Black Conservatives Absurdly Try To 'Andrew Breitbart' President Obama

This story is so ridiculous and absurd that I was not even going to write about it until two names jumped into my head: Andrew Breitbart and Shirley Sherrod.

By now, we've all been witness to Breitbart, the conservative propagandist, using an out-of-context video clip to try and portray Sherrod as a racist.

Well, friends, it's happening again on a more low-key scale as conservatives look for more political weapons (preferably racial ones) to use against President Obama.

The latest has to do with an innocuous comment the president made during a visit on "The View" as he spoke on the subject of racial identity.

First, lets go to the video:



This was in no way meant to be derogatory and only the most obsessive Obama hater (weakly attempting to portray him as taking a shot at black people) would view it in such a fashion.

Mongrel is a word that can be interpreted in ways that are harmless and harmful (it's all in the mind and heart of the person who says it and the person who interprets it). It is true that in the past it has been used by racists as a weapon of attack against people of color. But, remember, a knife can be used to slice cheese or it can be used to kill. Obviously, the president has to be careful with his words when dealing with people who are ignorant or have sinister motives.

President Obama, by any clear-thinking person, did not mean it in a derogatory way. Instead, he was attempting to show that we are more alike than we are different because man of us have been blood of different races running through us.

BUT, why let logic and context get in the way of a good smear. Learning nothing from Andrew Breitbart's pathetic attack on Shirley Sherrod using out-of-context comments, conservative blacks have been on the attack against the president.

Like a boxer trailing on all scorecards and needing a knockout to win late in the 12th round, they are swinging recklessly and wildly hoping to inflict damage in any way possible.

Here are some samples from the blog Booker Rising, a site (one I visit frequently to get a variety of perspectives on issues) dedicated mostly to conservative black opinion (which I once had).

The moderate Republican commentator in Maryland writes: "I do not like being categorized as a mongrel. It is a ridiculous and insulting statement. If George W. Bush, or another white politician said those words, the NAACP, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would be all over the airwaves calling for a public apology. I am not part of a 'mongrel people.' This is not how you have a discussion on race relations. I expect better judgment from the President of the United States. If this is how he sees African-Americans, perhaps it is time for them to find a new candidate."

Sandra Rose, a conservative blogger in metro Atlanta, Ga., writes: "U.S. president Barack Obama appeared on ‘The View’ and promptly stirred up a hornet’s nest of controversy when he referred to blacks as 'a sort of mongrel people.' For those who aren’t familiar with the term: a mongrel is a type of dog that is considered undesirable among breeders because its breed can not easily be determined. It is highly insulting to refer to human beings as mongrels."

The conservative blogger in Kansas argues that the president using the term in an already racially charged atmosphere was "retarded": "If I’m not mistaken folks a mongrel is a type of dog that is considered undesirable among breeders because its breed can not easily be determined. It is not highly insulting to refer to human beings as mongrels? Please if I wrong folks let your boy know. This is why dude uses a teleprompter because his [brain] is completely incapable of speaking unscripted. I’m just amazed....but not surprised I never thought he was very bright and even as I type this I continue to marvel at just how gullible or clueless you white people were in voting for the moronic f___k."

OK, that is enough of these player-hating idiots. You get the picture.

These people are doing the same thing that Andrew Breitbart did to Shirley Sherrod. They grab something taken out of its context without taking time to fully understand and appreciate the actual point and then using it to mischaracterize and demonize.

The only thing worse than a bigot is a stupid one that can't learn from the obvious.

Sorry Charlie ... It Seems Time To Step Aside

Rep. Charlie Rangel, the politically embattled one himself, looks very bad these days as he clings to his tenuous position. In fact, HE LOOKS TERRIBLE.

It's tough for him right now, I'm sure, but Rangel needs to let go of his once-powerful position in the political spotlight and just, as the saying goes, keep it moving.

This is an excerpt from an article published by Huffington Post:

A House panel on Thursday made public for the first time 13 charges of misusing his office and tax and disclosure violations against Rangel, 80, as it opened the trial phase of the ethics proceedings against him. If Rangel and the ethics committee do not settle the case, it goes to a public trial this fall, at the height of an election season in which every member of the House, 36 in the Senate and the Democratic majorities of both chambers are on the line.

We can't lie to ourselves: It's bad ... VERY BAD! Increasingly, it seems like Charlie is hanging onto something that has long since been lost.

His position as a powerful man, one who has served 20 terms, has been severely damaged - irreparably damaged.

His credibility is mortally wounded and each day he grabs a headline it adds another bruise to a battered political reputation. It all sets up to be a very bad ending for a man who once had the respect of so many.

Even President Obama, speaking to Katie Couric of CBS Evening News, has finally weighed in with a respectful tone, but one that nonetheless revealed how weakened Rangel is these days.

"He's somebody who's at the end of his career. I'm sure that what he wants is to be able to end his career with dignity. And my hope is that it happens," he said.

What is Rangel hanging onto these days?

Some supporters are still hanging onto him.

Rangel retained many supporters Friday. The New York delegation and the Congressional Black Caucus, which was co-founded by Rangel, urged their colleagues not to rush to judgment. House leaders eager to avoid alienating black voters remained mum on what Rangel should do.

I know the CBC has to remain somewhat loyal to Rangel for obvious reasons, but where does loyalty end and the reality of the mess the congressman has gotten himself in with these charges?

Time is running out for Charlie Rangel, and maybe it's best he step aside.

CNN Shows Its Weakness With Erickson As A Contributor Going Against Dr. Dyson

I had a chance to watch CNN's Anderson Cooper host a segment on the topic of race with Georgetown University professor Dr. Michael Eric Dyson and CNN contributor/racial flamethrower Erick Erickson.

After watching that segment (talking about a number of recent racial topics ... including strong comments from Howard Dean calling out the racism with Fox News), one thing is for sure: At times, CNN clearly needs no help from Fox News or MSNBC to look bad.

Hiring Erickson as a contributor is a sign of how low CNN's standards have plummeted. Erickson is like a poor man's Rush Limbaugh.

And, to have someone like him on with an impressive speaker like Dr. Dyson, was pathetic. Were Pat Buchanan and Limbaugh already booked elsewhere?

Check out this interview and enjoy a real-life version of the basketball equivalent of the Los Angeles Lakers (Dr. Dyson) playing your local middle school eighth graders (Erickson).

Transcript via CNN below the fold.

COOPER: Well, the charges of racism have been, frankly, used on both sides of the political aisle over the last week. The question is, are they fair? Or have our conversations about race in this country become nothing more than partisan weapons?

Joining me now, RedState.com blogger and CNN contributor Erick Erickson and Georgetown University professor Michael Eric Dyson.

Professor Dyson, what do you make of this? I mean, is Howard Dean basically just using this just as the right has used this? Or is he -- is he correct?

MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, PROFESSOR, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: Well, clearly the history of racism in this country is not simply about individual bias. It's also about institutional power.

