Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

2012 Best of The Saturday Night Card Game

2012 Best of The Saturday Night Card Game

And it goes on, and on, and on.

Any notion that the pathetic racial politics which drive Democrats would relax post-election were shattered immediately.  There is a sickness in the Democratic Party and media which just seems to get worse and worse.

It’s bad enough that they use false accusations of racism as a campaign tool.  They also reserve a special level of viciousness for conservatives and Republicans who are non-white.

The Saturday Night Card Game started unofficially on August 8, 2009, and officially on October 17, 2009.  About 150 Card Games later, here we are.

With just a handful of exceptions, we held a Card Game every Saturday Night in 2012.  Here are excerpts from the five I selected as the “Best Of”:

1. Repeat after me: “The Shirley Sherrod tape was not misleading” (March 3, 2012)

I am most proud of this post, because I completely punctured one of the most pernicious left-wing smears against Andrew Breitbart and by extension the entire conservative activist blogosphere.  It’s the type of work the mainstream media should be doing, but does not because it is agenda driven.  The left-wing blogs don’t care about the evidence, they just want to smear us all as racist.

With Andrew Breitbart’s death this week, one of the most persistent falsehoods has resurfaced, the claim that the original tape released of Shirley Sherrod’s speech to an NAACP Chapter was misleading or defamatory in that it did not reveal that Sherrod’s discrimination against a white farmer was long ago, that she ended up helping him, and that she had since changed her view.
 
* * * *
 
In February 2011, after Sherrod had sued Breitbart and co-defendant Larry O’Connor, I analysed the tape in even greater detail, literally frame by frame, Dissecting Shirley Sherrod’s Complaint Against Andrew Breitbart.
 
Once again I demonstrated that in fact each of the elements of Sherrod’s story which legend has it was not on the “edited” tape in fact was on the tape. Read the post for the full sequence, but here are some images which demonstrate that the full scope of Sherrod’s story was in the “edited” tape.

For example, the fact that Sherrod eventually helped the white farmer was on the tape:

So too that Sherrod later realized she was wrong to have those feelings:

There was a possible inaccuracy in the original tape in that it did not initially make clear that while Sherrod at the time of the speech worked for the federal government, at the time of her dealings with the white farmer she worked for state government. A correction was added to the tape soon after its release.

The reaction to the tape did not take into account what actually was on the tape. A spokesman for the NAACP denounced Sherrod and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack fired her.

When the complete video was released, everyone acted as if her redemption from her racist feelings was being revealed for the first time, and the NAACP rallied around her and Vilsack offered her her job back (which she refused).

This supposed revelation on the full version of the tape was a handy excuse, but the facts had been revealed in the original tape had anyone listened or watched carefully.

What really was going on was that the crowd reaction to Sherrod’s comments caught on the tape was very damaging to the NAACP and those who attacked the Tea Party movement as racist. The crowd cheered when Sherrod recounted her long-ago hostility to the white farmer, and that crowd reaction was the real story. Focusing the debate on the editing of the tape was a convenient distraction.

So let’s put to bed the claim that the original Sherrod tape was misleading, defamatory or reflective of racial codes or racism on the part of Breitbart.

Andrew Breitbart is not around to defend himself anymore, and we owe it to him to push back, hard.

2. May this be the last Saturday Night Card Game in the age of Obama (November 3, 2012)

This is the most melancholy of the posts.  One in which I ponder what might have been.

Tonight hopefully is the last Saturday Night Card Game in the age of Obama.

The series started just over three years ago, and has generated almost 150 posts.

I look back on this time period with great sadness as to how everything has been turned on its head. Those who now claim the mantle of civil rights demand that people be judged based on the color of their skin, while those who refuse to do so falsely are called racist for political gain.

False accusations of racism now are a political tool meant to silence legitimate political discourse and to shape the political battlefield. This is no mistake, but a calculated political tactic which has been used to great effect by Obama campaign supporters since 2008.

Pick almost any Saturday Night Card Game post, particularly in the past six months, and then listen to Martin Luther King, Jr.’s I Have A Dream speech.

I think your reaction will be the same as mine.

3. Worst race card playing commercial ever (June 30, 2012)

Personal injury lawyer meets the race card.  The script writes itself.  A script lacking historical knowledge, but rich with the faux history of the modern left which permeated the presidential campaign in 2012 as it did in 2008.

From Dr. Jack Kevorkian’s lawyer comes possibly the worst form of attorney advertising ever, a massive play of the race card designed to drum up business in the Detroit area. (h/t OcTEApi in Tip Line)

Did anyone question whether George Romney was qualified to be President? Hello Geoffrey Fieger, come on down and meet the Google search box which easily pulled up this recent Reuters article:

In George Romney’s case, most of the questions were raised initially by Democrats who cited the Constitution’s requirement that only a “natural born citizen” can be president…. * * *

And also meet Legal Insurrection blog, which previously has discussed Chester Arthur:

Nearly 123 years after his death, doubts about his US citizenship linger, thanks to lack of documentation and a political foe’s assertion that Arthur was really born in Canada – and was therefore ineligible for the White House, where he served from 1881 to 1885…. * * *

Hey Geoff, is the internet racist too? Or just history?

