Buchanan's xenophobic rhetoric thrills "crowd"

U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), whose narrow 2006 "victory" over Christine Jennings in Florida's 13th District was made possible by the curious disappearance of some 18,000 votes in Jennings' home county, Sarasota, held a campaign rally in wingnut-ridden Manatee County yesterday, attended by an intimate gathering of around 500. Gov. Crist was expected to be there but was unable to travel due to weather.

According to the article, "Buchanan said it was the biggest crowd he'd seen in Sarasota-Manatee." The article did not indicate how many of the 500 were there because they hoped to see the governor.

Five hundred Bradenton-area wingnuts for Buchanan is a big crowd? Even if they all were there because they wanted to see Buchanan (which I doubt), that's laughable. I recently attended a regular ol' luncheon featuring Buchanan's congressional colleague Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) that drew 300, and it wasn't even a particularly special occasion -- plus they all had to pay for the privilege. Vern, I gotta tell ya, 500 in Wingnut Central seeking a free chance to see the governor isn't exactly a ringing endorsement of your campaign, y'know?

But at least Vern came through with predictable xenophobia and racism, which was like red meat to the modest group in attendance:

Hundreds erupted in applause several occasions [sic], but perhaps most loudly when Buchanan said English should be made the official language of the United States.

Yep, typical Republican: when in doubt, fall back on hating the brown people.

Well, don't worry, Vern. With a rematch coming up in November against Jennings, you'll be back home selling cars again in no time. Unless your henchmen find another way to "misplace" thousands of Democratic ballots ...

(cross-posted at Florida Progressive Coalition Blog)

Bush's ghastly supporters are psycho

Wait, I think I read that headline wrong. It actually is How Political Psychology Explains Bush's Ghastly Success. Honest mistake ...

Anyway, in this week's New Republic, John B. Judis explores the psychology of fear-mongering so skillfully deployed by Drunky McStagger and the Bush crime syndicate. He attributes the "irrational" support of Drunky to the fear of death engendered by 9/11, exacerbated (intentionally, of course) by the War on Terra, as studied by psychologists Sheldon Solomon, Jeff Greenberg, and Tom Pyszczynski.

The three scientists examined reactions of people to various rhetorical devices meant to foment xenophobia and jingoism and compared the results from people who received subliminal reminders of mortality with those who did not. Those who subconsciously were reminded of death were far more likely to respond favorably to the jingoistic statements than were those who were not.

Now, watch what happened after 9/11, as the scientists introduced Drunky's own rhetoric to the experiment:

In the Wake of 9/11, [a book the scientists published in] 2003, recounted more than a decade of experiments and speculated on how the public's reaction to the attack-- including heightened religiosity, patriotism, and support for both Bush and his evangelical swagger--could be explained as worldview defense.

The three scholars also began devising experiments to test this theory. The first of these explored whether reminders of September 11 functioned as mortality reminders. In the spring of 2002, the psychologists, along with five colleagues, conducted an experiment at the University of Missouri, where subjects had either "911," "WTC" (for the World Trade Center), or "573" (the area code for Columbia) flashed subliminally between word associations. Afterward, they completed word-fragment tests to see whether thoughts of death were stirring in their unconscious. The psychologists found the same pattern between "911" and "WTC," on the one hand, and "573," on the other, that they had earlier found between "death" and "field." They concluded that reminders of September 11 awakened unconscious mortality thoughts. Later experiments would further confirm this.

They then explored whether Bush's popularity in the years after September 11 stemmed in part from Americans' need for a charismatic figure who could help them overcome these thoughts. Bush's appeal, the psychologists speculated, lay "in his image as a protective shield against death, armed with high-tech weaponry, patriotic rhetoric, and the resolute invocation of doing God's will to rid the world of evil.' " In 2002, the psychologists, aided by two colleagues, conducted an experiment at Brooklyn College that showed that mortality reminders dramatically enhanced the appeal of a hypothetical candidate who told voters, "You are not just an ordinary citizen: You are part of a special state and a special nation."

