SPLC report on ‘radical right’ abounds with adjectives and self-contradictions

Commentary by Kay B. Day

The Southern Poverty Law Center, by necessity, survives because of the hatred the organization perceives in so called ‘radical right’ groups. Those groups are upset with government policy on taxes and immigration, among other things. SPLC said there are almost 1,000 hate groups in the U.S. What is the criteria for being listed as a hate group?

‘So-called patriot groups’ are one example included in the SPLC rant, defined as “militias and other organizations that see the federal government as part of a plot to impose ‘one-world government’ on liberty-loving Americans…”

Apparently the SPLC hasn’t been following the Al Gore global warming movement, various agreements with the United Nations and and the deliberate interlocking of global economies, in the interest of select hedge funds making themselves richer while enjoying privileged tax status. Considering what George Soros did to Great Britain and what he may want to do to Europe, it would appear the SPLC is clueless as to why Americans might just be a tad concerned.

The spring, 2010, report ‘Rage on the Right’ is filled with inflammatory writing—propaganda would be too kind a word. In the first two paragraphs, both verbs and adjectives carry the hot fire of statist rage: ignited, explosion, furious, anti-immigrant, vigilante, impose, roaring.

Note the use of the term ‘anti-immigrant’ and the omission of the word ‘illegal.’ And ask yourself why SPLC would endorse government policy that deliberately imports uneducated migrant workers and then yawns if they’re here illegally. The government and various advocacy groups are simply creating a vulnerable worker class, largely from one geographic area,  that asks for less and comes to the US to earn and to receive medical care because their home country is a failed state.

The report also quotes a “veteran analyst of the American radical right” who said, “We are in the midst of one of the most significant right-wing populist rebellions in United States history.” I’d probably agree with that. After all, as the report also points out, 61 percent of us believe the country is in decline. And only 25 percent believe the government can be trusted.”

The real cracker-upper comes in an acknowledgment, however: “The anti-tax tea party movement is viewed in much more positive terms than either the Democratic [sic] or Republican parties…”

Of course much of the reason for all this “patriotism” is because there is a black man in The White House as statists like to say. That is factually incorrect as TUSR has repeatedly pointed out. There is a black/white man in The White House. Why do statists zero out Obama’s white mother? Is there a story in that?

Beneath all the hyperbole of the SPLC report there seems to be a visceral fear. The report notes anger about Obama’s election but fails to mention the greatest breach of security in our president’s first term, and that security was breached by his own staff. The White House dinner crashers made for great content in November but few media realized what a remarkable lapse in security the president’s staff allowed. Some blame the Secret Service, and they do share some responsibility. But overall, whoever was in command within the White House staff selected by Obama bears the largest amount of blame, one reason the social secretary finally resigned.

The SPLC did lighten up in one regard. In the last SPLC report, all manner of alleged ‘right wing extremists’ were named, even respectable bloggers and columnists. In the spring report, only Glenn Beck and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) were named.

Another moment of irony manifests as Tenth Amendment resolutions are noted—37 states have either passed or introduced resolutions reminding the federal government there are limitations to its powers and Americans have a copy of the document that establishes those limitations.

In a nutshell, the report makes its own case for anger at the government—well more than half of us believe the US is on a downhill slide and only 1 in 4 of us trust the government. All but 13 states have signed onto the Tenth Amendment resolution cause. And the tea partiers are more respected by Main Street than by elitists who call them all sorts of silly derogatory names and point to select signs from hundreds of thousands of signs to make a case for hate group status.

No one worried much when black Republican appointees were targeted for ridicule and hatred.

The SPLC needs hate groups like Planet Earth needs sunshine. That in itself should give us great cause to question anything that comes forth from that once useful organization, a group now reduced to dinosaur status and identity politics. And money.

Conservative blogger Yid with Lid said the report is, “a progressive political report pretending to be a study on ‘hate.’ The Vigilance Project noted the SPLC must rely on such reports for fundraising.

And there you have it in a nutshell—dogma meets fundraising for purposes of profit. That’s one reason all those inflammatory words meet the reader right up front in the first couple of paragraphs even if the report does implode of its own accord with cherry-picked figures that were meant to prove a position but fail to do so. The report is basic propaganda, as all those adjectives signify.