Skip to main content

After the Republican establishment finished its process of shafting Ron Paul delegates, a tumult erupted on the Republican convention floor as the Paulistas shouted at RNC Chairman Reince Priebus to "sit them" (to my ear that is what they were shouting). Priebus then turned down a motion to reconsider on a voice vote that did not appear to have a clear result. More tumult. Then the arena quieted down.

The next announced speaker was Zoraida Fonalledas, a Puerto Rican whose family wealth probably exceeds Mitt Romney's. For some reason, the Paulistas then erupted again. They were shouted down by others. But once Fonalledas approached the podium, a strange thing happened—the shouts turned into "USA!USA!" This chant was not heard when Preibus was being jeered. See the longer video:


Fonalledas discovered that despite all her money, Republicans still have no respect for her. Fox News Latino reported:
A visibly upset Zoraida Fonalledas, Chairwomen of the Committee on Permanent Organization, was greeted by chants of "USA, USA, USA" when RNC Chairman Reince Priebus introduced her to the convention crowd. The chants kept coming until Priebus stepped back up to the podium and told the delegates to let Fonalledas take care of her business. Just a little bit awkward.
Just a bit. Some argued that the chants had nothing to do with Fonalledas being a Puerto Rican woman, that the chants involved a dispute over sitting Ron Paul delegates. Those apologists will have to explain how a protest over delegate seating turned into a chant of "USA! USA!" directed at a Puerto Rican woman of immense wealth.

As Antonio Villaraigosa says, the GOP "can't just trot out a brown face or a Spanish surname" and expect Latinos to vote Republican. Especially when they treat them like this. One other point to consider: Jan Brewer (yes, Jan Brewer!) accused President Obama of race baiting:

Jan Brewer. Joe Arpaio. Paul Ryan. Mitt Romney. Not exactly a group that inspires confidence in their attitudes towards Latinos and Latinas. As for delegates to the GOP convention, well, I suppose you can imagine them being good people on the question of race. I am more sanguine.

To paraphrase Sally Field, they hate us! They really hate us! And we've noticed.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Some are sure that the USA! USA chants (52+ / 1-)

    that commenced when Ms. Fonalledas started speaking had nothing to do with her being a Latina.

    These folks are also sure that Romney's birther jokes were not race faded, that the welfare lies are not race based and that Jan Brewer loves Latinos.

    Yes. there is  context here, but I don't think it is the one some folks are looking at.

    •  Related (10+ / 0-)

      Right Wing accuses Msnbc of censoring minority GOP speakers:

      One of the left’s favorite attacks on the Republican Party is that it is the party of old white people, devoid of diversity and probably racist.

      If you were watching MSNBC’s coverage of the Republican National Convention in Tampa on Tuesday night, you might believe those assertions, since missing from the coverage was nearly every ethnic minority that spoke during Tuesday’s festivities.

      In lieu of airing speeches from former Democratic Rep. Artur Davis, a black American; Mia Love, a black candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Utah; and Texas senatorial hopeful Ted Cruz, a Latino American, MSNBC opted to show commentary anchored by Rachel Maddow from Rev. Al Sharpton, Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews, Chris Hayes and Steve Schmidt.

      Throughout this convention, Matthews has accused the Republicans of playing dog-whistle racist politics while on scene in Tampa. It isn’t clear, however, if Matthews will hurl accusations of racism at Davis, Love or Cruz for speeches his network failed to broadcast.

      What do you think of that?
        •  And you accuse GOP of using distortions and lies (0+ / 0-)

          when you do too.

          Nice.

          Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

          by Mindful Nature on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:19:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What did I lie about? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            middleagedhousewife

            What did I distort?

            Please enlighten me.

            •  Watch the entire video (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              thaddeus74, WFBMM, JVolvo

              and note that you and I both know that the shouting had to do with the rule change that was rammed through on a specious voice vote and that there was yelling at Priebus already long before the next speaker took the stage.

              You know all that, of course, but choose to ignore it because it doesn't support your pet narrative.  

              Willfull ignoring of the context and meaning to score cheap political points is a total karl Rove move and it is in large measure why we have millions of voters who are disgusted with the tone of the political debate. I'm going to say to you what Jon Stewart said to Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson:  "Stop hurting America" just for entertainment's sake.

              Stick with reality.  it's a lot more compelling.

              Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

              by Mindful Nature on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:55:06 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Please note that the chant changed (0+ / 0-)

                to USA USA when Fonalledas was introduced and went to the podium.

                That is the context I am referring to as I explained in my post.

                That is not something you see as requiring an explanation.

                I disagree.

                I am discussing reality. You disagree with my opinion. No problem there. But now you are trying to shout me down.

                And that is not ok.

                •  That's not what happened though (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  WFBMM, ltsply2, bnasley

                  The issue is of course that the chant didn't change (in the sense that people switched from oe to the other), but rather  that a second group (and larger) of chanters joined the first group of chanters, who didn't change and were still chanting "Seat them now"

                  In fact, NPR had a piece yesterday morning (I think) about how the California delegation had been assigned the role of shouting down any protests from the Maine Paul delegation and any other paul delegations.   That is in fact, exactly what appearss to have occured.

                  And yes, in an age of climate change denialism and false equivalencies, there's no reason to be tolerant of disinformation.  So, yes, in a sense I am trying to get you to retract this diary, insofar as it has been demonstrated to be inaccurate, has been shown why is misrepresents the context, and now seems to be in danger of becoming another  front page zombie meme in which the facts are ignored in favor of scoring a political point.

                  Personally, I think we need to give this kind of thing a very wide berth, because we have so many solid facts to point to instead.

                  Anway, as I said above (since we have like six exchanges going!), let's just shake hands, dust off, and move on.  

                  Sorry I got rather heated (again).  I'm chalking it up to male menopause, personally.

                  Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

                  by Mindful Nature on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 01:43:07 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  But the USA USA chant did not start (0+ / 0-)

                    until Fonalledas was introduced and at the podium.

                    Is there an innocent explanation? Certainly. Is there a less innocent explanation? Certainly.

                    Neither of us knows the real explanation.

                    My argument is that given their history, the benefit of the doubt is not appropriate.

                    YM varies.

                    •  Let's follow this thread (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Armando, bnasley

                      This is maybe what this is about:

                      My argument is that given their history, the benefit of the doubt is not appropriate
                      Here's why I think that's not a good way to go.  It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy if you interpret everything in a way to support your own preconceptions.  What that means if applied broadly is that one becomes maximally closed off to any countervailing evidence, because confirmation bias (which this would be a form of) discounts or explains away everything that conflicts and every interpretation is made to reinforce preexisting beliefs.

                      Two problems flow from that.  First, that means one can become increasingly detached from reality.  Second, if reality does change, one would be unable to respond.

                      In this case, there's an innocent explanation and a less innocent one.  (as you know I find the innocent one greatly more credible, especially the history over the last few months and days) So the root of the disagreement probably stems from the approach to handling such ambiguity.  For my part, I'm such an empiricist that I try not to believe anything unless I've solid foundation, and I try to be most skeptical (consciously that is) when something appears to confirm my ideas.  

