend research on things that might jepordise their drug sales. They’ve done what this article claims that the founding fathers did. (which by the way is ridiculous)

  40. I would also like to know if you think, Mr. Carson, that Mr. Hodfstater (excuse me if its misspelled)
    is correct in regards to why the framers created our so called “oligarchy”

  41. Which is why an effective means of healthcare must be developed. You speak in too general terms; again, every other developed nation but the US has a system of universal healthcare. I know because I’ve been a part of about 3. By no means does the government have too much power due to this. Yes, it does happen, but then again is there any kind of government that is entirely pure?

    But I’m still waiting for a response to why Obama is a socialist…

  42. I believe that our health care system is corrupt because it is controlled by HMOs and PPOs that double as Fortune 500 companies. The CEO of Cigna (a large HMO based out of Philadelphia), Edward Hanway, makes 30 million dollars per year. Yet, 47 million Americans are uninsured and the average family of four pays $1,000 per month for health insurance that often proves quite ineffective. That, my friends, is disgusting.

  43. First, in reference to Jim. The thing that I love most about history is its variety of interpretations. Carson focuses on discrimination and many negatives, but do not fool yourself into thinking that is his entire focus. He, as an educator, reserves the right to give a different interpretation of the facts. Keep in mind though, Carson lets his students think for themselves just as you do. If they want to align themselves with any of his views, that is there choice.

    Second, Patrick Ryan. You plagiarized. End of discussion. Don’t attempt to cover it up by saying he is a “colleague” or a “family friend.” It just gets aggravating and leads the conversation astray, just like that entire copied and pasted article that you entered into the blog.

    Third, Josh Brandt. Obama is not a socialist. Not at all. I completely agree with Jon in that respect. Take note I am neither an Obama or a McCain supporter. I focus on issues. So do not think that my views are liberally biased.

    Oh, and Dillon. Thank you for bringing some very intelligent, ORIGINAL thoughts into this discussion. It’s a breath of fresh air.

  44. For some reason, I find that Republicans frequently confuse “Democrat” and “Socialist,” which is odd, considering that I have not heard too many Democrats confuse “Republican” and “Fascist.” Nonetheless, I am with Jon in that I would love to hear an explanation from one of the many passionate Republicans around here as to why Obama is a Socialist.

    Sam, you are very welcome. Thanks for the compliment. Upon discovering this blog, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that there were a few intelligent students that shared my beliefs in the conservative wasteland that is our school. I am looking forward to having the privilege of being taught by Carson next year when I take APUSH.

  45. Dillon,

    Let me second Driver’s point. I have heard very good things from Metty about your ability to think and analyze. She is right.

    Driver — Thanks. That is my goal. I refuse to tell people what conclusions to draw, just how to think and reflect on the process. As it relates to this lady, boy she should have had one of my classes.

    As for the socialist question:

    Most Americans believe in some form of governmental help. If not, there would be a lot of people hurting after Ike of Katrina. Governments are created as an instituitional form ovis its members that contribute to the polity as a way to nurture the development of societal advancement. Most churches do this, but many lack the resources and wealth to help. And, we discover at times that too often they (some) will vanish when society needs them the most.

  46. I glanced over a comment that said, “I can’t believe they used the N word 3 times.” I can’t believe that people are not aware of the still present racism in our society, especially in places such as the deep south. These racist tendencies are both brought up by the past by slavery in the south of colonial times, and in the present with the lack of a proper education clearly portrayed by the characters in this video.

    Anyways, on to more important issues brought up by this video. Such as the racism toward Arabs or AKA “A-rabs” and the identification of this race by their name such as Barak, Hussein, Obama, Saddam, and Muhammad, even though these names are commonly found in the Middle East and even elsewhere. Correct me if I’m wrong but many of these are sir names and the name Muhammad is the most used name in the world. The second part in this generalization is that since they have this name, it automatically implies that they are of middle eastern descent. This implied background therefore categorizes you into a extremist group such as terrorists.

    This however is a very ironic situation because of the fact our culture looks past strange names such as Chad Johnson, “Chad Ocho Cino”, or my favorite, Frank Zappa’s daughter, “Moon Unit”. Despite these odd names we cannot accept names commonly found in the Middle East. Saying all of this I would never change my middle name to Hussein. Purely for the fact it would not flow with the rest of my name.

    The final point is that a presidential candidate, or anyone for that matter, should not be judged by their name but by the policies or change they endorse. This name based judgment is only but another avenue to display your ignorance and lack of a proper education.

  47. Dillon,

    I must agree with Driver, Magiera, and Mr. Carson on this one, your are quite an intelligent kid. It is not often that people have kept me on my toes but you certainly called a pretty big bluff on me (you ever considered taking up poker? I need a good partner) :). If I had more time, i would answer your question on Obama and socialism but I did feel that i needed to congratulate you on a job well done.

  48. I seem to have arrived at this party too late, but I felt I had to comment on one thing. The excerpt below, written by Jim Brown, is very disturbing to me. I can’t believe an educated man would actually write it.