4. What is left of the Zimmerman-Martin racial narrative? (April 14, 2012)

The racial narrative of the shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman was another example of the mainstream media and left-wing blogosphere wetting their pants with racial accusations before there was any evidence to support those accusations, and even after the accusations were cast into doubt. 

That false narrative made its way to campuses nationwide with “million man hoodie marches” and the such.  These students beclowned themselves based on false information spoon fed to them by our lazy biased media aided and abetted by university professors and administrators.

I think this is a fair description of the racial narrative of the shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman:

George Zimmerman (1) shot Trayvon Martin (2) because a black teenager in a hoodie is frightening (3) to whites, as proven by (4) Zimmerman’s description of Martin as suspicious because he was black, and (5) Zimmerman’s use of the phrase “f-ing coons”, (6) in a classic case of racial profiling, (7) inspired by a climate of hate stoked by Republican “right-wing” rhetoric.

What is left of this narrative based upon what currently is publicly known?

[go to the post where I destroy each element of the narrative, other than (1)]

* * * *

The net result of a fair assessment of the racial narrative of the case is that there is no racial narrative based on currently known facts. There are only assumptions and speculation drawn from historical events and experiences in which George Zimmerman was not involved.

This case is where it always should have been, about the known fact that George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin, and whether that shooting was legally justified, or an unlawful homicide.

5. Republican debate was racist before they said a word (January 28, 2012)

I can’t take any credit for analysis here, but every time I watch this video I split my gut.

Haven’t had much time to devote to the card game because I’m too busy trying to save the Republican Party from itself.

But links are being saved, and I don’t want this one to grow stale.

It speaks for itself:

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

BannedbytheGuardian | December 29, 2012 at 10:08 pm

Jaime Foxx was worth only $100 in Django Unchained.

Uncle Tom was sold for $800.

Market price .

    Here, you rascal, you make believe to be so pious, — didn’t you never hear, out of yer Bible, ‘Servants, obey yer masters’? An’t I yer master? Didn’t I pay down twelve hundred dollars, cash, for all there is inside yer old cussed black shell? An’t yer mine, now, body and soul?” he said, giving Tom a violent kick with his heavy boot; “tell me!”

    In the very depth of physical suffering, bowed by brutal oppression, this question shot a gleam of joy and triumph through Tom’s soul. He suddenly stretched himself up, and, looking earnestly to heaven, while the tears and blood that flowed down his face mingled, he exclaimed,

    “No! no! no! my soul an’t yours, Mas’r! You haven’t bought it, — ye can’t buy it! It’s been bought and paid for, by one that is able to keep it;

Possible correction on Sherrod. Being as she was a political appointee, she could (AFAIK) only be fired by the President of the United States. Anybody in the US could ask her to resign (including her direct superior, the SecAg), but only the POTUS could “fire” her. She emailed in her resignation from the side of the road after receiving a flood of higher-ups “asking” her to bail, but there was no evidence that the POTUS ever ordered her out or requested her resignation directly. (until the book deals come out in a year or two)

I say good riddance to 2012. We lost Andrew Breitbart, we lost the election, we lost Allen West, and God forbid, we will be bludgeoned with the return of Alan Grayson, and Fauxcahontas prevailed. 2012 can take a long walk off of a short pier as far as I am concerned.

William A. Jacobson: 1. Repeat after me: “The Shirley Sherrod tape was not misleading” (March 3, 2012)

Of course it was. “Context is everything.”

Breitbart: Video Proof: The NAACP Awards Racism–2010, “Sherrod’s racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement.”
http://www.webcitation.org/5rbhsjhzR

FoxNews: Video Shows USDA Official Saying She Didn’t Give ‘Full Force’ of Help to White Farmer, “a video has surfaced showing an Agriculture Department official regaling an NAACP audience with a story about how she withheld help to a white farmer facing bankruptcy — video that now has forced the official to resign.”
http://www.webcitation.org/5rQUyfera

    William A. Jacobson in reply to Zachriel. | December 30, 2012 at 9:01 am

    Here’s link that works, http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gdTCoKCblawJ:www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2010/07/19/Video-Proof–The-NAACP-Awards-Racism—2010+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

    So what? The story contains the correction as to her employment status mentioned in my analysis.

    Show me how I was wrong that the material elements people claimed were missing actually were there?

      William A. Jacobson: The story contains the correction as to her employment status mentioned in my analysis.

      You ignored the context. Apparently, your ‘analysis’ went over the heads of Breitbart and Foxnews.

      Breitbart: Video Proof: The NAACP Awards Racism–2010, “Sherrod’s racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement.”

      FoxNews: Video Shows USDA Official Saying She Didn’t Give ‘Full Force’ of Help to White Farmer, “a video has surfaced showing an Agriculture Department official regaling an NAACP audience with a story about how she withheld help to a white farmer facing bankruptcy — video that now has forced the official to resign.”