                      I should fess up that I'm a former scientist, and a significant part of that training is to develop alternative explanations that run counter to ones own interpretations.  It's not an advocacy way of thinking (though there's plenty of advocates in the scientific world who seem to feel their job is to support their pet ideas come hell or high water).  

                      Anyway, it's good to think about this in a new analytical framework, for me anyway.

                      Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

                      by Mindful Nature on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 02:04:08 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  The problem with the approach you espouse (0+ / 0-)

                        is 2 fold in my view.

                        First, it amounts to de facto unilaterla disarmament in thr political fight. The GOP won;t play by your rules.

                        Second, it seems wrong to me at least as a way of evaluating events. Past events and attitudes matter. They inform.

                        I can;t believe past findings are irrelvant to scientific thought.

                        Certainly, as a lawyer, character evidence is important.

                        •  I suppose (0+ / 0-)

                          On the fist point, I think part of what the political difference between the right and left is the commitment to evidence.  While the right is used ot pandering with false stereotypes, the left seeks to base judgments on evidence and reality.  While it might be seen as disarmament is you opt to use bias-driven analysis (for lack of a better term), in my estimation, engaging in it undermines the basis for the strength of ones argument.  If "both sides do it" then one isn't in a position to call out both the Republicans and the media for their sloppiness and lack of commitment to evidence.  I guess I see style here as the substance of the difference.  

                          That'sprobably just a difference in preferred tactics more athan anything.  Hard to say what's better, simply because the data's so complex.

                          On the second, past evidence clearly matters, but while it may inform the hypotheses, it can't relieve one of the requirement to form a null hypothesis and refute it (that is, lprove your statement by disproving the alternative that there's no effect here.).  Again, that may be just a methodological difference.

                          And finally, I thought character evidence wasn't admissible so as not to bias the jury into finding a defendant guilty based on who they are, rather than what they did.  That's based on 2L classes, and the bar, since I practice admin law and never get near evidentiary rules these days!  

                          and thanks for turning on a dime to have an interesting conversation!

                          Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

                          by Mindful Nature on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 03:10:53 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                  •  Looks like an attempt to shout down Paulistas (0+ / 0-)

                    I'm the last one to give GOPers a free pass on the widespread racism and xenophobia in today's Republican Party, but from looking at the video it seems that the Paulites were shouting "Seat them now! Seat them now!" and then another bunch of people then started shouting "USA! USA" to drown them out. The people shouting USA! are visibly not the Paulistas, and the Ron Paul delegates are visibly not shouting USA!

                    You could argue about why the non-Paul delegates picked USA! as their drown-out chant. The simplest explanation is that it is (a) in the same three-beat form as "Seat them now!" and (b) a chant that everybody else in the convention would be likely to join in, thus effectively shutting down the Paul supporters. Indeed, it sounds to my ears like Fonalledas herself joined in after a couple of beats.

                    That said, the optics (or is it sonics?) aren't good.

            •  Um, your title? You are asserting your opinion (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              emidesu, bnasley

              that those were "jeers."  Several here have pointed out the context of that moment: pissed Paulies booing and chanting because Preibus had just stripped Paul delegates via a subjective voice vote.  The GOP drones eventually figured out USA USA USA would cover the dissenters chants.  Rep Fonalledas was the unlucky person to be speaking immediately after Reince's delegate purge.

              But keep flailing away in your own subjective outrage.

              This reminds me of the Larry Johnson "Whitey" bullshit: no context, just emotion to assert a predetermined outcome.

              Note: I think many GOPers are bigoted, racist and/or misogynists.  FUCK THEM.

              I also think that this wasn't a Freudian/Bircher slip.  There's plenty to hit them with.

              The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

              by JVolvo on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 04:11:15 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  They were clearly jeers (0+ / 0-)

                To compare this to the whitey tape demonstrates a level of well, I don't know what to call it, that is bizarre.

                •  The "whitey" comparison is YOU --> Johnson (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MKSinSA

                  for willfully ignoring context and flailing away to your emotionally satisfying conclusion.

                  NOT the actual events.  But you knew that, too.

                  And with this, I'm done (6:54 CDT).  You get the opportunity for the last comment.

                  Enjoy yelling about your strawman.

                  The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

                  by JVolvo on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 04:54:03 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  I think when the GOP trots out ... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        4Freedom, devis1, Sue B, nellgwen

        Their very very very few minorities in an attempt to make them look like thousands ... we can tell them to pucker up.

        They're like extras in a cheap movie being told to cross the street 100 times to simulate a street crowd.

        •  I noticed that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          4Freedom

          they had to dig all the way down to Congressional candidates to find some minorities.  Is that typical of conventions?  To have "hopefuls" as speakers?

          Early to rise and early to bed Makes a man healthy, wealthy, and dead. --Not Benjamin Franklin

          by Boundegar on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:02:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  actually while I agreed with you after (6+ / 0-)

      reviewing the tape--

      Your second paragraph is patently false.  You're accusing A LOT OF PEOPLE ON THIS SITE who reviewed that video of being racist.

      That is beneath you.

    •  No, we're not (6+ / 0-)

      the same people who think that Romney's birther jokes weren't racially tinged. You're reading too much into this incident.

      Making Puerto Rico a state has been part of the Republican platform for as long as I can remember, and Romney has been wholeheartedly supportive of that -- like any Republican regular. The notion that RNC delegates -- Romney's delegates, no less -- would suddenly jeer a Puerto Rican speaker at their convention is pure fantasy.

      This has nothing to do with Brewer or birtherism or anything else. There was a well-documented floor fight going on between Paul delegates and Romney delegates, and that's what it degenerated into.

      "Let's put the jam on the lower shelf so the little people can reach it." - Ralph Yarborough

      by Zutroy on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:36:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Any facts to back up (6+ / 0-)

        your opinioon?

        for any of these claims:

        (1) Romney;s birther joke was racial.

        (2) Jan Brewer hates LAtinos

        (3) Republicans support Puerto Rico statehood (check the votes over the years.).

        (4) The USA USA chant had nothing to do with Fonalledas being Latina.

        I'll wait to see how you know some of these things and not the others.

        •  Romney's one-liner probably wasn't (0+ / 0-)

          meant to be racist.  But it was.  Romney probably wasn't thinking about race at all; and that's the problem.

          Does that make sense?

          Early to rise and early to bed Makes a man healthy, wealthy, and dead. --Not Benjamin Franklin

          by Boundegar on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:05:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It msakes total sense (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Delilah

            But there is not knife in the hand evidence to support it.

            You make my point very well.

          •  Could not disagree more with that (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TKO333, chemborg

            Romney's "joke" IMO was not extemporaneous,  it was written for him for a specific purpose and to convey a very simple, easy to understand message.

            For those of you who don't possess the universal dog whistle translator, let me translate for you.