And I think, if there's any validity in what Mr. Dean said, it is to point to the institutional matrix in which this whole thing unfolded. The reality is, is that FOX News has not been friendly toward the interests of or perspectives about African-American people or Latinos or a whole range of other minorities.

And I think that when we begin to sling around the term racism, people get offended and think, well, the right says it. The left says it. Well, bias is one thing; racism is another. Racism is the ability to impose your viewpoints, biased as they are, as normative, and then have the power to reinforce them as necessary, and primarily exclusive.

So I think in that sense the institutional power that's wielded by a place like FOX News certainly has to be called into question, and the fringe, as he pointed out, of the Republican Party has to be taken to task for the racist elements that are there.

COOPER: Erick Erickson, what are your thoughts?

ERICK ERICKSON, REDSTATE.COM: Really? We're going to go there with a news channel that they're racists? You know, we can't have an honest conversation about race in this country because of things like this.

Everyone wants to hurl the racism charge, particular towards Republicans and towards conservatives, simply because they don't agree on policy. And we try to take policy disagreements and turn them into racial issues when they're not. I think it's time to grow up.

Honestly, I can't believe an week after the Andrew Breitbart story broke, we're still talking about Shirley Sherrod instead of the economy, jobs, you name it.

DYSON: Well, but here's the problem. When you say that racism is equally distributed on both sides, I have no doubt. And talk about liberal enlightened racism on the one hand and conservative racism on the other. I think that's an absolutely valid point. The problem is...

COOPER: Wait, do you see -- professor, are you saying there's some sort of difference in racism on the left versus racism on the right?

DYSON: No, absolutely not. I'm saying that racism is racism, period. I'm saying it's deeply embedded in the structure of American society and that people on the left and people on the right certainly have been racist and have promoted and promulgated racist ideas. But let's not pretend Mr. Erickson can't be that naive to say it's more than policy disagreement. Policies are rooted in the culture of racism. Jim Crow was a public policy perpetuated by the legal systems of American society. So don't pretend that the mere reference...

ERICKSON: Yes, but tax cuts and stimulus opposition and opposition to Barack Obama are not racist.

DYSON: The opposition to Barack Obama as a witch doctor? Tell me, sir, why -- why the reference to his ethnic particularity has anything to do with his policy? Be opposed to the public policy.

ERICKSON: That's what I'm wondering.

DYSON: What I'm saying is that the witch doctor motif has been perpetuated by the Tea Party. And on top of that, when we talk more specifically about FOX News....

ERICKSON: No, not perpetuated by the Tea Party, just by a few people who were crazy enough to hold up signs.

DYSON: You know what?

ERICKSON: We can't paint with that broad of a brush.

DYSON: I understand that. But, see, that -- that's the argument. You can't paint it with that broad of a brush. But the same people who never stood for civil rights, who never stood for the progressive realization of freedom for minority people, who never stood for the realization of the basic rights of these individuals, then all of a sudden appear on the scene, take the words that have been used by the progressives -- that is civil rights, liberty and justice -- and then use them in defense of right-wing policies that have no sensitivity toward African-American people.

ERICKSON: We've been talking about liberty since the founding of the country. You know...

DYSON: I'm talking about racial liberty, sir.

COOPER: Wait, wait.

DYSON: I'm talking about liberty rooted in...

COOPER: Let...

DYSON: ... the possibility that black people can be -- be respected. That's what I'm speaking of.

COOPER: Let -- let Erick respond.

ERICKSON: You know, to say that people who weren't there marching in the civil rights movements are all of a sudden marching in the streets, and that's proof of racism or something, no, it's not. It's proof of people being hacked off by the growth of government.

And certainly there's some people out there on both sides. I mean, saying the Tea Party is racist is like saying all Democrats support cop killers, because a few Mumia Abu Jamal people show up and have three hand posters. I mean, we're painting with too broad a brush here, and we should be having a serious conversation about race, but we can't because we're too busy with the stereotyping.

DYSON: Well -- no, no, the reason we can't have a serious conversation on race, because it's very difficult for white Americans to conceive the legitimacy of a viewpoint that says, listen, this is not an equal argument. You can't say that, well, it's racism on the left and racism on the right, which is certainly true.

But the problem is, you never acknowledge the vitriolic history of racial animus in this country. And as a result of that, when you say -- you make strong arguments like I'm against people who are out there marching, and because you didn't support the civil rights marches, that therefore, you're racist. That's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying you cooperated with and benefited from a society that was unequal and that permitted African-American people to suffer for a great deal. That's what I'm talking about, something concrete and empirically verifiable and specific.

ERICKSON: My family's from Sweden. How exactly did I benefit from that?

DYSON: Wait a minute. Are you are actually trying to tell me that, because your family is from Sweden, that white skin privilege does not extend to them because they are European and not Anglo-Saxon from America? That's ridiculous.

ERICKSON: See, this is why we really can't have this discussion.

DYSON: No, you don't want to have an honest discussion.

ERICKSON: If I want to have -- if I've got to have the sins of generations ago placed on me...

DYSON: No, not the sins.

ERICKSON: ... we can't move on.

DYSON: I'm not talking about the sins, the benefits.

ERICKSON: The benefits. But you're also talking about them as sins. And you know, I would love to be able to move on from this.

DYSON: No, I'm not talking about the sins, I'm talking about the benefits.

ERICKSON: But the benefits are derived from the sins. Therefore, the benefits are also part of the sins.

DYSON: No, no. I'm saying...

ERICKSON: I will admit, it was terrible. But you know, there were people like Charlton Heston, who marched with Martin Luther King, and if he were alive today he'd be out in the Tea Party movement, as well.

DYSON: All I'm telling you, sir.

ERICKSON: Are we going to say someone like that is racist?

DYSON: I'm telling you this. When you go to the Supreme Court, you make arguments predicated upon what? Legal precedent. Why is it that the right wing is capable of acknowledging the historical impact of precedents that were set 200 years ago but can't acknowledge the benefits that they've inherited as a result of the same system?

So all I'm suggesting to you is that the past does have an impact on the present. And when we deal even with, specifically with FOX News, read Media Matters. FOX News claims it did not report the story before Shirley Sherrod resigned, but FOXNews.com reported on the story before she even resigned. So I'm saying we can't get the facts right.

ERICKSON: No. If you're going to quote from Media Matters, then we just -- we can't have this conversation, because Media Matters is nothing but a left-wing hit job.

DYSON: Well, wait a minute. You play for the Los Angeles Lakers. I play for the Miami Heat, but we're both in the NBA. We still have rules that we have to observe on either side.

ERICKSON: Yes, but you know, we also have facts we have to observe on either side, and it seems like no one wants to talk about the objective facts. We'd rather talk about the spin.

DYSON: Well, no. Sir, that's redundant, objective facts. If it's objective, it's factual.

