Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Saturday Night Card Game Tag

On this second anniversary of Andrew Breitbart's death, Legal Insurrection and others are remembering Andrew. Some of Andrew's enemies in life, however, continue their efforts in his death. I seriously thought about not calling attention to such people, but that would be a cop out. At the Breitbart Awards in Providence in 2012, the only blogger conference I've attended so far, numerous people spoke to how Andrew thought of himself as the point man in the movement, the person who drew the fire so that others didn't have to. It's important to remember what and who Andrew faced. When I scrolled through a Twitter search for Andrew Breitbart's name, I saw a tweet by Max Blumenthal referring to Andrew reaching his "tweet limit" and linking to an article by Blumenthal from May 2013 mocking how "it was convenient that Breitbart's heart exploded when it did...." I didn't remember what the beef was between Andrew and Blumenthal. So I did a search and found this video by Lee Doren (via an Erick Erickson post) explaining the whole incident and confrontation at CPAC 2010:

I haven't paid much attention to Richard Silverstein.  I did once describe him as an "apologist for anti-Israel extremism," in my post Most pathological #BostonMarathon Tweet. Nothing I've seen since leads me to think that description was wrong.  Others are less charitable, and he is a frequent target of mockery from pro-Israel bloggers, including when he recently accused his local synagogue in San Francisco of outing the date of his child's Bat Mitzvah for some nefarious purpose; turns out Silverstein himself had tweeted out the date. Silverstein insists he is not anti-Zionist. He just appears to act like one. Silverstein sent out a tweet yesterday that is quite astounding in its viciousness. The tweet was directed at Chloé Simone Valdary, a pro-Israel American Christian who is black. You may remember her from this video we featured in the post BDS is just the same old, same old hate:

Demos, a left-wing Soros-Open Society affiliated UK think tank, did a study of "slurs" on Twitter. The Daily Mail Reports, Just how racist is Twitter?
10,000 racist tweets are sent ever day, a major new study into racism on social networks has discovered. Research by the think tank Demos found the biggest insult was 'white boy' Researchers analysed 126,975 English-language tweets from across the globe over a 9-day period in the biggest ever study of Twitter racism. Researchers revealed the most common racial slurs used on the micro-blogging site included ‘whitey’ and ‘pikey’. However, as many as 70% of tweets using such language were deemed to be using slurs in non-derogatory fashion. 'This sparks the debate about the extent to which Twitter truly is a platform for racism and abusive language,' the report claims. Jamie Bartlett, Director of CASM at Demos and author of the report, said: 'Twitter provides us with a remarkable window into how people talk, argue, debate, and discuss issues of the day. 'While there are a lot of racial slurs being used on Twitter, the overwhelming majority of them are not used in an obviously prejudicial or hateful way.
Here's the chart from the Demos Report (the percentages are of the total of tweets identified as containing slurs:

We have noted before the tensions between white liberal feminists and non-white liberal feminists. Sometimes it breaks out into a Twitter War, as it did when #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen hashtag unleashed bitter intra-feminist racial grievances. Or when Joan Walsh of got into a twitter war with some ladies who did not like Walsh's condescending "professional left" attitude towards women of color, Dem Base Fractures Into Twitter War And Charges Of Racism Against Professional Left. This past week, for reasons unknown to me, the eruption used the hashtag #WhiteWomanPrivilege. It was like Festivus, the airing of grievances: There was not enough popcorn growing in the States of Iowa and Nebraska combined to cover this outbreak of intra-feminist racial greivances. Here are some of my favorites, but by all means scroll through the hashtag -- but don't get any butter on the couch please:

Melissa Harris-Perry of MSNBC presided over an appalling segment in which panelists mocked Mitt Romney's family because of his adopted black grandchild.  She later apologized profusely. Yet for unknown reasons, Ta-Nehisi Coates in The Atlantic rushed to Perry's defense not by defending her conduct, but by attacking her critics as racist.
The Smartest Nerd in the Room: Why Melissa Harris-Perry is America's foremost public intellectual, and what she means On Saturday, Melissa Harris-Perry apologized on air for segment that made light of the Romney clan's adoption of a young black boy. On Sunday, Mitt Romney accepted Harris-Perry's "heartfelt" apology, noting, "I've made plenty of mistakes myself." I've watched the offending segment several times now. I can see how a white parent who'd adopted a black child (or vice versa) would find the segment flip and offensive. It would not have surprised me if those concerned about adoption, equality, and racism voiced some protest about the segment. Instead what we got was week of invective driven mostly by a conservative movement with less lofty concerns.