            "By the way, if you guys haven't noticed, I'm the white guy running for president, as opposed to the other guy, who's black and maybe from another country to boot".

             

            "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

            by jkay on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:16:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Yes that would make sense.... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            chemborg, Armando, fumie

            ...so why is it so hard to accept that the shouts of USA were not also partially racist, at least by some if not many. You've got a whole auditorium filled with people to whom it would never occur that hollering USA at a representative of Puerto Rico might be a tad uncool.  And they are all members of a party that has been labeling everyone who isn't white "foreign." How is this different? I'm really asking cause I don't get it, not cause I'm trying to challenge you.

        •  Good grief. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ltsply2, Armando, JVolvo

          The first two have nothing to do with this, regardless of your attempts to tie them in, so I'll start with the third one.

          (3) The following passage was included in the 2008, 2004, and 2000 GOP platforms:

          We support the right of the United States citizens of Puerto Rico to be admitted to the Union as a fully sovereign state after they freely so determine. We recognize that Congress has the final authority to define the constitutionally valid options for Puerto Rico to achieve a permanent non-territorial status with government by consent and full enfranchisement. As long as Puerto Rico is not a state, however, the will of its people regarding their political status should be ascertained by means of a general right of referendum or specific referenda sponsored by the U.S. government.
          In fact, the GOP has endorsed Puerto Rico's statehood in every platform since 1968. In 1979, Ronald Reagan -- deeply admired by pro-statehood governor and RNC member Luis Fortuno -- stated the following:
          I favor statehood for Puerto Rico
          Romney, of course, is very supportive of Puerto Rican statehood, and it would stand to reason that his delegates would be to, eh?

          Why have mainstream Republicans long been in favor of Puerto Rican statehood? I honestly don't know. It could have something to do with their fondness for American expansionism. It may have to do with the belief of Republican leaders that the state would be solidly red (which, at this point, I would dispute). Whatever the case, it's clear that Puerto Rican statehood has been lingering on Republican wish lists for almost as long as DC statehood has been lingering on Democratic wish lists.

          (4) Per Univision:

          Ask yourself: why would delegates who conceivably supported the actions of Priebus and the RNC — of which Fonalledas is a member — try to drown out their own allies with a “U-S-A!” chant? I saw the chaos develop myself here in Tampa and I didn’t think for a second that delegates were going nativist on the Puerto Rican official.

          Remember, the booing and all around chaos had already broken out before Fonalledas opened her mouth. Do you think the rabble-rousers even knew she was from Puerto Rico?

          Yes, there has been a vigorous debate this week over the Republican Party’s ability to appeal to minorities, including Latinos. But this incident should not be a part of that discussion because it has absolutely nothing to do with Puerto Rico or race.

          Emphasis added. That just about says it all. A diarist here has already pointed out the same thing, but I believe you've laid into him already.

          Don't get me wrong, because I'm all for calling out GOP race-baiting, especially now that it makes up their main axis of attack against Obama. Fabricating race-baiting where it isn't, however, doesn't help us or anyone else.

          "Let's put the jam on the lower shelf so the little people can reach it." - Ralph Yarborough

          by Zutroy on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:37:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  If everyone will calm down a minute and (9+ / 0-)

        remember back to the 2008 election. Every time someone said something not wanted by the crowd, the crowd started chanting USA USA, etc. The Repukes have given us every reason to believe that they are a racist bunch. In this case, I believe they were doing their usual shout-down of someone saying something they didn't want to hear. When the Paulites were silenced, the speaker was permitted to speak without interruption.

        Your left is my right---Mort Sahl

        by HappyinNM on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:44:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They didn;t at the event we are speaking (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gchaucer2, Delilah

          of UNTIL Fonalledas was introduced.

          How do you explain the lack of a USA USA chant before Zonalledas was introduced?

          •  You can hear USA chants (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            shaso, JVolvo

            right after Priebus says thank you--around 10 sec mark in the longer video you posted--then he drowns out all chants by yelling into the microphone

            If anyone survives-this will be known as the Ostrich Era

            by FOYI on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:41:57 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I do not agree with that (0+ / 0-)

              But perhaps you have a better recording than I. I certainly do not hear that.

              If you are right and I am wrong, then your point is well taken but I just do not hear it as you do.

              But what if I am right? What would that mean in your thought process?

              •  At your suggestion I went back and viewed the (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Mindful Nature, DaveV, JVolvo

                video again. What I noticed is that you can read the lips of those people who were shown close up. It appeared to me that they were saying, "Seat them now." When they, unfortunately, give us so many opportunities to call foul, please don't make things worse than they already are.

                Your left is my right---Mort Sahl

                by HappyinNM on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 01:08:12 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  How does that support your view of events? (0+ / 0-)

                  USA USA is clearly heard after Fonalledas is introduced.

                  I'm not following your point here.

                  As for things being anything, I think you folks are being rather sanctimonious in this thread. Just a tad maybe?

    •  "The Hispanic community would come to"? (0+ / 0-)

      Doesn't she want to build fences to prevent that?

      Mitt/Twit - 2012 - Don't Tax Me, Bro!

      by kitebro on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:50:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's the Pee Wee Herman strategy... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      live1

      ... the Rethugs have been using it for some time.

      I keep telling everyone, this is familiar territory. I also keep telling everyone, that to certain elements on the Right, this is the most important election since The Beer Hall Putsch...

      ... just as this recent attempt at a military coup and assassination of Obama is eerily reminiscent of the Lincoln Presidency.

      But I am a Poet and Short Fiction Writer; so I am prone to the Dramatic.

      A Poet is at the same time a force for Solidarity and for Solitude -- Pablo Neruda / The Justice Department is on Netroots Radio.

      by justiceputnam on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:51:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Latinos get into bed with Republicans and wake up (0+ / 0-)

      with Chupa Cabra or worse (Racist Republicans).

    •  Wow. (5+ / 0-)
      These folks are also sure that Romney's birther jokes were not race faded, that the welfare lies are not race based and that Jan Brewer loves Latinos.
      You win.

      "They are an entire cruise ship of evil clowns, these current Republicans"...concernedamerican

      by Giles Goat Boy on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:10:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  For shame, Armando (7+ / 0-)

      I award you the gold medal in leaping to conclusions. Congratulations! But your blatantly calling Kossacks who disagree with you racist is beyond the pale, so I have to disqualify you from the competition.

      Yes, you did call them racists. You know you did.

      These folks are also sure that Romney's birther jokes were not race faded, that the welfare lies are not race based and that Jan Brewer loves Latinos.
      You just implied that anyone who disagrees with you, on this one issue, must also support racist stances on every other issue. If this was not what you meant to imply, I call on you to apologize and state, clearly and unequivocally, that you do not think your fellow Kossacks are racist and support racist ideals, just because they interpreted this ONE SITUATION differently than you.

      Shame on you. I'm not even taking a stance on the issue. I'm taking a stance against you, Armando, calling your fellow Kossacks racist for disagreeing with you.

      I'm saddened that you felt you needed to go there to bolster your point.