What I'm certainly suggesting to you is that the facts have been printed there. All we have to do is look at them, sir. And when we look at them, we see that FOXnews.com was involved in the story prior to the resignation of Shirley Sherrod. After...

(CROSSTALK)

ERICKSON: For some reason, you and I are looking at the same facts and coming to different conclusions. Which I guess is fair, but I just don't think we can deal legitimately with this conversation when we're having to go back 200 years to who had benefits and who didn't and what have you.

DYSON: No, I'm talking about benefits right now. Look, if you're a white person and you get stopped by the cops, and the cops don't assume that when you real reach for your wallet it's a gun, that's a form of privilege that has nothing to do with how much money you have or what country you're from.

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: Erick, I'll let you have the final thought, because we've got to go.

ERICKSON: Well, Anderson, I appreciate the time to do this, but I just think we're painting with too broad a brush. And we've just moved to the point where we can't have a civil conversation here.

DYSON: We're very civil. We just disagree.

ERICKSON: Just -- the brush that we're painting, calling people racist and racism. And is the Tea Party or not? We're talking about individuals, and we're painting with a brush that involves groups.

DYSON: We're talking about the collective enterprise -- we're talking about the collective enterprise of American society. Individuals belong to a United States of America. The United States of America benefit from privileges that were extended to certain groups and not to others. So that's empirically verifiable fact.

ERICKSON: There you go.

COOPER: We'll leave it there.

ERICKSON: Thanks, Anderson.

COOPER: Erick Erickson, Professor Michael Eric Dyson, appreciate both your perspectives. Thank you very much.

DYSON: Thank you.

I love this interview because Erickson clearly is overmatched intellectually and resorts to childish counters against Dr. Dyson.

Still, what is CNN doing with Erickson on the air (besides damaging its own reputation)? The man serves no useful purpose except to show that CNN has at least one extremist nutjob to balance hour after hour of far-right hacks on Fox News and Buchanan on MSNBC.

Fox News Now Attempts To Ridiculously Portray President Obama As Being Anti Boy Scouts

Pathetic Fox News will go to any lengths to attack this president by exploiting even the slightest of openings to continue its public relations work for the Republicans.

The latest is Fox News trying to advance the ridiculous notion that President Obama doesn't really care about the Boy Scouts and is more interested in hanging out with the ladies of The View.

Once again, it's all part of a Fox News campaign to try and show President Obama hating on anyone and everyone.

From Media Matters:

Seizing on a report from CNS News' Penny Starr, several conservative blogs are attacking President Obama for not speaking in person at the Boy Scouts' upcoming 100^th anniversary jamboree because he will be in New Jersey to speak about the economy before heading to New York City to film an upcoming appearance on ABC's The View.

The CNS article includes several points that should (in a sane media world) mitigate the inevitable freak-out from conservative media figures:

Obama will be addressing the Boy Scouts via a taped message.

Several previous presidents -- including conservative hero Ronald Reagan -- did not address a Boy Scouts jamboree in person.

The Boy Scouts just visited the Oval Office two weeks ago.

Read the Media Matters for America article to see the truth about the relationship that President Obama has developed with the Boy Scouts.

Don't fall for the bogus, partisan attack by Fox News on the president.

I suppose the image above (for conservatives) shows the president hating on the Boy Scouts.

Black People Rejecting Fox News And Its Divisive Messages

The ultra conservative Fox News Channel is so quick to brag about its precious ratings at every turn, but some aspects of the network's ratings are quite disturbing according to an article published by the Huffington Post which cites the New York Times.

The disturbing numbers, if true, are probably not all that surprising when you think of how hostile Fox News, with its 24/7 cycle of conservative commentary masquerading as news, has been, historically, toward black people and issues of importance to black people.

I know, you're stunned by that news.

From the Huffington Post:

Fox News may be the undisputed ratings champion in cable news, but not among black viewers.

The New York Times' Brian Stelter tweeted that, according to Nielsen Media Research, Fox News has averaged just 29,000 black viewers in primetime so far this television season (9/09-7/10). That represents just 1.38% of its 2.102 million total viewer audience.

CNN and MSNBC, meanwhile, both have far more black viewers, both in absolute terms and as a proportion of their overall audiences.

MSNBC has averaged 145,000 black viewers, representing 19.3% of its 751,000 total viewer audience.

CNN has averaged 134,000 black viewers, representing 20.7% of its 648,000 total viewer audience.

Is anyone really surprised that black people appear to be rejecting the messages of Fox News? Fox News is getting its ratings, but is doing it by racially dividing this country.

These ratings for Fox News are indicative of a bigger problem for Fox News (the fact that its messages tend to be rejected by a large number of people of color).

Since Fox News is in essence the public relations firm of the Republican party, eventually this trend will spell doom for the GOP if it does not broaden its political base (beyond just whites ... and particularly conservative whites).

Breitbart Attacks Again: This Time Goes After Spooner Family In Sherrod Case

The depths that right-wing extremist commentator Andrew Breitbart will plummet to, in an effort to defend himself, knows no limit.

After being exposed as a disgusting man willing to ruin an innocent woman's reputation to take a shot at the NAACP, black people, liberals and President Obama, Breitbart proceeded to viciously smear Shirley Sherrod.

The backlash has already started and Breitbart has been able to do something kind of amazing: he is on the defensive and the offensive at the same time. On CNN, speaking with the network's John King, Breitbart appeared to go on the attack against the white farmer and his wife (Roger and Eloise Spooner) in an effort to save himself. One can imagine Breitbart, had he been on the Titanic, would enthusiastically knock over small children, women, people of color and old people to save himself - every scoundrel for himself.

Back to Breitbart's appearance on CNN, as documented by Think Progress:



Speaking with CNN’s John King, right-wing provocateur Andrew Breitbart challenged Eloise Spooner’s “purported” story, accusing King of trusting Sherrod “that the ‘farmer’s wife’ is the farmer’s wife”:

You tell me as a reporter how CNN put on a person today who purported to be the farmer’s wife? What did you do to find out whether or not that was the actual farmer’s wife? I mean, if you’re going to accuse me of a falsehood, tell me where you’ve confirmed that had this incident happened 24 years ago. [...]

You’re going off of her word that the farmer’s wife is the farmer’s wife?

When you're losing an argument, like Breitbart frequently does, he resorts to trying to smear the innocent. First it was Shirley Sherrod, an innocent woman he viciously mischaracterized and attempted to portray as a racist against a white farmer, and now, as the white farmer has praised Sherrod, Breitbart is attacking the Spooners and CNN.

It's to divert attention from his own failures and many faults. Breitbart has sacrificed his human decency (after checking out his dreadful Web sites, a writer sanitarium for the conservatively insane ... it's clear he never had any journalistic credibility) for a pathetic tea bagger cause and fame.

It was not enough to smear Shirley Sherrod.

Now he is smearing the Spooner family.