Next, they began testing Bush's appeal directly. In October 2003, the three scholars, together with five colleagues, assembled 97 undergraduates at Rutgers to participate in what the students thought was a study of the relationship between personality and politics. One group was given the mortality exercises. The other wasn't. They then read an essay expressing a "highly favorable opinion of the measures taken by President Bush with regards to 9/11 and the Iraqi conflict." It read, in part:

Personally I endorse the actions of President Bush and the members of his administration who have taken bold action in Iraq. I appreciate our President's wisdom regarding the need to remove Saddam Hussein from power and his Homeland Security Policy is a source of great comfort to me. ... We need to stand behind our President and not be distracted by citizens who are less than patriotic. Ever since the attack on our country on September 11, 2001, Mr. Bush has been a source of strength and inspiration to us all.

This was not the kind of statement that would appeal to most Rutgers undergraduates, and indeed, on average, members of the control group rated it unfavorably. But those who did the mortality exercises on balance favored the statement. In February 2004, the psychologists repeated the experiment, but this time they used September 11 cues. They had one group of students write down the emotions that September 11 aroused in them and describe what happened on that day. They got the same results as before: On average, those in the September 11 group approved of the statement, while those who didn't do the exercises disapproved. Based on political questionnaires they had the students fill out, they also found that the September 11 and mortality exercises "increased both conservatives' and liberals' liking for Bush."

Then, in late September 2004, the psychologists, along with two colleagues from Rutgers, tested whether mortality exercises influenced whom voters would support in the upcoming presidential election. They conducted the study among 131 Rutgers undergraduates who said they were registered and planned to vote in November. The control group that completed a personality survey, but did not do the mortality exercises, predictably favored Kerry by four to one. But the students who did the mortality exercises favored Bush by more than two to one. This strongly suggested that Bush's popularity was sustained by mortality reminders. The psychologists concluded in a paper published after the election that the government terror warnings, the release of Osama bin Laden's video on October 29, and the Bush campaign's reiteration of the terrorist threat (Cheney on election eve: "If we make the wrong choice, then the danger is that we'll get hit again") were integral to Bush's victory over Kerry. "From a terror management perspective," they wrote, "the United States' electorate was exposed to a wide-ranging multidimensional mortality salience induction."

We've referred to it as "fear-mongering" and "scare tactics," but indeed the strategy of the Bush crime syndicate has a provable psychological basis. Now, we have to see if anything will have changed by Election Day 2008, and we likely can anticipate more of the same fear-mongering statements. The Republicans can't run on the "charisma" of Drunky McStagger anymore, but they will be banking on the idea that only the Republican Party and whoever its nominee is can protect America from the Evil Mean Brown People Who Threaten Our Freedom and Way of Life.

The question this time, though, is whether or not the electorate will respond psychologically to the scare tactics as they did in 2000 and 2004, or if the constant barrage of illegal and unethical activity by the Bush crime syndicate will immunize Americans from such manipulation this time around. I think Reality is overdue for a victory against Psychology.

Today on "Racist Congressmen," straight outta 1856 ...

... it's Virginia's inaccurately-appellated Virgil Goode (R-19th Century). All he did was send a letter to some (apparently many) of his constituents essentially advocating the platform of the Know-Nothing Party.

His anti-Muslim ("macaca" wasn't good enough for all Virginians, I guess) screed must be shared here in its entirety, in order to get the full flavor of just how far off the deep end this asshat has gone.

Thank you for your recent communication. When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran. We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country. I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.

The Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Koran. My response was clear, “As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office.” Thank you again for your email and thoughts.

I guess for Goode, "the next century" means the Twentieth. And Jesus H. Smack-Flappity Tap Dancing Christ, what he said to the student! I'd love to ask that student what he/she thought of Rep. Goode's answer.

The article sheds further light on this letter:

[The recipient] had never communicated with Goode’s office about Muslim immigration or official uses of the Koran. According to Goode’s office, Goode had received a flood of e-mails from constituents in response to newly elected Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison’s declaration that he would use the Koran, not the Bible, when being sworn into Congress next month. This letter was Goode’s response to those e-mails; Goode’s office says [this recipient] received the letter in error.

I'll bet it was in error. "Don't send this letter to anyone who voted for my opponent ... or who has a funny name ... or who smells like patchouli."

I hope Congress, when it reconvenes in January, will take the appropriate steps to reprimand Rep. Goode for his abhorrent and beyond-inappropriate statements. There's freedom of speech, and then there's outright racial hatred. This cannot be allowed to stand uncontroverted. (And, hey, if you feel like it, go ahead and shoot Goode ... an e-mail.)

Please help me get the message out there: racism and xenophobia will not be tolerated anywhere in America ... especially in Congress.

(cap tip to Raising Kaine via The Nose Knows.)