      •  I did not call any kossack a racist (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        arizonablue

        I was trying to make a point about how we evaluate statements and events.

        My point is that we all know the birther joke was racist, but we don;t know it from the actual words of the joke.

        It requires a thought process taking into account the GOP, its  attitudes, its members, its officials and its policies.

        Republicans vehemently deny that it is racist and we all reject those protestations because of the things we know about them.

        I think this event should be viewed through the same prism.

        I apologize for giving you the wrong impression of my intent.

        I hope this helps clear up what I meant.

    •  I think you're reaching. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JVolvo

      We've seen these outbreaks of "USA! USA!" chanting many times at Republican and Tea Party events.  It's the conservative equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and and singing "la la la la la."  It's what they fall back on when something isn't right and things are getting too complicated and they're feeling confused.  It's a way of dealing with cognitive dissonance.  In fact, it's their way of dealing, period.  When things get uncomfortable and the brain starts to hurt, they start chanting the magical chant and everybody joins in and soon it drowns out everything else.

      The Ron Paul supporters had departed from the script.  All the Republicans in the hall were confused, then frightened, and then they began to panic, so they began chanting "USA! USA!" to make the bad stuff go away.  Ms. Fonalledas was unlucky enough to be taking the podium at that moment, but I don't see that it had anything to do with her.

    •  Boy, done (0+ / 0-)

      Accusing people who disagree with your interpretation of the facts of racism is HR worthy.  

      I'm pretty tempted to HR the tip jar actually.

      Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

      by Mindful Nature on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:58:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I really don't know what to think of the chanting (14+ / 0-)

    because I had no desire to watch those fuckwits last night, and have not developed the desire today.  But regardless of the backstory, they sure managed to present a shit-ugly soundbite to reinforce every negative stereotype about their racist worldview.

    •  Why is Everyone Looking Up? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lineatus

      Also passing on the hatefest this year

      ... but I will say this about Republican "fuckwits": there's no occurrence where a chat of "USA, USA" doesn't seem like an inappropriate non sequitur, so they always join in.

      Oderint Dum Metuant.

      by Dunkerque on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:12:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  GOP tactic since 2004 Bush campaign (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kenboy, DaveV, elwior, sawgrass727, stegro, JVolvo

    A standard tactic at GOP rallies, initiated by the Bush campaign in 2004, is to shout "USA! USA!" to cover up/obscure anything a protester or heckler says.  One would have to review the video and find if the same faces who were booing over the rules change were the ones shouting "USA" or whether it was an entirely different group of people.  In order to make this charge of racism stick, you have to show me some individual Paulites booing during the rules change vote, then shouting "USA! USA!" at Fonalledas.

  •  The GOP is trying to get the Hispanic vote (6+ / 0-)

    to match their share of the African American vote.  

    They probably resent the RNC putting American Samoa ahead of Michigan in the crowd for added color.

    Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right. I'm riding for MS in September. Please donate here if you can.

    by darthstar on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:39:30 AM PDT

  •  She is NOT being chanted at because she's... (12+ / 0-)

    ...Puerto Rican. She was just caught in the Ron Paul dispute crossfire. I firmly believe that. Here's an extended video which includes the discussion of rules that happened before she came out.

    And GOPers use the USA chant frequently when they want to drown out protestors. Here's an example from last year. You can hear them start the chant about 1:30 into the video.

    "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D." - Tom Harkin

    by Tuttle on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:39:36 AM PDT

  •  The chant by the Paulites was "seat them now". (11+ / 0-)

    Ten Paul delegates were bumped on a procedural vote, not that it mattered. Paul was not getting to speak live under any circumstance, at least not without a shock collar and a SWAT team  member with a red laser dot on Paul's head.

    The "USA"chant appeared to be the effort of those with no imagination or ability to think fast to drown that chant out.

    "Ron Paul sucks" might have been more effective.  

    He only employs his passion who can make no use of his reason. - Cicero

    by SpamNunn on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:40:08 AM PDT

    •  Charmingly timed to commence AFTER (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      justiceputnam

      Fonelledas ewas intrroduced and reached the podium.

      Your opinion is not supported by the facts of this event.

      •  Preibus bull rushed the motion through. Then he (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ltsply2, Mindful Nature, JVolvo

        laid a motion to reconsider upon the table and ignored anyone who wanted to make that motion because the voice vote was not close enough, in his opinion, for that motion to ever carry.

        The Paulites recognized that they only way to stop the proceedings from going forward was to stop the next order of business until someone could raise a point of order.   Preibus was having none of that.   That's why they started chanting.  To delay the next order of business.  

        Seriously, Armando, I know that Republicans can be dense, but do you really believe that they are so dense that they would openly jeer an older woman of color on national TV, just because she was brown?   Please.  

        He only employs his passion who can make no use of his reason. - Cicero

        by SpamNunn on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:03:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I agree with the above... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JVolvo, ltsply2, Scott Wooledge

      and believe me, I am no apologist.  I saw some people very clearly chanting "Seat them now!"  It is logical to assume that the "USA!" chanters were trying to drown out Paul supporters.  No way to tell for sure, because recordings of crowds can be so misleading (remember the Dean scream?).

      In this recording, it sounded to me as though the voice vote should have had a different result, too.

      •  Why did it only start (0+ / 0-)

        after Fonelledas was introduced?

        Whynot right away when Priebus was still at the podium?

        Any speculation on that fpor me?

        •  Because Priebus MOVED ON. (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Short Bus, ltsply2, SpamNunn, JVolvo

          I think it's really unfortunate timing for the Republicans (awwww, poor things) that the next speaker to come out happened to be from Puerto Rico, because it seems to me this is what happened, from watching the longer video posted upthread:

          Some motion to shut down the Ron Paul fans is voice voted on.

          Priebus says it passed.

          The Ron Paul fans loudly disagree.

          Priebus says, in effect, "OK, that's over with, next up to speak is ..."

          The Ron Paul fans are REALLY mad that their loud votes didn't count, and that the chair is moving on, and start their "seat them now" chant.

          The ... I don't know what you call them, the non-Paulites start a "USA" chant to shut them up.

          For the "USA" chant to have been meant as a racist attack on the next speaker, it would have had to have started in some vacuum where all the above didn't happen, and where the Paulites weren't already shouting something of their own.

          The GOP is plenty racist, but I don't believe this is a manifestation of that.

        •  There were still people chanting, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JVolvo

          "Seat them, now!".  I'm just saying it is possible, even probable, that the "USA!" chanters picked this unfortunate moment to try and drown out the Paul supporters... maybe they couldn't even hear the introduction of Fonelledas, for all we know, because of all the chanting.  

          I think it is impossible to tell, based on this recording, what those folks on the floor were able to hear/ not hear.