Breitbart Is A Scoundrel Who Ran A Big-Time Scam To Smear Sherrod And Ruin Her Reputation

Andrew Breitbart is a disgusting man and his race-baiting desires and relentless motivation to attack Democrats (particularly ones of color or those involved with people of color) appears to have victimized now former Georgia USDA Rural Development State Director Shirley Sherrod, a woman (an Obama Administration employee) who has been treated awfully due to Breitbart's intentional fraud.

First, here is the evidence as posted at Crooks and Liars:



Here is Breitbart's attempted smear of Sherrod on his dubious Web site. The bottom line is that Breitbart, one of the chief defenders of racist elements within the Tea Party movement, has been on a mission to find ways of attacking black people and making them look racist (aided on many occasions by his buddies at Fox News). Fox News jumped all over this issue led by thick-headed partisans like Bill O'Reilly (who called for her resignation) and Sean Hannity.

Here is more from Crooks and Liars:

Shirley Sherrod was an employee of the USDA; specifically, the USDA Georgia director of rural development. In a speech to the Georgia chapter of the NAACP, she tells a story that appears to indicate she prefers to put black folks ahead of white folks.

Breitbart edits the video, puts it up, and the world goes mad. Sherrod is fired, after being told pressure is coming from the White House to fire her.

Breitbart heavily edited the video to try and portray Sherrod as a racist black woman who purposely discriminated against white farmers and told that story at an event put on by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. His mission likely was to paint a black person from the Obama Administration as racist against white people, show liberals to be racist, show the NAACP to be racist and show that black people can be racist.

From CNN:

(Agriculture Secretary Tom) Vilsack told CNN on Tuesday that he "didn't speak to anyone at the White House. ... I made this decision, it's my decision. Nobody from the White House contacted me about this at all."

A White House official also told CNN that "the White House did not pressure her or the USDA over the resignation. It was the secretary's decision, as he has said."

President Barack Obama was briefed on the situation after Vilsack decided to seek Sherrod's resignation, according to a White House official, who said the president fully supports the decision.

The White House and Vilsack (getting his information from Breitbart and Fox News) appear to have jumped the gun and it appears an innocent woman has been punished by people who caved to political pressure from Breitbart, a fringe right-wing freak known for his dubious and sinister tactics against those considered liberal.

CNN has wisely retracted its condemnation of Sherrod and the White House should reinstate her to her position (if she so desires) and, if necessary, conduct a full and fair investigation.

Shirley Sherrod deserves justice. So far, she has not gotten it.

By the way, in the wake of this controversy, here is what those white farmers (Roger and Eloise Spooner) said of Shirley Sherrod during an interview with CNN's Rick Sanchez:

SANCHEZ: In all your time knowing Shirley Sherrod, has there ever been anything about her, either through her attitude, her words, her opinions or behaviors that would lead you to believe that she is in any way a racist?

ROGER SPOONER: No way in the world. No way. No way. I don’t even want to talk about it. It don’t make sense. She was just so nice to us as — she didn’t — there wasn’t no — there wasn’t no racism attitude at all in it. Heck no. … They don’t know what they’re talking about. Let me say. They don’t know what they’re talking about, if you want to know my opinion.

ELOISE SPOONER: She always treated us really good. She was nice mannered, thoughtful, friendly. Good person.

They seem convinced - that she is a good woman who was a victim of character assassination for sinister political gain.

The Obama Administration is looking weak when pressure is brought to bear by the far-right Fox News and the fringe fake-ass "journalism" of Andrew Breitbart.

First it was Van Jones and now it's Shirley Sherrod.

Magic and Michael: Old-School Competitors Or Old-School Haters?

I've been a little interested in recent stories about Michael Jordan and now Magic Johnson coming out and saying they could never have joined forces with each other (and Larry Bird) in an effort to win an NBA championship.

As some of you may have heard, the Miami Heat have secured commitments from free agents LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh as they begin a quest for an NBA title. Last year, James pursued one with the Cleveland Cavaliers, Wade with the Heat and Bosh with the Toronto Raptors. Wade has already won a championship in Miami, when he teamed with Shaquille O'Neal a few years back, and now is aiming for a second one with James and Bosh as teammates.

Back in the 1980s and 1990s, times were different. Bird, Johnson and Jordan pursued NBA titles with their own teams and achieved glory. Jordan won six with the Chicago Bulls, Johnson won five with the Lakers and Bird won three with the Celtics.

In their prime, Bird, Johnson and Jordan stayed with their teams and won championships.

Jordan recently said, "There's no way, with hindsight, I would've ever called up Larry (Bird), called up Magic (Johnson) and said, 'Hey, look, let's get together and play on one team,' but that's ... things are different. I can't say that's a bad thing. It's an opportunity these kids have today. In all honesty, I was trying to beat those guys."

Johnson added, "We didn't think about it 'cause that's not what we were about," Johnson said at Baruch College in New York, according to Bloomberg News. "From college, I was trying to figure out how to beat Larry Bird."

Are Johnson and Jordan telling it like it is, in the simplest of terms, or acting out like old-school haters?

Glenn Beck ... Miss Celie Has Something To Say To You

"Nettie and my kids be comin' home soon, and when they get here we gonna' set around and whip your ass."

- Celie to Albert in The Color Purple.


That is what Miss Celie might to say to far-right nut Glenn Beck if she could come out of the movie The Color Purple and talk to him.

As we approach the 47th anniversary of the famous "I Have A Dream" speech from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., back in 1963, Beck is eager to exploit so much of what Dr. King stood for and do it as a slap in the face of black people and for his own self promotion in this half-ass rally he is attempting to pull together for Aug. 28.

Glenn Beck is a disgraceful man in spite of his legion of followers gullible and crazy as the Manson family, but maybe less dangerous (murder and whatnot).

Beck says he wants to "restore America," but his vision of America probably is to take it back to where it was when Dr. King had to make that speech.

Obviously, this has created a lot of controversy.

Glenn Beck chooses to spit in the face of Black America and to use the Dr. King anniversary as a doormat to walk on toward his dubious right-wing vision of America.

If Beck wants to have his rally then let him. I call upon real leaders to step forward and counter his protest to live up to what Miss Celie told Albert in The Color Purple.

Lets stand around the Lincoln Memorial and whip Glenn Beck's punk ass.



Lets not allow Glenn Beck (through this bogus rally) to repackage Dr. King for his own selfish and sinister purposes.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson Is Misguided In Criticism Of Jesse Jackson

It pains me to write this because I genuinely like and respect Earl Ofari Hutchinson as a writer and commentator who oftentimes is called upon by media outlets because of his expertise.

But, Hutchinson is all wrong in his challenge of the highly-publicized comments of the Rev. Jesse Jackson in response to Cleveland Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert's infamous comments in response to basketball star LeBron James' perfectly legal decision to leave the Cavaliers, as a free agent, for Miami.

I won't waste your time in rehashing all of the facts in Gilbert-Jackson-James-gate. If you need the 4-1-1, you can review past entries on this blog.

