The New Face Of Racism in America

Let me start with a hypothetical. Imagine it’s 2002 and a white supremacist (skinhead) is videotaped on a public sidewalk. Let’s say the skinhead says, “I hate black people. All of them. Every last iota of a n*****, I hate them”. He goes on and on and eventually says something about killing black babies.

Now, imagine it’s two years later. It’s election night. George Bush is running against John Kerry. Bush wins. However, his victory is marred by an incident at a polling place. The same skinhead who was videotaped talking about killing black babies is standing in front of a polling place on election night. He and a friend are videotaped in paramilitary uniforms. The leader (and presumptive black baby killer) is holding a night stick. Eventually, the police are called and the racist duo are forced to leave the polling place.

Post inauguration, George Bush has the polling incident brought to his attention. He watches the videotape of the skinhead making public racist statements. Then, he watches the videotape of the same skinhead standing in front of a polling place with a billy stick. What does he do? He lets his Attorney General (John Ashcroft) decide to forget the incident because it’s just not that important. How does the media react? Hint: They scream bloody murder calling both Bush and Ashcroft racists. How do liberals react? Hint: They scream bloody murder calling both Bush and Ashcroft racists.

Now, let’s leave the hypothetical and enter the world of reality.

New Black Panther leader King Shamir Shabazz was videotaped making exactly the same racist statements about white people as my hypothetical skinhead said about black people. The video can be seen here.

Then, King Shamir Shabazz and another New Black Panther member appeared in paramilitary uniforms with Shabazz brandishing a night stick in front of a polling place during the last presidential election. The video can be seen here.

Now, Obama’s justice department has decided not to follow up on a complaint about this act of voter intimidation put forth in January of 2009 – before Obama took the oath of office. You can read about it here.

If you can’t manage to believe your own eyes (or dear ole Groveton) – consider this interview with a civil rights lawyer, former editor of the Village Voice and certifiable uber – liberal, Bartle Bull. You can watch it here. Bartle Bull was also a campaign manager for both Bobby Kennedy and Jimmy Carter.

If you are a reader of this blog, I’d ask that you consider this post in the context of three possibilities:

1. In the hypothetical situation of the skinheads, Bush and Ashcroft – you would have sided with the Bush Administration in believing that the skinhead with a history of making public racial slurs holding a billy club at a polling place was not a sufficiently big deal to investigate. You also excuse the New Black Panthers for their real life racism and intimidation of voters. Hint: You are not a racist. You are just stupid.

2. You would disagree with both the hypothetical Bush situation and the all too real Obama situation by saying that there is no place for racist intimidation of voters and no administration should tolerate such actions. Hint: You are a normal, non-racist American.

3. You think Bush and Ashcroft would have been racists while Obama and Holder are not. Hint: You are very much a racist yourself.

Eric Holder has apparently selected option 3. He is a racist – pure and simple.

Share this article


(comments below)


(comments below)


33 responses to “The New Face Of Racism in America”

  1. Larry G Avatar

    I don't think you can judge racism by AN incident.

    When white skinheads do their thing – it's based on 150 years of a pattern of whites doing bad stuff to blacks – systematically and institutionally tolerated and ignored.

    A system that still has more blacks in prison than their percentage in the population.

    A system were police abuses still happen at a higher proportional rate to black people than whites.

    So when you look at a black person who has a bad attitude about whites – it's not because they are white – it's because of the history of white treatment of blacks.

    On the other hand – the treatment of blacks at the hands of whites is not in retaliation for previous perceived wrongs.

    Nope. It's because they are simply black.

    This is the context that you cannot ignore and if you do and you are white and you call AN INCIDENT… PROOF of RACISM..

    well you go ahead and do that but methinks you have, once gain, failed to truly understand.

    I'm not excusing it – by any means – only pointing out that this man that you are accusing – until proven otherwise – has lived on this earth for a bunch of years and acquitted himself better than thousands of others in his field – and if he had a pattern of racism — in his personal and professional life – would it not be known?'re doing exactly what the right wing propaganda machine has been doing in the last few years.

    A single incident – is not a generational pattern …

    A "skinhead" who has a lifetime pattern of hatred for blacks for no other reason other than they are black is not the same as an AG ..mishandling ONE incident out of thousands that make up his professional career.

    Groveton – I'd respectfully point this out to you.

    The Black Panthers did not spring up in the 1800's as a anti-white hate group.

    The Black Panthers were formed in response to 150 years of perceived hatred based on little more than color….

    They are not excused for their actions and neither is the AG but to equate it to white racism is just plain wrong.

    You've once again stepped into it guy and don't apparently know how to not step in it.