    •  That's what I heard too. n/t (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ltsply2, JVolvo

      Oklahoma: birthplace of Kate Barnard, W. Rogers, W. Guthrie, Bill Moyers & Eliz. Warren. Home to proud progressive agitators since before statehood. Current political climate a mere passing dust cloud; we're waiting it out & planning for clearer days.

      by peacearena on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:58:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  They don't hate you (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, Armando

    They just hate that you look a little different on the outside, and you're from somewhere further away then most people they meet.

    ;)

    The symbol for the Republican party shouldn't be an elephant -- it should be a unicorn.

    by Deadicated Marxist on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:40:37 AM PDT

  •  I don't know why they did that, but man those (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, Sun dog, Armando, Dunkerque

    people are weird.

  •  Maybe they are expressing support (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sawgrass727, Armando

    for Puerto Rican statehood, he asked naively?

    Romney economics: Feed our seed corn to the fattest pigs and trust them to poop out jobs.

    by blue aardvark on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:43:48 AM PDT

  •  Anthony Villaraigosa? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Icicle68, justiceputnam, Armando

    I thought his name was Antonio...

  •  Tweeps from Maine in the hall say the chant was (0+ / 0-)

    "Sit Maine Now!"

    Form follows function -- Louis Sullivan

    by Spud1 on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:44:39 AM PDT

  •  Romney only has 26% of the Hispanic vote (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Armando

    According to this poll taken Monday by Latino Decisions/impreMedia.
    I saw another set of numbers on MSNBC showing President Obama 89% to 4%. Not sure the source of those numbers.

    Everybody got to elevate from the norm....

    by Icicle68 on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:44:42 AM PDT

  •  with Statehood for Puerto Rico in the new (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Armando

    GOP platform maybe they were just chanting to make Puerto Rico a state ???????????????

  •  They were trying to drown out "seat them now" (7+ / 0-)

    Common tactic at events with hecklers is to shout "USA USA!" It's been done many times.

    I think this diary is silly and reflects poorly on us as a reality based community.  Sorry.

    "This is not class warfare. It's math." - Barack Obama 9/19/11

    by DaveV on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:46:08 AM PDT

    •  Not so common (0+ / 0-)

      oin that they did not use it in this event for the number of minutes prior to Fonalledas introiduction.

      This story that many of you are repeating is interesting but belied by the fact that it was NOT used before Fonalledas was intriduced.

      There isa big ewhole in your theory.

      •  How do you know it was NOT used (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JVolvo

        before Fonalledas?  Did the microphone capture the WHOLE arena?  No.

        Chants take a long time to spread across a large distance.  First, the "seat them now" chant had to spread to where the mics could pick it up, then the counter-chant had to spread.  This can take on the order of minutes in a large venue.

        "This is not class warfare. It's math." - Barack Obama 9/19/11

        by DaveV on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:04:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  What do they expect? This is the same convention (5+ / 0-)

    where nuts are thrown at an African American camerawoman, while the perps compare her and "people like her" to animals.

    Apparently money, cannot buy Whiteness.

  •  I was only able to watch.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Armando

    ...about 30 minutes in total last night before I had to finally give up.

    Watching those people is just not good for my mental health.

    When I look at the faces of the people on the floor, many of them appear to me to be in some sort of weird, detached zombie like hypnotic trance. It's very disturbing.

    Did anybody else notice this?

    "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

    by jkay on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:48:16 AM PDT

  •  HappyinNM, Spamnunn and Tuttle have it (5+ / 0-)

    Having reviewed the videos, the Paul supporters are chanting "seat them now" or some variant, and it is always separate, other people (notice the different style of dress as well, much more suit and tie types) chanting "USA USA."  They are trying to drown out the Paul delegates.

    •  The buzz cut Reagan Youth guy mid way through (4+ / 0-)

      can clearly be seen to chant "seat them now", the middle word clearly being "them" because he mouths a "th" sound at the beginning of the word and an "m" sound at the end of that word.  

      These kind of posts drive me batty.  There is so much to trash these people for that it's simply not necessary to make stuff up.  

      He only employs his passion who can make no use of his reason. - Cicero

      by SpamNunn on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:51:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  No they do not (0+ / 0-)

      No one, and I mean no one, has explained why the USA USA chants do not start until AFTEr Fonelldas is introduced and reaches the podium.

      to "have it" some one need to explain that.

  •  So this story has been re-bunked? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    valadon

    Last night's debunking has been rebuked and retracted?

    Where we at?

    I'll say this: today's GOP makes it all too easy to believe the absolute worst.

  •  I got the impression (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sponson, JVolvo

    the regular Romney low brows were trying to drown out the Texas Tejadists' shouts of "Seat them" with their "USA" chant but I could be wrong.

     

    "Fascism is attracting the dregs of humanity- people with a slovenly biography - sadists, mental freaks, traitors." - ILYA EHRENBURG

    by durrati on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:49:01 AM PDT

  •  Insensitivity is core problem with Romney campaign (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Armando, fumie

    Just another example!  Whatever the reason for the chant it was poorly timed and comes across as brutally attacking the speaker.

  •  I cannot believe this was "front paged" (7+ / 0-)

    There is so much other evidence that the Republican party is biased...you don't have to twist this situation into that.

    "It looks like how music sounds." --My four year old nephew upon looking through a kaleidoscope for the first time

    by Mote Dai on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:53:01 AM PDT

  •  Thank you. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Uncle Moji, Armando, arizonablue

    And yes, I heard your incensed commentary on Netroots Radio this a.m.

    I honestly don't understand the defense of this shite on this site.

    " My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total." Barbara Jordan, 1974

    by gchaucer2 on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:53:22 AM PDT

    •  No defense of racist, bigoted misogynists GOP (0+ / 0-)

      from me OR those I've seen posting.  

      I'm going with 2 different tapes of the moments BEFORE Rep Fonalledas took the stage: Preibus stripping Paul delegates and gaveling it closed, Paul delegates booing and chanting, then GOPbots chanting USA USA to drown them out).  

      Oh, and an open mind to what happened.

      NO ONE is defending GOPers here.
      And NO ONE is disputing the USA USA chants at the end.  But that's Armando's whole argument: They were chanting USA! ergo RACIST INSULT OF HER!!111

      Ugh.

      The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

      by JVolvo on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 04:36:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  GOP: a mob of racists? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Armando

    So the GOP is descending rapidly into a mob of racists? Even if those  at the 'top' of the party don't think these incidents matter, they do.

    When this mob starts stampeding toward some minority to attack, purge or ethnic cleanse it, what will these GOP leaders at the 'top' do?

  •  Why would she be offended? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sponson

    Do people realize that Puerto Rico is part of the USA?  She would have no reason to be offended.

    I think most Republicans are racist, misogynistic, homophobic jerks but I think this attack is silly.  There are so many real offenses to choose from, why would anyone need to make one up?

  •  Nope. Totally wrong. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sponson, JVolvo, ltsply2, greyXstar

    The Paul people were chanting "Point of Order" and the Romney people wanted to chant something to drown them out.  So they chanted the easiest thing for a bunch of Romney Republicans to chant on short notice.

    It's completely obvious to anyone with literally any knowledge of the situation at all.