Hutchinson has a column posted at Huffington Post that takes some shots at Rev. Jackson (an increasingly popular trend these days).

Here's how Hutchinson starts his piece:

Jesse Jackson should be slapped with a sixth foul and a fast ejection from the Lebron James game. Jackson should get the much deserved boot for shoving race into an issue that has absolutely nothing to do with race. Jackson likened Cleveland Cavs owner Dan Gilbert's much publicized open letter tirade against James for jumping ship in Cleveland to treating James as a "runaway slave." Jackson's race card sound bite would have gotten a splashy news note if he had stopped there. But Jackson couldn't let it go at that. He demanded that the league chastise Gilbert for his James outburst. That's hyperbole and neither Gilbert, the NBA, nor James bothered to dignify the inanity with a response.

First, Gilbert did offer a response to Rev. Jackson's comments as I am posting below as published on ESPN's Web site:

"I strongly disagree with Rev. Jesse Jackson's recent comments and we are not going to engage in any related discussion on it. Going forward, we're very excited about the Cavaliers and the positive future of our region."

Also, NBA Commissioner David Stern had this comment about it:

"However well-meaning Jesse may be in the premise on this one, he is, as he rarely is, mistaken. And I would have told him so had he called me before he issued his statement, rather than this morning. But he is a good friend of the NBA and our players. Has worked arduously on many good causes and we work together in many matters."

Maybe Hutchinson wrote his column before these responses.

To some degree, I will give him the benefit of the doubt.

Now, back to the excerpt. Did Jackson really bring race into this issue? I think that is debatable. In my opinion, he drew what I thought was a fairly apt comparison between the mentality of slave masters in regard to slaves. People of many different races have held slaves. But, Hutchinson is entitled to his opinion. However, I would contend that whenever Rev. Jackson says anything that can even remotely be considered to race, his critics (and there are a lot of him) attack him as a retaliation for so much of what bothers them (the browning of America, Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama, affirmative action, O.J. Simpson, etc.).

Considering NBA Commissioner David Stern fined Gilbert the sum of $100,000 for his out-of-line words, one could argue there must have been some merit to the true motives behind the statement (however uncomfortable they made some people feel) made by Rev. Jackson.

Here is another excerpt:

Jackson didn't bother to explain how a slave, let alone a runaway slave, can orchestrate their own media self-coronation. Or, how a slave can have the entire sports media genuflect in front of him, shove the BP spill, financial reform bill, and looming immigration reform debate, and the Oscar Grant shooting case verdict off the front page for a day.

That is absolutely ridiculous. Once again, don't be fooled by this journalistic sleight of hand. Rev. Jackson was not necessarily equating James to a slave. Obviously, James is a wealthy man who makes his own decisions (as evidenced by the fact that he left Cleveland and decided to take his talents to Miami). So, Hutchinson's point, in trying to distort and amplify the race angle rings hollow and falls short. Again, Rev. Jackson was comparing the relationship between the slave master and slave to the relationship between the team owner and player.

Frankly, whether it makes people uncomfortable or not, Dan Gilbert was acting as if he owned LeBron James. James was no longer under contract and had every right to leave. Gilbert attacked James.

Again, from Hutchinson:

The Jackson race play with James was more than a desperate grab to snatch a moment of media limelight.

I've never understood this argument at all. While Rev. Jackson has been known to release statements to the media, it is the media that often goes to Rev. Jackson for comments regarding race issues. There are times when perhaps he should decline comment, but I do not believe this is one of them. As uncomfortable as his words were, they were on the money in my opinion.

More:

Jackson's twist of the James flight from Cleveland into an issue of black victimization fits that bill.

This is not about race or victimization. This is about the fact that Dan Gilbert smeared James, his character and integrity and acted as if the man had no right to leave Cleveland in any way he saw fit. James played out his contract and earned his free agency. This is not about black victimization, but that fits the argument that people most frequently use against Rev. Jackson. It's a weak one that is successful only because people have grown to resent Rev. Jackson for a multitude of reasons (some fair and some not).

I do respect Earl Ofari Hutchinson, but he was wrong on this issue as he wrote yet another column bashing Rev. Jackson and virtually ignoring the sins of Dan Gilbert.

Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/earl-ofari-hutchinson/jesse-jackson-fouls-out-o_b_643896.html

Fox News Uses Black Fringe Groups To Portray Blacks As Angry, Dangerous, Scary

Fox News has a history of portraying black people as angry, dangerous, hostile and racist in many of its broadcasts (news and commentary alike).

The most recent example of this has been this massively over-hyped and B.S. story about the New Black Panther Party and alleged voter intimidation. Fox News has been pushing this story hard to its largely white and conservative audience to push an image of scary black people threatening white people and being allowed to do so by a black president (Barack Obama) and a black attorney general (Eric Holder) in spite of the fact this happened during the George W. Bush Administration. Fox News also has a dubious history of using black people to attack black people. We have witnessed that over and over again with the likes of the pathetic Jesse Lee Peterson, Sean Hannity's boy (that's right, I said it that way).

Republicans have a history of this and used the tactic of the scary black man in the famous Willie Horton ad from the late 1980s used by George H.W. Bush against Michael Dukakis.



From Wikipedia:

Republicans picked up the Horton issue after Dukakis clinched the nomination. In June 1988, Republican candidate George H.W. Bush seized on the Horton case, bringing it up repeatedly in campaign speeches.^[6] Bush's campaign manager, Lee Atwater, predicted that "by the time this election is over, Willie Horton will be a household name."^[6][7] Media consultant Roger Ailes remarked "the only question is whether we depict Willie Horton with a knife in his hand or without it."^[8]

It's an effort by the far right to show scary black hoods coming to get you and Democrats will not protect you, but Republicans will take care of these dangerous black thugs.

Fox News frequently has used fringe black groups to attack black people. One of its favorite examples of this is the use of the New Black Panther Party and, most frequently, Malik Zulu Shabazz.

Media Matters for America has showcased the effort by Fox News to use fringe black groups to negatively showcase black people (rarely do they do it with, say a Ku Klux Klansman, and think of how they bend over backward to defend racist tea party morons).

For weeks, Fox News has been hyping J. Christian Adam's discredited allegations that the Department of Justice has "a hostility in the voting section and in the civil rights division to bringing cases on behalf of white victims for the benefit of national racial minorities." Predictably, right-wing media quickly used the phony controversy to race-bait, attempting to connect the Obama administration to the New Black Panther Party -- a designated hate group. Fox News' Glenn Beck, for example, said on his radio show that the New Black Panther Party represented "the kinds of people that our president aligns himself with," and Fox News' David Asman accused Obama of "defending racists" by "letting the Black Panthers off." More recently, Megyn Kelly, the biggest Adams cheerleader of them all, devoted airtime interviewing New Black Panther President Malik Shabazz. This episode follows a pattern of Fox highlighting this radical fringe group over the years.