  2. Groveton Avatar

    So, LarryG – if a white administration did exactly the same thing in response to white people intimidating voters it would be "unacceptable racism"? But, when an African-American administration excuses black racists for intimidating voters it is "acceptable racism"?

    That's your position?

    Do I really need to tell you that's racist?

    You and your ilk are very quick to call the governor of Arizona a racist. You are very quick to categorize the Tea Party as racist. However, when confronted with a racist act by the Attorney General you can't quite summon up the courage to call him a racist. You would have easily called John Ashcroft a racist for taking exactly the same action but you can't screw up the courage to say the same about Eric Holder. Be honest here LarryG – what would you have called John Ashcroft or Ed Meese if they would have done exactly the same thing?

    If you want another incident of racism in the Obama Administration – take a look at the speech given by federal apointee Shirley Sherrod to the NAACP recently. In the videotaped speech Ms. Sherrod tells the audience how she abused her government position to provide only limited support to a white farmer going bankrupt because he was white. Ultimately, she refers the white farmer to a white lawyer since she believes that "they" should "take care of their own kind". However, unlike you, Ms. Sherrod apparently has the self-awareness to recognize her own inappropriate racism. Rather than trying to excuse her own inexcusable comments by claiming 150 years of abuse she resigned her government position. I must say that I have far more respect for Ms. Sherrod's ability to understand her own shortcomings than I have for your ability to do the same.

  3. Larry G Avatar

    150 years of racism by whites to blacks for no other reason other than the fact that they are black…

    is equated to a single incident at one precinct – one time.

    you be wrong Groveton.

    You be a white man who ignores the previous 150 years and now wants to judge each incident as if no racism ever existed previously?

    you can do that.

    and obviously you're aligning yourself with the right-wingers who now practice it religiously.

    sorry, I won't apologize for thinking it's wrong.

    and when I see us transferring the same process to brown people in the name of "illegals" .. it has just too many parallels with what we did 150 years ago where we blamed – not the folks who were exploiting other humans but we blamed the folks who were being exploited.

    Methinks some of us are pretty mixed up on this.

    When you exploit a whole race of people – and then blame them for that exploitation… and want to "punish" them for being exploited…by unscrupulous "employers"…

    does that concept strike you as a bit dysfunctional?

  4. Larry G Avatar

    " If you want another incident of racism in the Obama Administration – take a look at the speech given by federal apointee Shirley Sherrod to the NAACP recently. In the videotaped speech Ms. Sherrod tells the audience how she abused her government position to provide only limited support to a white farmer going bankrupt because he was white."

    It's ONE incident .. yes more than one but not a 150 year old pattern done by thousands of people … and institutions to one race.

    I don't excuse her views but are you really THAT surprised that the grand daughter of a slave might end up with that view?

    She hates those that hated her grand parents and subjugated them…

    not their white color

    which was the reason here grand parents were hated… just skin color…

    can you not understand the difference

    between – out and out hate of those who are different from you

    and a response to that hate?

    do you equate the two as the same?

  5. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    Basically, what Larry is saying is that ethnic chauvenism by blacks directed against whites isn't really "racism" because whites oppressed blacks for so long.

    Gee, I can't remember the last time I personally oppressed a black person. But that's OK, I am guilty because of the sins of my forefathers. I guess that makes sense, because some of my Bacon ancestors did own slaves in Delaware back in the 19th century (although they did manumit them). Whatever wealth those ancestors managed to extract from those slaves didn't stay with the family very long. My grandfather Bacon died of tuberculosis during the Depression, my grandmother worked as a switchboard operator at a DuPont plant, and my father got a college education because he managed to get into the Naval Academy, all expenses paid. Regardless, let's say that I'm irredeemably tainted by my blood line, and it's OK for black panthers to direct their hate speech at me.

    How about all the Italians, Jews, Poles, Swedes and others who emigrated to the U.S. after slavery was abolished, settled in northern states where they never saw a black person? Are they and all of their descendents guilty of the blood debt, too?

    I'm also wondering at what point Larry thinks it would be appropriate to consider *all* people as individuals rather than members of a "race", and to hold people accountable for their individual behavior rather than the sins of others who share the same skin color.

  6. Larry G Avatar

    Groveton – methinks you do not know the history – and it's affect on those like the lady you referred to….

    you're obviously an educated man but apparently still ignorant to things that still affect us.

    " Many black farmers across the nation experienced discrimination in their dealings with U.S. Department of Agriculture agencies in their states. Across the nation, black farmers alleged, and the USDA later agreed, they were denied access to loans and subsidies provided by the government.[6] On a national level, farm subsidies that were afforded to white farmers were not afforded to black farmers.[7] Since they were denied government loans, emergency or disaster assistance, and other aid, many black farmers lost their farms and their homes."

    Now.. if you were a black lady whose family lost their farm …lost the family assets that many white folks did not lose and now days still own and benefit from…

    how would you feel?

    do you think it might have some effect on your attitudes?

    is that kind of attitude "racist"?

    you tell me.

  7. Larry G Avatar

    re: " Basically, what Larry is saying is that ethnic chauvenism by blacks directed against whites isn't really "racism" because whites oppressed blacks for so long"


    It's never right.

    but to equate individual incidents to a 150 year old pattern – systematically carried out – to the detriment of those that bore the impact of it…

    and to say that – all of that is behind us and everything is equal…

    well.. you can believe it if you want – especially as a white man –

    but you can't make it so….

    white people today – the direct descendent's of white people who benefited from institutional racism

    are viewed by blacks as unfairly benefiting from the fruits of the original racism.

    you can tell them that they're wrong – but you can't change the history.

    for every family "farm" that still "belongs" to the descendents – there is a black family history of having their family farm taken away.

    and you want them to not remember it.

  8. Groveton Avatar

    Fundamentally, Larry believes that an African-American Attorney General cannot be held to the same standards to which he would hold a European – American Attorney General.

    If a Eurpoean – American Attorney General turned a blind eye to white supremicists intimidating voters he could immediately and correctly be called a racist. However, when an African – American Attorney General turns a blind eye to black supremicists intimidating voters it would be unfair to call him a racist.

    Larry apparently has two sets of standards – a "high bar" for white people and a "lower bar" for people of color. I can't agree. I believe that the Attorney General of the United States should be held to the same set of high standards regardless of his or her race.

    And, for the record – my forefathers soent most of the last 150 years stealing chickens in Italy, Germany and Ireland.

  9. Anonymous Avatar

    Lets not discriminate against racists: my mother was a racist.

  10. Anonymous Avatar

    Anon 8:46 raises an important point!

    It is related to the question Prof. Risse often asks:

    "Can the genetic proclivities that got homo sapiens to this stage of civilizatin get them to a sustainable trajectory?"

    The answer is NO if well informed, well educated citizens keep tossing rocks at empty pigeon holes…

    And having fun baiting on another with red meat.

    What are the grounds for consensus on achieving a sustainable trajectory?


  11. Anonymous Avatar

    Observer, are you saying that the only thing that matters in life is how close we all live to our jobs?


  12. Anonymous Avatar

    No, TMT it means what is important is that all homo sapiens are citizens and that all citizens are happy and safe.

    That requires a sustainable trajectory for civilization.

    All contributions are welcome, all distractions are not.


  13. Groveton Avatar


    If you haven't figured it out yet – I like throwing rocks at empty pigeon holes. In fact, you should too. The only way we will ever achieve your vision of sustainable human settlement patterns is through an effective combination of free market economics and democratic legislation. This means that we need competent men and women in the leadership ranks of business and competent men and women in the leadership ranks of government.

    When somebody like Eric Holder fails to do their job in an effort to curry favor with a small percentage of the citizens who support him he diminishes the faith people have in the government. Without faith that governemnt is acting in the best interests of the people in accordance with the US Constitution and other laws your hope for a sustainable future will be forlorn.

    It is incumbent on "we the people" to hold our elected officials accountable for behaving and performing in a manner which benefits our country over the long term. When the Obama administration ignores voter intimidation beacause the intimidators represent a rabid group of Obama supporters – we all lose.

    You will never get your sustainable trajectory without a competent, honest and fair government. I believe the Obama administration is incompetent, corrupt and unfair. Until we throw Obama and all other hyper-parochial politicians out of office there will be no sustainable trajectory.

  14. Larry G Avatar

    re: two sets of standards.


    I'm saying recognize the difference between 150 years of discriminating against a people because of their color –

    … and a de-facto backlash in response to that irrational hate

    neither is acceptable

    Holder is wrong to not to strictly follow the law and may well need to go because of it but as far as I know there is no evidence that backs up the assertion that the man is a life-long racist because he committed one undeniable act.

    Holder himself – does not, as far as I know, have a life-long pattern as a racist . say… like George Allen or Trent Lott who did apparently..

    I see no similar history in Holder.

    Some folks say if you do it once, it's exactly the same as a generation of people doing it or an individual who's life was/is that way.

    Holder is no black version of Jesse Helms or David Duke.

    equating the two or playing semantic games to that practical end … is …

    well.. it's ignoring history and it's ignoring realities and in the end – it's not the truth.

  15. Groveton Avatar

    In fact Observer – let me ask you a practical question …

    How can we use your ideas about a sustainable future to guide our voting choices this November? Maybe one example – Connolly vs. Fimian. I don't even live in the congressional district in question. However, I am interested in how you would analyze the two candidates in terms of their ability to create a sustainable trajectory.