    The real irony of describing this as an anti-Latina chant is that the Latina in question was Romney's hand-picked lackey to chair the committee, so the people chanting "USA" were the ones in attendance on her side.

  •  God, I hate that jingoistic "USA" "USA" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    defluxion10, fumie

    crap.  Always reminds me of bigoted Republicans.

    "Activism begins with you, Democracy begins with you, get out there, get active! Tag, you're it!" Thom Hartmann

    by glogrrl on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:58:20 AM PDT

  •  Could Priebus be more of a smug POS? (4+ / 0-)

    And did he say "show some respect?"

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Strange but not a stranger.

    by jnww on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:58:52 AM PDT

  •  Oh boy. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sponson, ltsply2, greyXstar, JVolvo

    Armando, you're not so much the straw that stirs the drink as the stick that stirs the pot of shit.

    It's debatable enough that the trigger for this outburst was the Paulites that this isn't an appropriate front page diary, IMHO.  It risks making us look like we're trying to manufacture an issue.

    In a day with the Caymans yacht story and the day after the AfAm CNN camerawoman had nuts thrown at her and was called an animal, it's unnecessary. The environment is so target rich you don't need to work the marginals issues.

    I think you can just look at the GOP's policies and their governors to see what they really think of Latino voters.

    We get what we want - or what we fail to refuse. - Muhammad Yunus

    by nightsweat on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 11:59:10 AM PDT

    •  Sorry (0+ / 0-)

      to sully your berloved blog.
      You write what you like and I;ll write what I like. How about that?

      •  For this to be a credible forum, a quality (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JVolvo, DaveV

        standard needs to be applied to what is on the front page. It should not include hyperbole or push conjecture as fact.

      •  Fine, but don't be surprised (0+ / 0-)

        When someone tells you you're being unproductive or worse, counterproductive.

        We get what we want - or what we fail to refuse. - Muhammad Yunus

        by nightsweat on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 01:52:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  People can and will say what they want (0+ / 0-)

          This is not new. Nor is this my first rodeo.

          Why I had quite the mob after me when I crticized Larry Summers over his remarks about women ins science.

          Your number is low enough to remember. Hell, you might have been in the group chasing after me and writing diaries about how I was bad for Daily Kos.

          You might have been in the group attacking Markos for writing his American Taliban book.

          There are always people sure that others are being counterproductive.

          •  Very nice (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JVolvo, DaveV

            An example of some pretty sleazy tactics there.  "Why, I see your UID is low enough that you might have participated in all these horrible things.  I am not SAYING that, mind you, I'm just saying you might have..."

            For the record, I did neither.  When it's been appropriate, I call bullshit on you directly and had no problem with the American Taliban book.

            We get what we want - or what we fail to refuse. - Muhammad Yunus

            by nightsweat on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 02:02:43 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Really? (0+ / 0-)

              Dude, if everyone who ripped me was a "sleazy" person, the number would be in the tens of thousands.

              You know a lot of respected people had wars with me over Summers.

              You know a lot of respected people trashed Markos' book.

              My point was that the reaction you predict is not new.

              I was reminding you of them and frankly, indicating that I had no hard feelings about them now as I do not about whatever transpired today.

              Damn, call me anything you like, but a grudge holder I am not.

              I seem to be saying all the wrong things today.

              Maybe it is time for me to call it a day.

              I really did not mean anything by it.

              Have a nice day. Really.

    •  Next: Daily Drudge with Armando... :o( (0+ / 0-)

      The GOP says you have to have an ID to vote, but $ Millionaire donors should remain anonymous?

      by JVolvo on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 04:37:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  USA is a common 'rebuttal' chant (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DaveV, ltsply2, JVolvo

    If you watch any of the 'mic check' videos from a few months ago, counter protestors also started chanting USA.

    It must be in some counter protest handbook or something.  It's easy to say, easy to hear and repeat, mostly meaningless, and suitably chest thumping and flag-draping.

    There were also incidents in state party meetings where RP-ites started the same commotion and counter-protestors there also chanted USA, so I wouldn't doubt that Romney supporters and delegates had been instructed to do this if the RP crowd tried anything.

  •  this is nuts (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DaveV, ltsply2, auron renouille, JVolvo

    Delegates admitted to being told to chant "USA" over the jeers they were expecting. This isn't exactly new behavior. It's what RWNJ's do when they hear chants they don't like. Things seemed to settle down before she took the stage because the mics were being cut, as they did several times all afternoon.

    And I really love how anyone who disagrees with you also doesn't think the welfare/birther stuff is racist. Cuz ya know, thats totally reasonable. This diary should be taken down.

  •  Perception is REALITY. It does not matter who was (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sawgrass727, ltsply2, skod, andgarden

    shouting what.  

    What is perceived is that this was a slight to this Hispanic woman.

    You can call it any way you like, but HISPANICS CAN CALL IT ANY WAY THEY LIKE AS WELL.

    Bottom line, IF YOU HAVE TO EXPLAIN IT YOU ARE LOSING.

    Not a winner for Republicans.

    "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave." -- Patrick Henry

    by BornDuringWWII on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:01:13 PM PDT

  •  When introducing Fonalledas, Reince Priebus should (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Final Frame, greyXstar, JVolvo

    have told the crowd that she is incredibly wealthy. Republicans would never heckle a rich person.

    Even the smallest dog can lift its leg on the tallest building. Jim Hightower

    by shoeless on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:02:08 PM PDT

  •  One of the top stories on reddit.com today says: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mrsgoo, arizonablue, JVolvo

    "As a Ron Paul Supporter, What Happened at the Convention Was Enraging. I Cannot Honestly Vote For the GOP. I Will Most Likely Vote for Either Obama or Johnson In The Hope That A Loss Teaches The GOP a Lesson. Any Other Paulites Feel This Way? Who Do You Plan On Voting For?"

    The GOP is in serious trouble. Piss off African-Americans? Check. Piss off Latinos? Check. Women? Check. And now, Libertarians.

    At this point the only voting block left seems to be affluent white people. It's no wonder they're working so hard on the disenfranchisement stuff, they really have no other path.

  •  A story, a non-story, and now a headline (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ltsply2, JVolvo

    I've followed the order above on DailyKos.  
    - Got incredibly angry about the rudeness to Ms. Fonalledas & was ready to tell all my friends about the KKKonvention;
    - then fortunately got a better understanding that two things were going on -- people were rude to Ms. Fonalledas no doubt, but I believe their anger was directed at Priebus, Boehner, and the Republican Party in general;
    - And now I see this diary, taking one incident into multiple racial directions, many of which are valid.

    No comprendo.

    With regard to "These folks are also sure that Romney's birther jokes were not race faded, that the welfare lies are not race based and that Jan Brewer loves Latinos", f*** you, Armando.

  •  My vote: It was a shout-down (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ltsply2, JVolvo

    I think it the "USA" shouting crowd that overacted to the Paulites and thoroughly disrupted the proceedings so much.     After Fonalledas started to speak, you can still hear the minority Paulites in the background chanting.