Research posted by Media Matters shows more than 50 instances of Fox News hosting someone from the New Black Panther Party:

Date	Show	Guest
6/24/1998	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
8/31/1999	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
6/21/2000	The Edge with Paula Zahn	Quanell X
6/22/2000	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
6/23/2000	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
2/19/2001	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
3/19/2001	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
4/12/2001	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
5/3/2001	The O'Reilly Factor	Malik Shabazz
5/18/2001	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
7/30/2001	The O'Reilly Factor	Malik Shabazz
9/7/2001	Fox News Edge	Malik Shabazz
11/1/2001	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
1/16/2002	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
2/18/2002	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
7/7/2002	Fox Wire	Malik Shabazz
7/8/2002	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
7/18/2002	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
8/16/2002	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
10/24/2002	The O'Reilly Factor	Malik Shabazz
10/28/2002	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
7/9/2003	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
2/28/2004	Big Story Weekend Edition	Malik Shabazz
6/21/2004	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
5/3/2005	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
5/5/2005	The O'Reilly Factor	Quanell X
5/25/2005	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
9/19/2005	Hannity & Colmes	Hashim Nzinga
9/27/2005	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
10/13/2005	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
10/17/2005	The O'Reilly Factor	Malik Shabazz
10/17/2005	Hannity & Colmes	Hashim Nzinga
11/29/2005	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
2/9/2006	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
3/10/2006	The O'Reilly Factor	Malik Shabazz
4/10/2006	Hannity & Colmes	Hashim Nzinga
5/1/2006	Hannity & Colmes	Hashim Nzinga
5/1/2006	On the Record with Greta Van Susteren	Malik Shabazz
6/7/2006	Hannity & Colmes	Hashim Nzinga
8/11/2006	Hannity & Colmes	Hashim Nzinga
11/16/2006	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
11/30/2006	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
12/5/2006	Hannity & Colmes	Hashim Nzinga
1/5/2007	The O'Reilly Factor	Malik Shabazz
2/26/2007	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
3/9/2007	Hannity & Colmes	Hashim Nzinga
4/13/2007	Hannity & Colmes	Hashim Nzinga
7/16/2007	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz
10/19/2007	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
12/4/2007	Hannity & Colmes	Quanell X
3/19/2008	Hannity & Colmes	Malik Shabazz

Again, this is no accident with Fox and its mostly white and conservative audience. This is a calculated effort to fear monger and make white people afraid of black people.

Media Matters for America:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201007140028

Excellent Video: What If The Tea Party Was Black?

Tea Baggers Reveal Their Racism In This Video

The poor, misunderstood tea baggers feel like they can't get a fair shake from the media which holds them accountable for their racism or the racism in their midst that they condone.

Tea baggers, of course, contend that there is no racism and that it's all a plot by that oppressive mainstream media. As Think Progress points out, we've seen a lot of racist signs, heard plenty of racist and homophobic language and racist incidents.

Check out this video of what some tea baggers think:



Racism appears to be alive and well among tea baggers. What is particularly chilling, from the video above, is how openly racist many of these morons revealed themselves to be - on camera.

As for the sign above, I am sure a proud parent is pleased with the way their son has been raised to carry such a sign around with a smile. Maybe that embodies all the hopes and dreams some parents have for their children (to be photographed with a racist sign and a smile).

Roland Martin To Dan Gilbert: Shut Up And Build Your Team

Megyn Kelly Lacks Any Professionalism

Megyn Kelly, the right wing anchor for Fox News network, has a long history of emotional instability and a complete disregard for professionalism.

What this means is ... she fits in well at Fox News (the public relations firm of the Republican Party).

But, in the wake of her atrocious, unprofessional and irrational behavior during a recent interview, I must concur with the opinion expressed here by News Hounds:

I’ll say it now and I’ll say it unless and until she comes out and apologizes for acting as a race-baiting shill for the GOP, Megyn Kelly should be fired. As for Powers, I award her Best in Show. Not just for standing up to Kelly but for confronting the race-baiting agenda of her employer. She should not be the only one.

You can contact the show at Kelly@foxnews.com. I can’t find contact information for Kirsten Powers that’s new but I’m awarding her Best in Show.

Kelly is a disgrace to our airwaves and each day she is on her true colors show. She is a total partisan masquerading as fair and balanced. Actually, she is not even doing a good job masquerading anymore. The mask is off and she is proving to be a far-right advocate.

Fox News would have to have standards and integrity to fire Megyn Kelly. So, don't expect it to happen.

Iowa Tea Party Sign Compares Obama To Hitler And Lenin

President Obama is on a billboard being compared to Hitler and Lenin in a sign that shows how much people continue to try and demonize Barack Obama.



















No, there is not hypocrisy here. Rev. Jesse Jackson was comparing the slave-slave master relationship to the interaction between Dan Gilbert and LeBron James.

The above is another flat-out smear on the part of bigoted tea baggers.

Steele Getting Challengers From Within

Things are not looking too good for Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, who looks like a political dead man walking.

This clown has the same old ignorant rhetoric, but the bigger point is Steele could be in a lot of trouble.

Another Example Of Anti-Jackson Prejudice That Taints Perspective

I've been in some spirited discussions about the whole controversy that now includes LeBron James, formerly of the Cleveland Cavaliers and now of the Miami Heat; Dan Gilbert, formerly of class and now owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers; and the Rev. Jesse Jackson, once considered a hero of the civil rights movement now a point of attack for a variety of reasons.

Here is my original commentary: http://sandygholston.blogspot.com/2010/07/jesse-jackson-has-strong-words.html

Rev. Jackson made some controversial remarks in discussing Gilbert's hateful comments and actions toward James in the wake of his decision to leave the Cavaliers, as a free agent, to join the Heat.

Here is an excerpt from an online commentary I recently read from Gregg Doyel of CBS Sports. His commentary is titled, "Jesse Jackson's opinion makes other side look better." That is quite an interesting title and indicative of how a large number of people tend to feel these days with respect to Rev. Jackson. What he says is less important as what he stands for in the eyes of different people. To many whites, Jackson is a painful reminder of an era they would love to forget. For many of these same people, he represents a lot of what makes them angry today with regard to blacks and civil rights: affirmative action, the browning of America, etc. To many blacks, he is a person who draws the ire of whites and that adversely impacts the race.

Here is part of what Doyel had to say in his article:

Jesse Jackson complained about Gilbert.

Sorry, that was too subtle, and Jesse Jackson doesn't do subtle. Jesse Jackson didn't simply complain about Dan Gilbert. He compared Gilbert to a slave owner. Which makes LeBron James the slave.

Which makes Jesse Jackson the biggest idiot in this story, and that's saying something, because this story includes Jim Gray and his question about fingernails.