      The video was hyped and purposefully edited for effect. Most people didn’t watch the whole video, but even then it left out enough to leave a false impression. A great deal of misleading and damaging propaganda was disseminated.

      What’s interesting is that so many of the initial stories are no longer to be found on the original sites.

William A. Jacobson: 4. What is left of the Zimmerman-Martin racial narrative? (April 14, 2012)

Even by Zimmerman’s account, it’s a typical American story of distrust centered on race.

    William A. Jacobson in reply to Zachriel. | December 30, 2012 at 8:49 am

    “even by Zimmerman’s accoount” it’s “centered on race”? cite?

      He’s suspicious of a kid in a hoodie walking down the street. Call it xenophobia, if it makes you feel better, but it doesn’t change the underlying dynamic. Martin must have been similarly suspicious—given Zimmerman’s account. As we said, typical. Only in this case, one of them had a gun.

      Nor does Zimmerman’s claim that Martin said “you gonna die tonight” seem reasonable. It may have seemed reasonable to Zimmerman at the time, thinking as he did that the black guy was a prowler, but it doesn’t make sense now as we now know that Martin was just walking home from the local convenience store after buying his little brother some candy.

        NeoConScum in reply to Zachriel. | December 30, 2012 at 6:46 pm

        ‘Yo, Zachie, Homes…A young black brutha in a hoodie is usually the star of countless Mini-Mart videos. Ya know, Zachie, the star wielding the pistol and often shooting the cashier and sometimes customers,’Yo? So, before you go scampering to the SOP Lib thing of,”Soooooo, that means he should have been killed??!!” Nope, but in poker it’s a valid ‘Tell’ and reason to ask him something in that neighborhood. That’s when Mr.’Hoodie went apes*** postal and ended up DEAD. Sad…Tragic…Sure, Yep, Right. Murder or even Manslaughter..? NOPE, Nada, Nyet, Nein, NO WAY.

          NeoConScum: A young black brutha in a hoodie is usually the star of countless Mini-Mart videos.

          Or a store model for hoodies at Bloomingdales.
          http://m.bloomingdales.com/shop/sale/hoodies-track-jackets?id=5288&channel=mobile&ppp=20
          As we said, it’s a cultural divide that led to suspicion.

          NeoConScum: Ya know, Zachie, the star wielding the pistol and often shooting the cashier and sometimes customers,’Yo? So, before you go scampering to the SOP Lib thing of,”Soooooo, that means he should have been killed??!!”

          The young black man wasn’t robbing stores, but just walking back from the store where he went to get his little brother some candy.

          Ah, got it. You’re parroting! Yes, that’s it. A perfect illustration of ignorance leading to false suppositions. Prejudice and distrust as we said above.

William A. Jacobson | December 30, 2012 at 8:53 am

Lee Atwater said something in 1981, therefore everything every Republican says after that is a racist dog whistle, and everything some tiny percentage says taints everyone. You’ve proved my point about the liberal race card, it’s guilt by ancient or distant associations which do not apply to Democrats (get me some old Robert Byrd quotes).

    William A. Jacobson: Lee Atwater said something in 1981, therefore everything every Republican says after that is a racist dog whistle, …

    Not at all, but it does show the provenance of the methodology.

    William A. Jacobson: … and everything some tiny percentage says taints everyone.

    Um, Atwater was not just some body, but an important political operator in the Republican Party. He and his ilk helped establish the political means that the Republican Party has often used to attain power.

    William A. Jacobson: You’ve proved my point about the liberal race card, it’s guilt by ancient or distant associations which do not apply to Democrats (get me some old Robert Byrd quotes).

    The Democrats have accepted and repudiated their sorry past. They fought a long intra-party battle to resolve that issue, and paid a substantial political price. Have the Republicans repudiated their own past, or do they, as you do here, simply try to justify it?

    Notably, you didn’t respond to the point concerning xenophobic terms applied to Obama by many prominent commentators.

“While it is certainly true that some people are too quick to claim racism, it is also true that many people have expressed their bigotry by repeatedly referring to Obama as “Kenyan”, “Muslim”, “Barack Hussein”, “Marxist”, etc.”

I am still trying to figure out what is so bad about referring to Barack with his full given name? Barack Hussein Obama. What’s the problem? Oddly enough, one of my best friends who voted for him, did not even know that was his middle name…she thought I was disparaging him!!!

You right, Zachie. Mistah Neo a wascally wacist,’Yo. He been goin’ down to a ‘hood in Minneola-Clermont for ‘fo years now,’Yo, and mentoring some black ‘yoots. Yep, “BLACK”, not “African”, as they never use white-lib PC terms there, nor do they have anything much but contempt and snickering for little white libs on those vastly rare occasions when they see’um.

Want’a come down with me Friday, Zachie? Jarvielle and Kareem and La-La(Lafayette)and Xa-Xa(Xavier)and Alisha and their Grammy Runell would love to smoke you over,’Yo.

Open invite,’Yo.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend