Rebane republished The Union column on his blog with this logo.
It promotes the views of political extremists — right under the masthead, no less. Since the publisher’s name — Dave Schmall — is right above the column, people might mistake it for the newspaper’s own opinion. Is it?
The column running under the masthead is titled “The advent of ‘Obamunism’,” written by “right wingnut” George Rebane, AKA “columnist.” Rebane calls himself an “entrepreneur” at the bottom of his column; in fact, he is a political activist in our community — for the hard right. It’s an open secret.
Obamunism?
“To say that President Obama is a unique piece of work in the Oval Office would be an understatement of this young century,” it begins. The column makes broad and misleading statements about the Agenda 21 accord, a workforce that sees government “as an employer of last resort” and “public information through a ‘new media-government cooperative.’”
This perspective is a “piece of work.” No reasonable person would find the points rational, accurate — or reflective of the newspaper’s general readership. And it should be labeled political activism, not masquerading as the views of an “entrepreneur” or “systems scientist.” The Union is being used.
This is the John Birch Society’s view of America, at best. Remember them? They didn’t get much traction in our country, but you can’t fault them for trying. It’s a free country.
THE “REJECT OBAMUNISM” LOGO LINKS TO A HATEFUL WEBSITE
On his blog, Rebane shows his true colors, republishing the column with the logo shown here “Reject Obamunism.” It is disrespectful of a President, at best.
Also there’s a link to a political blog at the bottom of the logo; it is called “No Obama Nation.” The blog’s URL is in small type under the words “Obamunism.” The link is here. Check out this blog.
The Union management (including Dave Schmall) should check it out too. On the front page, it shows an image of a man giving the finger to Obama, with the wording “Hey Obama, redistribute this ASSHOLE!”
Come to think of it, has Dave Schmall read the Rebane blog, including his defense of using the term “raghead” and more? Does The Union’s managing editor Brian Hamilton, a longtime sports editor whose name also is listed on the masthead, think much about the consequences of running Rebane’s columns in this spot?
The new publisher does not need to be “co-opted” by political extremists to maintain the newspaper’s reputation for being “The Tea Party Gazette.” Running this article in such a prominent place has just the same impact. It shows a lack of editorial judgment.
In fact, I’m wondering if the newspaper should be called “The John Birch Society” Gazette, not just The Tea Party Gazette.
To be sure, the real issue is that The Union cannot find enough qualified citizens to submit columns, so it runs what’s submitted: in this case, extremist, polarizing views that divide the community.
This plays right into the hands of political activists such as Rebane. Political activists have been manipulating newspapers (and newspaper publishers) for years. It’s an open secret about The Union too. No spine.
To be taken seriously, however, The Union ought to rethink its editorial policy. It’s a lazy policy.
It also ought to look in the proverbial mirror and ask itself why it doesn’t get submissions from the real entrepreneurs in our community, not political activists. When was the last time you read one? It’s because people are turned off by its judgment — and have been for years.
Sure it’s OK to run extreme views, but run them on another page, not under the masthead. This is not a First Amendment issue; it’s a judgment issue. And people trust a newspaper (or not) based on its judgment.
A column by Huey P. Newton (a leftwing extremist) is here. I wonder if The Union would run that perspective under its masthead if it showed up in the “in” box.
Reading The Union for free the past week has reminded me that it’s going to take forever to turn this paper around.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Of course this is a disgusting piece of propaganda, designed to appeal to the basest instincts in the American character and sow fear in advance of the Presidential election. John Burton was right, the tactic is straight out of Goebbels; this time by someone who were there to hear Goebbels first person. All I can say is Goebbels either did his job so well that the Boys from Brazil continue in his footsteps, or the author learned nothing from his childhood.
As I suspected, it’s not going to turn around. It’s Swift Communication. It’s the same old s**t in a new hat. I don’t think I’ve purchased a single copy in the last 8 or 9 years.
Obamunism doesn’t actually exist, and while I will give George a “nice try” award, his efforts are for naught. You might as well claim that President Eisenhower was a member of the Communist Party.
BTW, if George Rebane really wanted to reach out to folks other than the choir, he would post here. The fact that he doesn’t is telling.
No matter what his political stripe, Rebane has committed the egregious sin of bad writing.
I had a writing teacher once who hammered this message repeatedly: “You must be willing to kill off your little darlings.”
He was referring to those clever little turns of phrase and conceits with which we delight ourselves in the act of writing. Our delight at our own cleverness short-circuits our self-critical faculty.
In this case, Rebane not only gets attached to the over-cute nonsense word, “Obamunism,” his little darling becomes the basis for his entire piece, making it laughable in its entirety.
Nicely put and very astute, Mr. Pelton.
“We will never have the elite smart people on our side, because they believe they should have the power to tell you what to do,” said Santorum, adding, “So our colleges and universities, they’re not going to be on our side. The conservative movement will always be – and that’s why we founded Patriot Voices – the basic premise of America and American values will always be sustained through two institutions, the church and the family.”
Rick Santorum to the Values Voters Summit Sept. 15, 2012
Well, I guess Schmail is showing his true committment to The Union’s purpose. I wonder how many more subscribers will be lost. My neighbor, my only immediate source, has decided she’s done with The Union.
Including Mr. Pelline, there are already seven voices here that could write and submt a well-written and thoughtful article to The Union in support of Pres. Obama’s policies and ideology. I am pretty sure that The Union would print it.
Rebane writes: “Public information will come through a new media-government cooperative whose administrators will be the final arbiters of fair and balanced delivery of news and opinions.”
Isn’t that what is kind of going on here? Bullying The Union in order to restrict speech? Clearly, George’s views are George’s…as much as Amy Goodman’s views are her own. They are not The Union’s.
Instead of bullying and attacking George personally, maybe you all should debate the merits (or lack thereof) of his article.
Barry,
Don’t “shoot the messenger”: I’m a middle of the road guy (registered as “DTS”) who has voted for Republicans and Democrats over the years. I do not participate in any political activities or rallies (though I did donate $500 to Greg Diaz’ campaign in the nonpartisan clerk-recorder’s race, because I though it was being highly politicized. Greg was the most qualified candidate.)
I’m just astounded at The Union newspaper’s lack of editorial judgment. Just because it is “submitted,” doesn’t mean you run it below the masthead. Debating George Rebane is like debating Huey P. Newton or any other political extremist. You should also disclose that you are a political activist who shares George’s views.
The message was created by the messenger – and nobody wants to shoot you! That said, is not that which your post seeks to do also? It just seems like there is a lot of bullying and intimidation in the post and the comments thereto. I think that we would be better served as a people to debate the merits of George’s article as opposed to bullying The Union and George.
As far as you broad brush “disclosure,” I am a political activist, but my views are my own and hardly extreme. Further, I doubt that all of my views mirror George’s or anyone else’s for that matter…much the same as I doubt that all of your views mirror anyone else. If you would take the time to get to know me, instead of continually attempting to label me, you would know that.
Barry – Could you address this point please:
Should Rebane be below the Masthead in the Union as if he were part of an editorial?
George Rebane, one more old white man yelling at an empty chair through the Union and KVMR.
Barry,
Nobody’s being bullied or intimidated — you would feel a lot more heat if they were. As for labeling, you are labeling yourself by coming here to defend George’s outlandish “Obamunism” reference and The Union’s poor decision to run his column below the masthead. If I were you, and concerned about labeling, I would have just ignored this post all together and enjoyed the fine “Indian Summer” weather. It’s not too late!
I am not defending George – I am defending is right to express his thoughts. We need more speech – not less. We need to be able to express our thoughts without fear of intmidation and bullying. This type of intimidation and bullying is something I find very difficult to ignore – it is a weakness of mine, but I will take you advice and go golfing today!
Barry, I don’t think anyone is saying that George should not be able to express his thoughts…they are questioning whether KVMR and The Union, as private sector entities, should be giving George a platform to express those thoughts. There is a fundamental difference between freedom of speech and guaranteeing equal access to the media; access to the media is at the discretion of the media entity since the elimination of the fairness doctrine. Even under the fairness doctrine private media companies were allowed to set standards. My point is that their standards are too low.
Exposing the issue of what community standards do we want to set is not intimidation and bullying.
I question whether or not The Union and KVMR should be giving George a platform that drives readers and listeners to his blog. Here is George in response to a question from Mr. Anderson earlier today:
“”Re reaching out to other than the choir, I would offer that you would not assign more than half the commenters here to anything labeled as “the choir”. In addition to my Union column and KVMR commentaries, my readership is of a size that humbles me, and I am grateful to have their attention and interest in the ideas I present and/or we subsequently discuss/debate. I would estimate that of the thousands of monthly unique visitors to RR, half are of the liberal bent. My informal poll of local encounters and emails from those who say they read me seems to corroborate that……”
As long as George’s blog promotes the use of bigoted and racist speech (use of the term “rag head”, use of the term “jigaboo”, and numerous incidents of dog whistle references to President Obama’s race that I could cite), I don’t think it is either a wise business decision or a good community standard to set. Perhaps if George had some standards on his blog he would deserve a spot on KVMR and in The Union. I would say the same thing about Amy Goodman if she was engaged in such speech (I don’t really listen to Amy).