Gilbert ought to be home free, because the enmity of Jackson is basically a free pass. If Jesse Jackson thinks you're a disgruntled slave-master, then you're not. Simple as that. A lunatic on the fringe, a liberal version of Rush Limbaugh, Jackson lost the right a long time ago to be taken seriously on race -- but in recent years Jackson has come to represent the inverse: When he says one thing on race, you can believe the opposite.

So when Jackson compares James to an oppressed, impoverished slave, you can believe the opposite -- that LeBron James is one of the richest men in America, that he has been treated opulently and lavishly since he was a teenager, that he stands to become a billionaire.

This is another in a long line of examples of people reporting that the forest can't be seen because there are too many trees in the way.

Perhaps Doyel would like for Gilbert to be home free, but he is not. While a large number of people would love to shift the focus on to Jackson and free Gilbert from scorn, it's not going to work. The prejudice that so many people feel toward Rev. Jackson is irrelevant to what he said and the greater point behind what he said.

This is not about being an "oppressed, impoverished slave." Such a point is insane. We know "that LeBron James is one of the richest men in America," but that is irrelevant.

The fact that he could become a billionaire has nothing to do with the issue.

Later, Doyel gets to perhaps his real point:

At the moment, I'm having a hard time believing the comments Jackson made Sunday night, though at the same time I'm relieved he made them. Because his comments take the attention off Dan Gilbert, and focus it directly onto Jesse Jackson. Which was Jackson's point all along, of course.

"Doyel is "relieved he made them. Because his comments take the attention off Dan Gilbert." Is that the real motive here? Is Doyel really happy that Gilbert gets off in this case.

Doyel contends that Jackson's intent was to gain attention for himself. This is an old and tired argument used against Rev. Jackson and it is designed to marginalize the argument by attempting to discredit the person making it (perhaps that is what Doyel wanted all along).

Here is a thought, maybe Gilbert trashed James to take the pressure off of himself for not being able to surround James (the two-time MVP) with championship-level talent. Maybe Gilbert jabbed at the raw emotions of Cleveland fans to make James the target and absolve himself of responsibility.

Later, we see more hatred toward Rev. Jackson as the true motive continues to reveal itself:

But I can't ignore this, and here's why: Jackson is poisonous. Rainbow PUSH? My ass. He's a coral snake, a small little creature cursed by Mother Nature with the venom of 10 poisonous serpents. And the thing is, it didn't have to be this way. When it comes to right and wrong, good and bad, Jackson comes down on the side of right. Racial equality? That's good. Once upon a time, Jackson was a positive factor in this conversation.

Today? He's a carnival barker. He's the racial conversation's version of PETA, a great idea gone bad, an attention-seeking missile aimed directly at one of society's most vulnerable fault lines. Jackson stopped being part of the solution a long time ago. Now he's part of the problem, and Gilbert was his most recent prop.

Clever commentary about PETA, but it all shows a simmering hatred. He calls Rev. Jackson "poisonous," a "coral snake," a "small little creature cursed by Mother Nature with the venom of 10 poisonous serpents," a "carnival barker" and so on. There is a lot of hatred in Gregg Doyel's commentary and it is all aimed at Rev. Jackson.

While I agree he could have used a less controversial analogy. I think his words touched a wound that many Americans do not truly want to heal. It's a wound that people hide from, make excuses for, and ignore with the hopes it will just go away. The wound is racism. And, no amount of attacks on Rev. Jesse Jackson will move us any closer to deal with those wounds.

Rev. Jackson's comments were not even necessarily about race, but people like Gregg Doyel desperately want it to be about race so they can attack Rev. Jackson as a race agitator.

He reminds people of past sins, current sins and future sins.

Fear is a large part of why he is so frequently attacked and what he actually says is typically ignored.

Once again, the Rev. Jesse Jackson is met with scorn while Dan Gilbert is given mostly a free pass.

CBS Sports:
http://www.cbssports.com/columns/story/13637053/jacksons-opinion-makes-other-side-look-better

Blackwell's Commentary Indicative Of The Right's Dangerous And Divisive Rhetoric

Ken Blackwell, a far-right and Barack-Obama-hating politician, is back up to his old tricks of divide and celebrate.

Blackwell, who because he is black may think he gets a pass on his racial divisiveness, is attacking President Obama for reaching out to Muslim nations in part through NASA. Now, this really is no different from what President Reagan did in the 1980s when NASA was a part of an effort to build bridges between the U.S. and the Soviet Union and between the U.S. and other nations. But, why would Ken Blackwell let the truth get in the way of a good out-of-context smear against President Obama that also helps to divide Americans (it's almost like a BOGO smear deal for him)?

This is an issue that should not have been a big deal, but some on the right wing have taken it and twisted it into some heinous plot (of course many of these are the same people who do not believe Barack Obama is born in the U.S., who think that he is a Muslim, who think that he hates America, etc.).

Here is what Blackwell said in a recent commentary:

Third, this 'outreach' to Muslims by NASA is, well, lunacy. Telling Muslims that they once led the world in science and technology is wonderful. They did. But that was before murderous mullahs took over control of Muslim societies and threatened with death anyone who didn't toe the line of theocratic control. I have a simple way for Muslim-majority nations to excel in science and technology: Have everyone read a list of Jewish scientists who have won the Nobel Prize in Physics, Chemistry, or Medicine in the past century. Then, perhaps, their leaders could stop their Israel-bashing and Jew-baiting. They might also read George Gilder's latest book, The Israel Test. Gilder, who is not Jewish, says Israel is a wonderful test for everyone. Do we envy and resent this people? Do we covet what they have produced? Do we want to emulate their productivity and creative genius, or do we darkly ascribe their feats to a 'Zionist' protocol? Gilder holds up a mirror to anti-Semites everywhere. What do you see?

This has hate written all over it from Blackwell. Using NASA as a way to reach out to Muslims he calls "lunacy" in this excerpt above. Was it lunacy when President Reagan used it to reach out to the Soviets? Is Blackwell letting a racial-like prejudice influence his commentary? It sure seems that he is running with the right-wing herd and demonizing all or most Muslims.

We all need to tear down stereotypes that divide us, but who is Blackwell to lecture Muslims when he is leading the bigoted and stereotyping trend?

Blackwell then goes on in the commentary to dramatically lose credibility points by citing and applauding the far-right Charles Krauthammer who could is politically fair about as often as we've landed humans on the moon. Blackwell's commentary was a bigoted waste of space and indicative of the partisan politics inside of him and his hatred of President Obama.

Ironically, he quotes President Reagan, but not in his desire to use NASA to bridge the gap between the U.S. and the Soviets.

Here is a little nugget from President Reagan's 1984 State of the Union address:

America has always been greatest when we dared to be great. We can reach for greatness again. We can follow our dreams to distant stars, living and working in space for peaceful, economic, and scientific gain. Tonight, I am directing NASA to develop a permanently manned space station and to do it within a decade.

A space station will permit quantum leaps in our research in science, communications, and in metals and lifesaving medicines which could be manufactured only in space. We want our friends to help us meet these challenges and share in their benefits. NASA will invite other countries to participate so we can strengthen peace, build prosperity, and expand freedom for all who share our goals.