    The gap in time before the USA shouting occurred was their slow reaction to the Paulites.

    As an aside, only political junkies would be aware of this shoutfest, but it really shows the authoritarian character of the GOP.   Democrats truly broadened their tent about 40 years ago, while the Republicans are forever making their tent ever less diverse.  The central control of the party is evidenced by this convention and how the Paulites were handled.   For a party whose mantra is "state rights", the hypocrisy was obvious in their attempt to supersede state party rules.

    This is the delusion that they create for themselves:

    "The party's not defined by the top of the ticket anymore. The party is defined by the broader community of people who choose to associate and participate,'' said Matt Kibbe, chairman of FreedomWorks, the grass roots organizing group aligned with tea party conservatives.
    If that were true, you wouldn't have seen the Paulites shut out and shouted-down like they were.  The GOP simply can't handle dissension from within....and I think that's the motivation for the "USA" shoutfest.
  •  kudos to you (4+ / 0-)

    for writing this diary and for braving the onslaught of those who only see racism if it's, pardon me, surrounded by white sheets and hanging from a tree.

    One day, I hope someone will write a diary about acute and chronic racism.  How there is a willingness among some to only see racism in its acute phase, and never in the just-as-deadly and more debilitating chronic manifestations  of racism.  The kind like these daily and regular low level insults and privations and degradations  this Latina (however rich and Republican she might be) had to face.  Racism is a cancer.  Whether acute or chronic, it destroys your life.

    "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

    by Uncle Moji on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:09:07 PM PDT

  •  Not sure that "USA" was directed at Fonalledas (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ltsply2, auron renouille, defluxion10

    But I am sure that those people are all nuts regardless. What a bunch of buffoons.

  •  Shouting "USA, USA, USA!" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sandy on Signal, ltsply2

    is the American version of "Sieg, Heil!".  Because, though the politics are different the emotions and meanness are the same.

  •  Hard to watch such disrespect (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ltsply2, Delilah

    I feel sorry for the lady.  Even Reince Preibus is pissed, but hey, the GOP created this monster.  This is the baby formed by a Tea Party and GOP marriage.  Hope they are proud of this now.  

  •  This is so fake (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ltsply2

    you might as well sign up with the Romney campaign.

    This has been debunked already, since the other GOP delegates were chanting USA as an easy one to chant to drown out "Seat them now!" from the Paul delegates.

    This is done and overwith and I am sorely disappointed to see this nonsense propagated on the front page.  How the hell can we take Romney to task for knowing misrepresentations when dailykos does it too?

    Maybe the MSM is right:  both sides do it.

    Thanks for making us look bad, Armando.  You ought to take the high road and just delete this already and find a real issue to write about.  God knows we have enough real controversies without trying to gin up fake outrage over something that's already been debunked.

    This is a new low.

    Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

    by Mindful Nature on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:18:15 PM PDT

  •  I'm sorry, I have to disagree (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ltsply2, distraught, JVolvo
    Those apologists will have to explain how a protest over delegate seating turned into a chant of "USA! USA!" directed at a Puerto Rican woman of immense wealth.
     
    The explanation is simple. Whatever it was the Paulites were chanting, the rest of the crowd sought to drown them out with chants of "USA!"

    This is very common. We've seen it many times before. When Obama got heckled over DADT at a fundraiser, his supporters drown out those chants saying, "Yes we can."

    I get how rude the behavior was to the Puerto Rican delegate.

    And I get it's politically advantageous for Democrats to push a meme that this was a racist action.

    But call me an apologist, but having watched it, I honestly don't think it WAS motivated by racism. I do think that whole dustup would have occurred no matter who was about to take the stage.

    You're not being "oppressed" when another group gains rights you've always enjoyed.

    by Scott Wooledge on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:19:26 PM PDT

  •  No matter what happened... (0+ / 0-)

    It would have been very useful last night for at least some of many and expensive media personnel at the convention to have gotten the story directly.  

    What the hell was going on down there on the floor? What were the chants?  How about an interview?  Were reporters even ALLOWED to be on the floor?

    Don't get me wrong, I love the various MSNBC commenters (even Tweety), and the only parts of the coverage I could stomach were Rachael et al. ' s commentary -- I didn't even listen to the babble of the various speakers.  But some direct reporting would have been nice given all the cash the networks are doling out for this colossal waste of energy!

  •  What Convention? (0+ / 0-)

    What is this "convention", of which you speak?  Is it a Bilderberg conference?

  •  Maybe her wealth wasn't made in the proper (0+ / 0-)

    Republican 'Mercian way -- by crushing the hopes, reams and lives of those beneath her.

    NOW SHOWING
    Progressive Candidate Obama (now - Nov 6, 2012)
    Bipartisan Obama returns (Nov 7, 2012)

    by The Dead Man on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:34:23 PM PDT

  •  Here are the facts: (4+ / 0-)

    1.  Republicans were having a shit fight.

    2.  Ms Fonelledas was introduced

    3.  For whatever reason, the chant "USA USA USA" then began to be used.

    4.  This creates an "optics" problem for the goopers.

    5.  Suddenly a whole lot of people at Dkos are taking pains to defend those who chanted "USA" on grounds that 1/ they love to chant that or 2/ they didnt mean to call her out for being Hispanic when they chanted it or 3/ they were mad about the Ron Paul stuff and just generally screaming at the podium.

    6.  Whatever the truth of 5/ turns out to be, the GOP presented a picture on tv of their delegates screaming"USA" at a Puerto Rican delegate.  That is the only fact in this whole mess that is incontrovertible.  Shouldn't it be the goopers who are rushing to defend the goopers?  Not us.

    Still enjoying my stimulus package.

    by Kevvboy on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:35:42 PM PDT

    •  it's this whole "reality-based" thing (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mindful Nature

      Did George W. Bush eat babies for breakfast? I doubt it. Why am I rushing to defend W.? Shoot me now.

      Here, we have an honest difference of opinion about what we're seeing and hearing. But I see no reason to withhold my opinion on the grounds that it might be perceived as defending Republicans.

      Election protection: there's an app for that!
      Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

      by HudsonValleyMark on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:43:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I rush to defend facts. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tytalus, JVolvo

      Democrats have facts on our side, I like keeping it that way.

      "The first drawback of anger is that it destroys your inner peace; the second is that it distorts your view of reality. If you come to understand that anger is really unhelpful, you can begin to distance yourself from anger." - The Dalai Lama

      by auron renouille on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:44:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  depends on what our values are (0+ / 0-)

      But if we want to have a leg to stand on in calling out Romney when the GOP engages in lies and distortions, we sure as hell ought to be calling out those on our side who use the same tactics.

      Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

      by Mindful Nature on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:50:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What fact did I misstate? (0+ / 0-)

        You have a lot of invective but no specifics.

      •  I listed the facts (0+ / 0-)

        as I see them.  Please tell me which fact I got wrong.