The long and short of it is that a good community standard is that even editorials should be backed up by facts, real facts, facts that can be checked. What George has provided is a mish-mash of vague theories. I wrote an editorial in the Sierra Sun on Friday, and I painstakingly reviewed documents, did independent research and can cite a source to back up every single factual claim I made in that editorial. I for one would be happy if editorials required sources to back up opinions (but I know that with the current state of journalism that is not going to happen in our lifetimes, and I am not suggesting such a standard).
http://www.sierrasun.com/article/20120914/NEWS/120919941/1066&ParentProfile=1051
Just for the record, I do not think the “under the masthead” issue is a real issue. Anyone could appear under that masthead, as I have once or twice, and the public is smart enough to know the difference between an guest editorial, a position piece by the paper, and a news story. But Jeff is pointing out that from a purely editing standpoint the ambiguity of it could be construed as sloppy.
I mean, really, is this the state of our media? When the predominant media culture (and KVMR and The Union are the two biggest dogs in Nevada County) becomes a conduit to drive web hits to bigotry, we are in a world of hurt. Mainstream media should be calling bigotry on its’ behavior.
Finally, I am still giving Mr. Schmall the benefit of the doubt. I think he inherited a job and it will take some time for him to define and set the new standards. I welcome him doing that.
Hope you had a nice golf game. I’m going to buy a new I-phone 4s now that we know the 5 is no big deal.
There is no question, if one is being honest, as to the intent of Rebane’s coinage of Obamunism and the revolutionary style, red background behind a stern Lenin like ism type guy. In my opinion, one quite familiar with Socialist Realism so-called-art, the word and poster are a cowardly attempt to portray our President as a Communist without actually coming straight out and doing so. And the Union, by its printing and placement of said piece, has endorsed the message
I’m for honesty. Romney and Ryan are habitual liars and have dishonored themselves with their cheap trash talk over recent events in the volatile Islamic countries. These two and the Republican party have are trying to make lying an acceptable part of speech, just as the Nazis were able to do and the communist when ruled by Stalin, the Georgian man of steel did, even to his closest friends.
Ed, just for the record, The Union did not run the graphic.
Steve, thanks for the heads up on that bit of info. Just the same, three and a half years of Rebane’s, Juvinall’s and that whole crowd labeling of sane people as slimy commies, and pictures like the one in question–which is sooooo Marxist-Leninist in flavor–while they sing the praises of the R & R tag team, who seem so eager, if elected, to let Netanyahu entangle us in a war with Iran. Iran is no Iraq. And those two have nothing to offer but what appears to be Aryan supremacy and despite the immorality of their platform, their local shills are still devote.
Hate to weigh in again, but the image on the poster is an exact duplicate of the iconic 2008 Shepard Fairey “Hope” poster.
You educated me on that, Steve. Tweaking my curiosity about Fairy. I found many of his posters which I do like. He did create quite a stir back in ’08 with the Hope poster. It did remind me of Lenin’s portrait and one art critic commented that his work is a blend of Warhol and Socialist Realism and indeed, the poster reminded me of that type of art. Very talented artist, IMO, but quite controversial in the Art world.
To suggest that Obama is a communist suggests to me a detachment from reality. I would think that rational people would begin to look at DSM-5 categories in order to understand this phenomenon.
It has been more than suggested, It has been blatant and prolific, with the hammer and sickle positioned next to a blog about Obama on one blog, and the ‘too many times to count’ that I’ve read comments following op-eds referring to Obama as such. Some times it’s just name calling but other times I believe it is truely believed.
Just the way I see it.
People,
The Union’s management invited George Rebane to be a columnist. The commentary is labeled “columnist,” not “Other Voices” like other contributors. That’s a big difference. It reflects their judgment. The article that Steve Frisch wrote is more appropriate for a “community” newspaper, because it deals with a community issue — a proposed biomass facility in Placer County. Imagine that!
For some reason George thought he had invented the term. I corrected him on this, by posting the following search: http://www.google.ca/search?q=obamunism+image&hl=en&lr=&as_qdr=all&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=g45WULvfEKWqigKqwoBA&ved=0CCEQsAQ&biw=1600&bih=708 He then revised his original post to include the poster. Read the earliest comments to see how this played out.
“First they came for the veterans, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a veteran; then they came for Tea Party members, and I didn’t speak out because I didn’t belong to the Tea Party; then they came for …; and then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.” George Rebane
Somehow I think Martin Niemoller would be spinning in his grave.
Here is the actual text:
First they came for the communists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.
Steve,
George is a joke. I agree that the Obama administration has expanded the militarization of domestic law enforcement agencies but it was started long ago and put on steroids by the Bush administration. I guess George forgets that Bush ended Posse Commitatus in 2006 and created a Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) in 2002. As I protested these things in the previous administrations I have protested against these things in the Obama administration. I don’t see George in the streets? These steps towards a militarized law enforcement are incremental and always justified to protect the public, they are put in place to control the public.