It's been a long week for Melissa Harris-Perry. The MSNBC host took a lot of heat for this segment on her show last weekend in which she moderated a panel of comedians in offering a caption to a Romney family photo that featured Governor Romney holding his adopted grandson, Kieran, who is black. The segment devolved into senseless mocking - as Professor Jacobson previously noted, "To the race-obsessed minds at MSNBC, the fact that Mitt Romney’s son and daughter-in-law adopted a black child is something to mock." Mitt Romney family Christmas photo 2013 Backlash ensued and Melissa Harris-Perry later apologized online in a series of tweets. On her program today, Harris-Perry again made an apology for that segment, while fighting back tears.  Below is an excerpt from that apology.  Video is after the jump.
Now given my own family history, I identify with that picture and I intended to say positive and celebratory things about it, but whatever the intent was, the reality is that the segment proceeded in a way that was offensive. And showing the photo in that context, that segment, was poor judgment. So without reservation or qualification, I apologize to the Romney family. Adults who enter into public life implicitly consent to having less privacy. But their families, and especially their children, should not be treated callously or thoughtlessly. My intention was not malicious, but I broke the ground rule that families are off-limits, and for that I am sorry. Also, allow me to apologize to other families formed through transracial adoption, because I am deeply sorry that we suggested that interracial families are in any way funny or deserving of ridicule. On this program we are dedicated to advocating for a wide diversity of families. It is one of our core principles, and I am reminded that when we are doing so, it must always be with the utmost respect.
(h/t to Newsbusters for the transcript; and to TheRightScoop for staying on the story)

We have dealt the "white privilege" so many times here, I probably should start a "white privilege" tag. Michael Eric Dyson is a frequent commentator on MSNBC. He's a Professor of Sociology at Georgetown. He is quick to make accusations impunigning others with accusations of explicit or implicit racism: And he has the privilege of accusing other of "white privilege" when he wants to win an argument:

No, not of me. Of Obama, British Prime Minister David Cameron and Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt yucking it up at Nelson Mandela's memorial service. The allegation was that the reaction was racist. From the ever-reliable, The media’s Michelle Obama problem: What a selfie says about our biases
More than anything, the response to these latest images of Michelle Obama speaks volumes about the expectations placed on black women in the public eye and how a black women’s default emotional state is perceived as angry. The black woman is ever at the ready to aggressively defend her territory. She is making her disapproval known. She never gets to simply be. Maybe the first lady is irritated with her husband or someone else, maybe she’s indifferent, maybe she’s thinking about the long plane ride home, maybe, just maybe, she’s recalling Nelson Mandela’s life and legacy. We will never know. Meanwhile, the Internet is speculating about Michelle Obama’s mind-set, her motivations and the state of her marriage because if a married black man, always on the prowl even if he is the commander in chief, is seen smiling next to an attractive white woman, well, that’s curtains for the marriage. The white she-devil strikes again! The first lady can’t win. Last month, Michelle Obama was a “feminist nightmare.” Today she is angry and on the verge of losing her marriage.
From Oliver Willis of Media Matters (tweeting his own opinion, of course):

Nelson Mandela died on Thursday. I have been deliberately deliberative on writing about his death, in this post for the first time. As so many rushed out with statements based on self-proclaimed expertise on Mandela's life, I realized that I knew little of his life other than the big picture -- A fight to end Apartheid and a famous lack of desire for revenge. Maybe that was enough to know. What I've read the past couple of days confirms both the greatness of his accomplishments, yet also the mixed record of his life which does not justify simplification. Mandela embraced totalitarian communist and socialist regimes during his struggle against another form of unjust regime; he embraced the murderous thieving Yasser Arafat, yet also insisted on Israel's right to exist in secure borders. Here are just a few of the more informative pieces, among many dozens I've read: This immediate post-release press conference seems to embody the conflicting aspects of his history and that of South Africa:

If Obama can do it, why can't I? A follow up to a prior question, What race is an illegal alien? Obama is pivoting back to immigration reform, which really amounts to an amnesty push, because without amnesty there could be "reform" of a wide variety of immigration issues. During a speech at DreamWorks, Obama curiously stated that he could tell who were immigrants based on their faces (transcript via RCP):
OBAMA: As I was getting a tour of DreamWorks, I didn't ask, but just looking at faces, I could tell there were some folks who are here not because they were born here, but because they want to be here and they bring extraordinary talents to the United States. And that's part of what makes America special. And that's part of what, by the way, makes California special, because it's always been this magnet of dreamers and strivers. And people coming from every direction saying to themselves, you know, if I work hard there I can have my piece of the American Dream.
I know exactly what he means. I spotted this immigrant from a mile away (the one on the left). Piers Morgan Mike Tyson Must have been the fear of deportation on his face:

There has been a not too subtle attempt this week to smear the Tea Party as racist and violent in connection with the 50th Anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy. What does the Tea Party have to do with the assassination? It's an outgrowth of the discredited and time-worn eliminationist narrative, that the modern "right wing" and the Tea Party in particular are the inheritors of the "paranoid style of politics" from the 1960s. The logic, if you call it that, is that Dallas was a city infused with hate and anti-Catholic bigotry, that bigotry was reflective of a larger Southern bigotry including racism, and that the Tea Party is the outgrowth of that racist, bigoted past which led to the assassination. There is a problem with all this, of course.  Kennedy was killed by a Lee Harvey Oswald, a Commie, not the "right wing." Let me repeat, because this is the internet:


You would not know that if you read the attempt to portray the Kennedy assassination as the result of right wing, bigoted hatred in the mainstream liberal media and blogosphere: Rich Lowry notes (also see video at bottom of post), The Kennedy Conspiracy in Plain Sight:

We have written many times before about the "white privilege" industry, a collection of self-perpetuating activists and academics who, not being able to demonstrate racism to justify their salaries and conferences, invent it. The lack of ability to prove racism becomes the best proof of racism.  It's everywhere, unspoken, unseen, lurking behind everything and every person with white skin (whatever that is). It is .... White Privilege. White privilege is adopted wholesale as and elsewhere in the left blogosphere as well because it can't be disproven.  It is a prime example of Kafkatrapping -- the denial is the proof. Particularly when combined with maleness and Christianity, white privilege becomes the Swiss Army Knife of race cards. Or maybe the Energizer Bunny is a better reference, because it just keeps going, and going, and going. It's easy to laugh, except when you consider how deeply these theories have has permeated into society. So much so that the Pentagon is preaching the evils of "white privilege" and a male club, as part of its training materials for Equal Opportunity officers. Pentagon training manual: white males have unfair advantages:
A controversial 600-plus page manual used by the military to train its Equal Opportunity officers teaches that "healthy, white, heterosexual, Christian" men hold an unfair advantage over other races, and warns in great detail about a so-called "White Male Club." “Simply put, a healthy, white, heterosexual, Christian male receives many unearned advantages of social privilege, whereas a black, homosexual, atheist female in poor health receives many unearned disadvantages of social privilege,” reads a statement in the manual created by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI). The manual, which was obtained by Fox News, also instructs troops to “support the leadership of people of color. Do this consistently, but not uncritically,” the manual states.

In some countries, making fun of the President results in collective punishment I would not want to live in such a country. Oh, wait. At a Kentucky Hospital Halloween party some guy dressed like Obama in a straitjacket. Someone took offense. As a result, 750 people will get punished with mandatory diversity training, because diversity training has what to do with dressing like Obama for Halloween? No, you cannot keep your Obama Halloween costume even if you like it. Obama costume scares up controversy:
Hopkinsville, KY - - One Halloween costume is scaring up plenty of controversy along the Tennessee-Kentucky border. A person dressed as President Obama wearing a straitjacket is generating lots of complaints.... 1st Street Baptist Church Pastor C.E. Timberlake says it's wrong to portray any president that way. "I think it's very offensive and really that shouldn't have happened," Timberlake said. "There are other characters they could have dressed up and put a straitjacket other than the President of this country," Administrators of the hospital agree releasing a statement saying "no matter who the president is they deserve respect and honor." Joe turner is the Vice Chair of the Christian County Republican Party and he points out President Obama isn't the first to be made fun of on Halloween and believes this costume makes an amusing statement inside a hospital. "We see even still today Richard Nixon masks and George W Bush masks," Turner said.
Someone must be punished. Or better yet, everyone must be punished:

Dick Durbin's Facebook comment that a senior House Republican told Obama "I cannot even stand to look at you" was exposed as a lie. The lie did not originate with Durbin, he merely passed on what Harry Reid told the Senate Democratic caucus based on information provided to Reid by The White House. That White House lie, now admitted but chalked up to a "miscommunication," inspired Chris Matthews and guests David Corn and Cynthia Tucker, to lash out at Republicans for demonizing the President:

Hardball -  A Pattern Of Disrespect Screen Shot

A main focus was the disrespect shown by Republicans by repeatedly calling Obama a liar, which the panel agreed was because of hatred of Obama for the "other" and not one of us, and in the case of Tucker, coming right out and calling it racist:

When it comes to, I've always wondered if they really believe all their outlandish accusations of Tea Party and Republican racism, or it's just the niche they've carved out and click bait.  Look at me, I'm not, I'm Whether it's David Sirota's rants about hoping the Boston Bombers were White Americans, Salon energizing its White Privilege Branding over the Zimmerman trial, or Joan Walsh writing that the "shutdown" (more like a scale back) is the culmination of 50 years of GOP race-baiting, do they actually believe what they write? When it comes to the "shutdown" Salon has caught a Confederate fever, and the only prescription, is more Confederate. Salon has several lead articles in recent days arguing that the Tea Party in general and the "shutdown" in particular are the fulfillment White racist Confederate dreams. By, um, Rafael Edward Cruz?  They never quite address that problem in their argument. Salon is not alone in raising the alleged rise of the Confederacy to demonize the Tea Party, but Salon has taken it to an obsessive level, once again. This would all be laughable, if it weren't so poisonous to the national political dialogue, and if so many liberals didn't actually believe this nonsense and treat it as an absolute truth (just read the comments there). (click each image for link to article, or not): Tea Party Avenging surrender of the South GOP confederate fantasies
Font Resize
Contrast Mode