        Still enjoying my stimulus package.

        by Kevvboy on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 02:11:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's the omission (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Final Frame

          of the context.  Yes, the optics are bad, especially when the video is presented without the context.  Without that context, there's a high risk of a misattribution.

          No surprise to anyone, I find the notion that a big floor fight that's been coming for months boiling over to outraged chanting and protest against the party establishment is vastly better supported than the interpretation that the big floor fight that we've all known was coming blew over in five seconds after the closing gavel, the delegates had their memories wiped clean, and then the started chanting to hurl abuse at a random speaker.

          The attribution problem is whether you attribute the chanting to the ugly fight that had come just before, or the presence of a latina woman just after. (I forgot, did they boo or chant for Susana Martinez?)

          YMMV.  

          Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

          by Mindful Nature on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 03:33:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  My scenario is a bit different. (0+ / 0-)

            Frustrated and angry, at the moment the delegates heard the words "Puerto Rico" their anti-immigrant button was pushed beyond retrieving, and they began to chant USA USA because

            they don't actually know that Puerto Rico is part of America.

            Still enjoying my stimulus package.

            by Kevvboy on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 04:39:25 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Unpossible!!!! (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Mindful Nature
            •  That involves assuming your conclusion (0+ / 0-)

              you have to assume that they are acting on their anti-immigrant impulses in order to conclude they're showing anti-immigrant bias (inappropriately).  

              For many observers, that's an incredible stretch, particularly given the much simpler and more obvious explanation at hand and gives rise the conservative memes that liberals are liars and claims of racism are typically hoaxes.  (Of course, let's not pretend for a second that NOT attributing the chanting to racism is going to slow conservatives down in spreading those memes, so that's no real argument against reaching your conclusion.)

              Anyway, I think we've all fleshed out the issues and come down to a large glop of "who knows?" in reality.

              Courtesy Kos. Trying to call on the better angels of our nature.

              by Mindful Nature on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 05:15:26 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  It seems that a lot happened at once. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tytalus, ltsply2, distraught, JVolvo, fumie

    I don't think anyone is able to really fully unpack what happened there unless they were on the floor, and even amongst reporters who were there, confusion seems to be the order of the day.  I've read diaries here that report that the shouts of "USA!" were pre-planned as a way to suppress the voice votes coming from the Paulbots.  Were they instead directed towards a Puertorriqueña delegate as racism?  Hard to tell.  But either way, it's really horrible optics for the GOP.

    Having said that, I don't think it's fair to accuse people who reasonably conclude that the verbal melee was in regards to the Paulbots of being "apologists" for racism.  Either way, it looks bad for the GOP, and it's indisputable that a whole lot of disgusting racism was displayed on the convention floor last night.  Regardless, this particular moment may have just been creepy timing.

    "The first drawback of anger is that it destroys your inner peace; the second is that it distorts your view of reality. If you come to understand that anger is really unhelpful, you can begin to distance yourself from anger." - The Dalai Lama

    by auron renouille on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:37:02 PM PDT

  •  Plenty of opinions on this (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mindful Nature, ltsply2, JVolvo

    But I think I'll take Giles Goat Boy over yours.

    If at first you don't succeed, vote Teapublicans out and try again. You have to be persistent if you want anything out of life.

    by Final Frame on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:38:22 PM PDT

  •  I jumped to conclusions too (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    auron renouille, ltsply2, JVolvo

    When I first saw the short video, I immediately assumed it was racism and xenophobia from the GOP, because they do that all the time, and it was kinda funny that they didn't know Puerto Rico IS the USA.  But watching the longer video, it is clear this was infighting with the Paulites, which just happened to have weirdly bad timing.

    •  I did as well, at first viewing. (0+ / 0-)

      We wanted a floor fight, although not sure that was the floor fight we fully expected.

      "The first drawback of anger is that it destroys your inner peace; the second is that it distorts your view of reality. If you come to understand that anger is really unhelpful, you can begin to distance yourself from anger." - The Dalai Lama

      by auron renouille on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:43:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Also, I think you know better than assuming that (0+ / 0-)

    all PR Republicans are "0.1%ers."  Puerto Rico doesn't have the same political party divisions that the continental US does and all of the major parties have members who affiliate with all major continental parties, including the ruling party. Territorial politics are complicated and, like Guam (which at least explicitly uses the Democratic/Republican labels, albeit switched around), PR's parties don't neatly line up to mainland positions.

    "The first drawback of anger is that it destroys your inner peace; the second is that it distorts your view of reality. If you come to understand that anger is really unhelpful, you can begin to distance yourself from anger." - The Dalai Lama

    by auron renouille on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:42:19 PM PDT

  •  is it bad etiquette to (0+ / 0-)

    HR a front page diary?

  •  That was directed at her and not the Paul (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sandy on Signal

    supporters follow the Eyes and which way the nose points they was looking at and facing the stage and shaking their arms and fist at at the stage if it was to silence the Paul Supporter they would have been facing and pointing at them not the stage.

  •  I have no idea what happened, (0+ / 0-)

    but I do know the likely political outcome: Obama will, at minimum, match his 2008 numbers with Latinos. Except this time, there will be more of them (likely offsetting a white dropoff).

    Ok, so I read the polls.

    by andgarden on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 12:52:58 PM PDT

  •  It's like America's very own Nuremberg Rally (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sandy on Signal, shanikka

    watching those people shout "USA! USA! USA!" at that Puerto Rican lady.

    Of course, they all think Puerto Rico is somewhere in South America.

  •  EVEN IF those guys weren't racist at that point .. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bevenro, JVolvo

    ... in time, seeing those crazy f'ers in matching cowboy hats or those even crazier f'ers in business suits and baseball caps yelling "U S A" or "Seat him now" was like watching a scene from "The Warriors" movie.

    John Edwards was wrong, there are 3 Americas, the haves, the have nots, and Republican delegates. Holy Moly!!

    No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible.

    by Magster on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 01:44:53 PM PDT

  •  Whether this particular .... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fumie

    ... incident was racist or not, has the GOP earned any benefit of the doubt?

    On the one hand, I can see the argument that this was a climax to the Paul rebellion that coincidentally coincided with a PR speaker, but on the other hand, given the GOP's track record on hating non-whites, that's one heckuva coincidence.

    No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible.

    by Magster on Wed Aug 29, 2012 at 02:12:28 PM PDT

  •  Watched the video carefully (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sandy on Signal, shanikka

    and it looks and sounds like the delegates...RNC guys were yelling at and over Zoraida Fonalledas. Preibus had to tell them to shut up, be respectful and allow her to conduct her business. She was clearly uncomfortable.

    I don't think that Armando is misreading the video. He is usually the first person to shut down diaries containing false information around here.

  •  I agree with Armando's interpretation here (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shanikka

    We can't know exactly what was in those people's minds, but it certainly looks to me that they are screaming at their party leadership, and when that leadership brings out a Latino woman (2 strikes!) in a leadership position, THEN the chants of USA begin.  Seems pretty clearly racist to me.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site