What a boob. Rebane is an embarrassment for The Union to call him one of their “columnists.” He’s an (arm’s length) “other voices” contributor, at best. But reading him once a month is too much for most of us.
I wonder if The Union will run his latest rant, too He writes “we’re basically screwed,” where he pees all over an economic development meeting that he doesn’t even stick around for.:
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2012/09/local-control-of-business-development-were-basically-screwed.html
I don’t listen to the KVMR news hour (where Rebane is featured) either. At least KNCO doesn’t put Rush on their local news hour.
I’m sure there are some more intelligent conservative voices out there. Even conservatives laugh at this guy. He’s a political extremist (and a political activist) masquerading as an “entrepreneur.”
Unfortunately I have to say that although George did not stay, his basic observation, that the meeting was more about people reporting on what they are doing rather than coordinating activity to reach a set of objectives, is spot on.
I attended the entire session, and opened the session by stating that economic development is a system, like an ecosystem, and that the parts of that system (like local government, educational institutions, the chambers, professional associations, lenders, NGO’s, EDC’s, state and federal agencies, and BUSINESS) needs to be mapped, services and gaps in services identified, strategic investments in time and capital made, and the system managed to meet specific short term and long term objectives that are collectively established.
I believe that Russ’ observation that rather than acting like a system we act like a tribal confederation is also spot on. Each of the entities above has a specific interest, and a specific business model that makes their interest run; and we are captured by self-interest rather than motivated by community interest.
I do think that the session had real value, first from an informational stand point; there is value for local governments (NC, GV, NC and TOT were all represented) having a common understanding of what each entity in the ED support sector is doing. Second, some good questions and complicated answers were discussed.
But the bigger issue is that our ‘region’ lacks a clear ED strategy, and lacks clarity of vision on certain key questions such as:
1) what is the region that we should be planning in (is the scale the entire Sierra, the four generally identified sub-areas of the Sierra, are western Placer and El Dorado connected to a Sacramento strategy, is Nevada County more like Placer or more like Plumas-Sierra, is eastern NC in the mix? how do we identify a ‘region, is it demographically or geopolitically?)
2) what is the role of government in identifying and advancing an ED strategy (some say laissez-fair some say directive)
3) what is the role of state and federal entities and the nature of our relationship with them (is it active or passive, is it adversarial or collaborative)
4) how do we establish a process to identify goals, objectives, strategies, actions, timelines and budgets that the vast majority fo players can support?
I find it hard to believe that we are 4 years into the Great Recession and we are still arguing over the shape of the table. In that sense, George and Russ are entirely correct—but that does not mean that the solution is to piss all over the efforts people are making. That just perpetuates the problem.
There is a lot of good work going on out there by people like Brent, Robert Trent, the NCCA, the chambers, the ERC, SBC and others. It is time that these efforts collaborate.
Steve,
I wonder if there’s a more eloquent way to put it than “We’re all basically screwed.” This is not very informative, insightful or newsworthy. In fact, there’s more collaboration in our western county than in the past among these groups. Some new faces appearing (and some old ones disappearing) has helped. George Rebane needs to “dig deeper,” but his ideology always gets in the way.
If you don’t thnk we are all basically screwed, consider this element that was not even discussed at the conference, even though we are an Ag County:
~Philip Anderson posted to —> U.S. Farmers & Ranchers Alliance~
“Something that bugs me about Monsanto legalities against farmers. If a Monsanto-using farm’s pollen pollenates your plants, you will be sued for using their product without paying. That’s the equivalent of you jumping over my fence, raping my wife and impregnating her… and then suing me for illegally using your seed. That is insane logic. And knowing that pollen spreads, it must have been thought out and planned ahead years before that eventually all specific plants would change to Monsanto “brands.”
Doug–I wish you had introduced yourself to me. I’m sure we have met in the past but I would have loved to have talked with you.
I agree, Ag is a significant part of our economy and needs a strong seat at the table in future discussions of ED.
Doug’s a pretty sharp cookie!
I tend to give him a no-nonsense rating as he tends to be a “elminate the chaff and just keep the wheat” kinda guy!
Thank-you both, I wasn’t there , however.
Personally, I prefer to read many opinions to get the big picture. I’m glad the new publisher intends to carry on the tradition. We’ve subscribed for almost 60 years, and our parents and grandparents before us. The Union has always represented the pulse of our community…and may it continue to do so for many years in the future.
Okay, so thanks to Mr. Rebane’s opinion, we all know that the sky is falling.
Now what?