    ***I’m truly sorry you feel you live in a nation where they entire system from its very roots has been stacked against you. I guess you can continue to point out the negatives as is your right, but I guess I’m just more of a glass-half-full kind of person.***

    I won’t argue, because there’s no point. I’m just amazed that it was written by an intellectual.

    Oh, and Dillon: Wow! I’m completely impressed by your comments, here and in the Sundown Towns post. I wish I had been so thorough and articulate when I was your age. Heck, I wish I could be so thorough and articulate now!

  49. Dear Friends,

    It saddens me that our Government process has come to this. Unfortunately, America stands for all- even the ignorant. If we begin to choose those who can voice an opinion and those who cannot, we lose the most important right of all. Speak up all, have a voice. Apathy only lessens our chance for freedom; even when we do not like the words.


  50. I guess what really set me off was the video. You can hear people egging this poor woman on to say more wild things. They are making fun of her and it seems like the purpose of posting it here was to make fun of people who oppose Obama as ignorant rednecks. Eddie is this the way you see people who disagree with you politicly? I don’t want to vote for Obama partialy for reasons that she was trying her best to articulate. Is this the way you really see me?? I was honestly hurt and it made me very angry. I’m sorry I got mad at you and took it out on you here.

  51. Jim Brown – do you not support Barack Obama because he is Black and has a name that is of Middle Eastern/Arabic origin? Those are the reasons that this woman was “trying her best to articulate.” I also do not recall Carson claiming that “people who suppose Obama are ignorant rednecks.” Correct me if I am wrong.

  52. Dillon,

    I typically don’t speak for Jim … especially in a situation like this … where he either needs to defend his statements or apologize, because I can’t do either … but I can assure you that his differences with Obama are that Jim truly believes that in small government, etc. and not because of the fact that Obama is black and Jim understands that Obama is not from the Middle East. The main points of his post were to point out that this woman was just plain pitiful, the blog piece evoked an emotional, irrational response of hurt and anger from Jim, and he was sorry that he posted it. Jim and Eddie are friends. Unfortunately, sometimes even the best people really blow it and have a completely emotional, unreasoned response to something. What’s even worse is when they have it in a public place …and now, because this is a blog, they have it in writing. Apologizing is difficult. Jim’s apology is not perfect … but that is all it is meant to be. It is not meant to be a term paper or legal document … Jim was just letting Eddie know why he had the emotional response. He didn’t say that that the ACTUAL purpose of the blog was to say that everyone who opposes Obama is a redneck … it just seemed that way … at least to him. This may seem like splitting hairs, but I think in the context of an apology it makes sense. So, yes, Jim ranted. He went way over the line and he apologized. That is what people … even good, well-meaning people have to do every now and then.

    There have been several comments on other blog pieces how HCHS ignore the sin anger (vs. homosexuality/abortion, etc) lately. Part of why so many Christian adults have such a hard time preaching about it is because they know they still struggle with it from time to time … and that is what you have seen. It is embarrassing to lose your temper at a friend in a public forum. It is embarrassing to come back and apologize and explain what hurt you. But, that is what happened.

    So, please forgive Jim if his apology isn’t perfect … he felt like it needed to take place in the comment section of the blog sense that is where the offense took place … but I think he and Eddie should get together at Captain Tom’s or somewhere and I will buy dinner just so they can reconcile and be friends again! Because this has been killing me!

    ~Staci Brown

  53. Captn. Tom’s sounds great here. I have not been in a while. I leave town for El Paso tomorrow to conduct a history seminar at a community college tomorrow. It is cool. I was never all that upset about this. Better yet, I understand the comment, that is why I did not delete it. I had to delete the other one for reasons related to my post titled :My Blog” which I have explained to you Staci.

  54. The present state of the politics of the United States has become quite distasteful. It disturbs me that politics today is based more upon deception of the ignorant/uninformed and the selfish agendas designed for the sole purpose of furthering the goals of a very select number of people rather than the entire populace of the country. Is not this strikingly contradictory with the democratic and republican values Americans are so quick to tout and publicize at every opportunity?

    Perhaps politics has always been this way. After all, general human nature remains relatively the same regardless of what era. I believe Mark Twain expresses this in a comical yet surprisingly true way: “The political and commercial morals of the United States are not merely food for laughter, they are an entire banquet.” (Dillon and Patrick – please note the use of quotation marks).

    In another quote, Twain remarks, “Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.” It is no doubt upsetting that after the Presidential debates it is necessary to run a fact check.

    The unparalleled state of luxury in the United States and the subsequent unparalleled state of corruption in morals and government, coupled with the extremely high levels of outsourcing due to American pride and vanity, is strongly indicative of the fall of Rome. While I am not attempting to suggest extremist views about the imminent fall of the U.S., I am trying to promote the awareness of our current state and an actual confrontation of said corruption, rather than the passive ignorance it seems to be met with so commonly today.

    Not to belabor the Mark Twain quotes – this is my last one: “It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them.”

    It seems rudely ironic that people today choose not to apply this “prudence” in light of the fact that for centuries people have been oppressed and killed just to maintain even the faintest bit of hope that these freedoms we enjoy here in America might one day be achieved and practiced.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s