Daily Archives: November 2, 2011

As you’ve doubtless noted the meme “High-Tech Lynching” has become part of the “Mainstream” once more.
Therefore it’s only proper to point out what an Actual Lynching is like.


lynch 2

Let’s go to the Wiki.

“Lynching is an extrajudicial execution carried out by a mob, often by hanging, but also by burning at the stake or shooting, in order to punish an alleged transgressor, or to intimidate, control, or otherwise manipulate a population of people. It is related to other means of social control that arise in communities, such as charivari, riding the rail, and tarring and feathering. Lynchings have been more frequent in times of social and economic tension, and have often been the means used by the politically dominant population to oppress social challengers.

Violence in the United States against African Americans, especially in the South, rose in the aftermath of the Civil War, after slavery had been abolished and recently freed black men were given the right to vote. Violence rose even more at the end of the century, after southern white Democrats regained their political power in the South in the 1870s. States passed new constitutions or legislation which effectively disfranchised most blacks and many poor whites, established segregation of public facilities by race, and separated blacks from common public life and facilities. Nearly 3,500 African Americans were lynched in the United States between 1882 and 1968, mostly from 1882 to 1920″

But this is not a practice entirely consinged to history as witness by the lynching of James Byrd Jr.


“an African-American who was murdered by three white men, asserted to be white supremacists, during a racially motivated crime in Jasper, Texas, on June 7, 1998. Shawn Berry, Lawrence Brewer, and John King dragged Byrd behind a pick-up truck along an asphalt road after they wrapped a heavy logging chain around his ankles. Byrd was pulled along for about three miles as the truck swerved from side to side.

Byrd, who remained conscious throughout most of the ordeal, was killed when his body hit the edge of a culvert, severing his right arm and head. The murderers drove on for another mile before dumping his torso in front of an African-American cemetery in Jasper. Byrd’s lynching-by-dragging gave impetus to passage of a Texas hate crimes law. It later led to the federal October 22, 2009 Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, commonly known as the Matthew Shepard Act. President Barack Obama signed the bill into law on October 28, 2009.

Lawrence Brewer was executed by lethal injection for this crime by the state of Texas on September 21, 2011. King remains on Texas’ death row while appeals are pending, while Berry was sentenced to life imprisonment.

These historical facts are barely touched on by John Dickerson in Slate in his latest column on the Herman Cain Dog and Pony Show:

“Herman Cain’s stump speech starts out talking about a nation in crisis. Now he has a campaign in one. Responding to reports about his history of sexual harassment claims, he has offered conflicting and confusing stories. The candidate known for his simplicity has fallen into lawyerly hairsplitting.
Conservatives almost immediately denounced the story as a “high-tech lynching,” the same phrase Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas (Cain’s model) used to characterize his treatment during his 1991 confirmation hearings. The expression immediately signals to partisans which setting to choose for their outrage dial. All the same, the characterization is unfair to Thomas and lets Cain off the hook.”

As those of us who don’t work for the “Mainstream” are well aware, Clairence Thomas (seen here with his trophy wife)


was decidedly unfair to one Anita Hill


for reasons which Dickerson like all “Mianstream” cogs continues to obfuscate.

“Leave aside questions of whether the phrase “high-tech lynching” is accurate or appropriate. For our purposes, the relevant details are these: Thomas was hit with surprise allegations about sexual harassment in the middle of his confirmation hearings in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. His former colleague Anita Hill’s allegations were new, explosive, and adjudicated by a committee unequipped for the task. It all happened under the bright lights of the hearing room, where Thomas—not a public figure or politician—had to defend himself in the middle of the circus.”

Poor defenseless baby.

“The charges against Cain were handled in a far more professional manner. While Cain was chief executive of the National Restaurant Association, in at least two cases, according to Politico’s reporting and that of other news organizations, women came forward with complaints. Cain’s issue was adjudicated by lawyers and a human-resources department whose purpose, in part, is to handle these kinds of issues (if for no other reason than after the Thomas hearings every organization updated its HR policies on sexual harassment). Politics, presumably, were not involved.”

Politics is always involved.

“Hill’s story appeared in the paper, catching Thomas off guard.”

Yeah right. That remark about Hill’s pubic hairs being found on his Coke can had totally slipped Clarence’s mind.

“Cain was given 10 days to respond to questions about the matter before it was made public. Politico wasn’t fishing—tell us anything wrong you’ve ever done—it was asking questions about a specific legal matter. Unlike Thomas, Cain wasn’t responding to a new accusation; he was being asked for his position on an issue that had already been investigated and resolved. Checks had been cut, even. Taking Cain at his word, perhaps he was only vaguely familiar with the issue when he was first asked about it. But he has a quick memory. In the 24 hours after the Politico story was published, he had a series of detailed recollections.
Is this the most important issue in the campaign? Obviously not.”

Obviously we don’t know yet. There’s more than one woman who filed a complaint against Cain.

“But it is relevant, particularly for a candidate who asks to be judged based on his performance in the private sector. As a political matter, it’s also crucial to Republicans that candidates get a thorough vetting before the general election. No less than Sarah Palin has said so. If only President Obama had gotten this kind of teeth-cleaning! “

Oh really? Any complaints filed against Obama we haven’t been informed of?




“Tuesday at a National Journal forum, Rick Santorum’s campaign manager said Cain’s “answers changed during the day,” as he sought to explain the harassment question, and he called on the Cain campaign to be “forthcoming so that you are vetted.”
In the Clarence Thomas matter, it was clear from the way the Hill allegations surfaced—in the middle of a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing—that they were not a part of the regular process.”

You don’t say. The “Normal Process” would be to pay off the offended party — as Cain did.

“The same can’t be said for a presidential campaign. Cain’s knee-jerk defenders act as if this kind of story is sullying the meticulous theater of reason known as a Presidential Campaign.”

Actually it’s made it more entertaining — as witnessed by Ann Coulter’s revival of slavery.

IOW, she’s got Herman on a short leash. And we all know what would happen should he get off it.

“By the standard of presidential campaigns, and this one in particular, it’s pretty natural for candidates to have to face wacky improvised explosions. George W. Bush had to defend the alleged use of subliminal words in his advertising, and a 24-year-old DUI arrest. John McCain tried to put Obama on the hook as a sexist for using the phrase “lipstick on a pig.” Oh, and this campaign one of the former front-runners raised questions about the president’s citizenship.”


“Michele Bachmann was asked at a debate about submitting to her husband if she were president, based on some remarks she’d made years earlier. It was a gotcha question founded, one could argue, on a look-at-these-crazy-Christians reading of the passage she was citing.”

“Cain is being treated no less roughly than Cain treated others. When Rick Perry enjoyed his moment in the beating barrel over a story about a racist word written on a rock at a family hunting camp,”


“Cain was the first rival to criticize him (and Cain, in turn, was criticized for his criticism). That Perry story wasn’t as solid as the one about Cain that he’s now denouncing, and over which conservatives are displaying such umbrage.
Thomas was treated differently than nominees that had come before him (except maybe John Tower). Cain has not been. Rather, he is simply undergoing a process known as “running for president.”

Running in circles is more like it. Like the tiger in that story we all doubtless recall.


But that’s not all we should recall


Now here’s Billie Holiday