Is this I wonder if this is "lunacy" to Ken Blackwell?

Lastly, check out Jon Stewart's clip from the Daily Show as posted at Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/08/jon-stewart-rips-fox-news_n_639103.html?show_comment_id=52934816

Color Of Change Holds CNN Accountable For Echoing Fox News Racial Bias

Here is a letter I received from Color of Change:

Dear Sandy,

FOX is up to its old race-baiting tricks. But this time, CNN is repeating FOX's distortions and taking them mainstream.

FOX is claiming that under President Obama, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is refusing to prosecute voting rights offenses when the victims are White and the perpetrators are Black.^[1] It's a bogus story based on the allegations of one former Republican DOJ attorney, and it sidesteps a mountain of facts.^[2]

On Tuesday, FOX complained that other news outlets weren't covering the story. The next day, CNN uncritically echoed FOX's distorted story, lending it mainstream credibility. We expect FOX to engage in this kind of race-baiting. But CNN should know better, and we need to hold them publicly accountable.

Click the link below to send a message to Jon Klein, head of CNN, demanding CNN stop running with half-baked, racially charged stories from FOX. And then please ask your friends and family to do the same:

http://www.colorofchange.org/cnnfox/?id=1651-835564

FOX consistently plays to the fear that President Obama will not govern Blacks and Whites equally, and they're hard at work promoting this twisted narrative again.

The story that FOX is pushing revolves around an incident on election day 2008 in which several men from a small, fringe organization called the New Black Panther Party (NBPP -- no relationship to the original Black Panther Party) stood in front of a polling place in a majority Black voting district, one of them carrying a nightstick. The Bush Justice Department charged them with civil voter intimidation charges, after deciding that the case didn't meet the bar for criminal charges.^[3] After Obama took office, the Department of Justice dropped most of the remaining charges, saying that they weren't supported by the facts and the law, while obtaining an injunction against the man who had been carrying a nightstick.^[4]

But in FOX's hands, the story has become that the case was dropped because of anti-White policies in the Obama administration, with Andrew Breitbart and host David Asman effectively calling the President a racist.^[5] CNN's willingness to follow FOX's lead is inexcusable.

The New Black Panther story is built on the claims of one man -- J. Christian Adams, a former Justice Department official who claims that the Obama administration dropped the NBPP case because of race.^[6] But even the most basic digging reveals that Adams is nothing more than a conservative activist hired by a Bush administration that was hell-bent on politicizing the Justice Department and subverting its civil rights enforcement mission.^[7] During the Bush years -- the bulk of Adams' tenure at the DOJ -- civil rights enforcement decreased. The DOJ failed to even investigate numerous clear civil rights violations when the victims were Black and Latino, especially allegations involving voting rights.^[8]

CNN has repeatedly allowed Adams to air his twisted views without allowing opposing perspectives or telling the full story of Adams' past. CNN calls itself "the most trusted name in news," but they just became complicit in a right wing effort to smear President Obama and Attorney General Holder as racists. Help hold them accountable now:

http://www.colorofchange.org/cnnfox/?id=1651-835564

The fact is that there's simply no evidence to support Adams' claims. No "victims" -- White or otherwise -- have stepped forward to say that they were intimidated on the day in question.^[9]

Even Abigail Thernstrom, GOP-appointed vice chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which is now investigating the situation, blasted Adams, his theory, and the path it's forced the commission to pursue. She sees it as an embarrassment. Thernstrom said, "I know Chris Adams very well, and he doesn't know why the decision was made." She goes on to call the DOJ's position "perfectly plausible" and concludes "I don't think that this inquiry has served the interests of the Commission as being a bipartisan watchdog for important civil rights violations, and I do not believe it has served well the party to which I belong."^[10,11]

The real danger of FOX

FOX has consistently stoked the fears of some White Americans that President Obama might favor Blacks over Whites -- an irresponsible and dangerous game. But it's even more dangerous when other news networks amplify and validate what they're doing. This is FOX's plan, and it's important to note that just before the story got covered on CNN, FOX spent the previous day accusing the other news organizations of not covering the story. They set the bait and CNN took it.

It's the same pattern that was used to put ACORN out of business. FOX ran a smear-campaign with partial or fabricated information and then got other news outlets to follow and run with the same story without digging deeper. Once the truth came out, it was too late.^[12]

We expect FOX to lie and distort. But for CNN and others to fall into the trap of repeating FOX's claims is a different story. Now, in hopes of preventing similar situations in the future, we must fight back. Join us in calling on CNN to do real reporting, and not mainstream FOX's distortions and lies. And when you do, please ask your family and friends to do the same. It only takes a moment:

http://www.colorofchange.org/cnnfox/?id=1651-835564

Thanks and Peace,

-- James, Gabriel, William, Dani, Milton and the rest of the ColorOfChange.org team
July 10th, 2010

Help support our work. ColorOfChange.org is powered by YOU -- your energy and dollars. We take no money from lobbyists or large corporations that don't share our values, and our tiny staff ensures your contributions go a long way. You can contribute here:

https://secure.colorofchange.org/contribute/

References:

1. "Fox hypes GOP activist’s “explosive new allegations” against Obama DOJ," Media Matters, 6-30-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/293?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=8

2. “Almost Everything You Need To Know About The New Black Panther Party Case,” The American Prospect Blog, 7-6-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/294?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=10

3. “O’Reilly Factor ludicrously blames Obama for not pressing criminal charges in New Black Panthers case,” Media Matters, 7-7-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/295?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=12

4. Judgment, US vs. New Black Panther Party for Self Defense, 5-18-09
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/306?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=14

5. "Breitbart, Asman agree Obama is 'defending racism' in Black Panthers case, which is 'virtually the same' as being racist," Media Matters, 7-6-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/296?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=16

6. “CNN omits GOP criticism of Black Panther investigation,” Media Matters, 7-7-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/297?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=18

7. “Christian Adams’ case continues to implode: Bush-era DOJ declined to charge Minutemen for voter intimidation,” Media Matters, 7-1-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/298?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=20

8. “Flashback To The Bush Days At The DoJ,” The American Prospect blog, 7-6-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/299?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=22

9. US Commission on Civil Rights hearing, 4-23-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/300?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=24

10. “Adams' credibility continues to crumble,” Media Matters, 7-5-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/301?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=26

11. “The New Black Panther Case: A Conservative Dissent,” National Review Online, 7-6-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/302?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=28

12. "Extra, Extra—Read All About ACORN," The Nation blog, 1-5-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/303?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=30

Additional resources:

“Manufactured scandal: Right wing’s phony allegations against the Justice Department,” Media Matters, 7-7-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/304?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=32

“New Black Panther Party Primer,” The American Prospect blog, 7-7-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/305?akid=1502.868165.xAvPNj&t=34