  16. Groveton Avatar

    LarryG –

    I agree with you about Helms and Allen. I guess the question comes down to how many racist things does someone have to do before they become racists.

    Which makes me wonder – you toss around the racist label pretty liberally (pun intended). Do you really think the Tea Party is inherently racist? How about Jan Brewer? The 70% of Arizonans who support the new law against illegal immigration?

    A recent study of elite colleges and universities found that, "To have the same chance of gaining admission as a black student with a SAT score of 1100, a Hispanic student otherwise equally matched in background characteristics would have to have 1230, a white student a 1410, and an Asian student a 1550.". Would you label an Asian a racist if he or she objected to being subject to a higher bar than whites? Did the Asians gain the upper hand in elite education by opressing whites? Are Asians genetically smarter than whites? Or, does the average Asian – American family simply take academics more seriously than the average white American family? You probably can guess my opinion. The Asians have risen to the top because they work harder. On average, they get better grades because they study harder than whites. Refusing to admit more qualified Asian-Americans in favor of less qualified white Americans is a racist behavior.

    Perhaps you can explain how the liberal view of victimology supports the observable fact that Asian-Americans are, on average, more likely to get better grades and SAT scores than white Americans. Did white people forget to be biased against Asians? Does our Anglo-centric society discriminate against all people of color … except Asians?

  17. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Interesting analogy but I am not sure thatthe poiont is all that compelling. A few points:

    (1) Sure either the skinheads or the panthers are racist.

    (2) Ineither case (hypothetical or real) did the radicals actually physically prevent voters from voting? I would think that would be the line they would have to cross to make an ironclad case of interfering with voting.

    (3) I don't know where you vote, but I do at a peaceful, bucolic Methodist Church right across the road from a store that has been in operation since the 1920s and looks like it. The voting officials won't let you in if you are wearing a T shirt that they consider provacative. I think this has some civil rights issues.

    (4) Are Black Panthers racist? You betcha. They sprung out of the more restrained African-American movements such as SNCC and the SCLC that more Northern and California urban black radicals thought were too soft on dealing with whitey. The SCLC followed the teachings of Gandhi and other non-violent advocates and were probably a lot more successful in affecting change.

    (5) As a cub reporter on a tiny N.C. newspaper, I covered the Joan Little case (1974) involving a young black prisoner killing a white jailer she claimed tried to rape her. The SCLC and the Panthers battled over who would be Ms. Little's advocate. It was curious watching old marchers in their 50s go against the young radicals with the berets and bandoliers — both groups being black.

    Peter Galuszka

  18. Larry G Avatar

    Groveton – I don't toe the liberal line on racism so you need to pay attention to what I say and not assume that the blanks fill in the way you seem to have assumed.

    I do not forgive "reverse" racism even if ..possibly a retaliatorial act in response to 150 years of hundreds/thousands of racist acts in the name of skin color and nothing else.

    Did Obama end up hiring some black folks with revenge in their hearts?

    no doubt as events are proving.

    do these folks hate whites because of their skin color?

    I don't think so.

    this is not a tale about who fired the first shot…

    we already know the truth.

    but we keep forgetting it because apparently one racist act by a black is all it takes for him to be a black panther equivalent to a skinhead.

    This is the narrative that is coming from some on the right.

    I'm not buying it.

    and neither should you.

  19. Anonymous Avatar

    "what is important is that all homo sapiens are citizens and that all citizens are happy and safe."

    Sometimes I feel happy and safe right after I have punched some rude SOB in the mouth.

    The hypothetical skinhead and Shabazz were being rude, racism aside. There is no need to rub salt in the wound.

  20. Anonymous Avatar

    "Until we throw Obama and all other hyper-parochial politicians out of office… "

    I agree, but why single out Obama as hyper parochial and not Shabazz, for example?

    And what do we do with fake parochials who adopt a stance because of the money it brings in, like Beck? The guy is not a doctor any more than he is a politician, but he is selling poisonous political snake oil, just as surely as the skinheads.

  21. Groveton Avatar

    Anon 3:05 – I don't take Beck seriously. Nor Limbaugh, nor Olbermann, nor Maddow, etc, etc.

    They are entertainers who put on a show to get ratings.

    I have much more respect for the likes of Paul Krugman and Pat Buchanan. They try to use facts and figures to back up their arguments.

    I also have to admit to the guilty truth – I think Ann Coulter is hysterical. Not often credible, believable or reasonable but really, really funny.

  22. Groveton Avatar

    I smell a rat!

    I have been following the Shirley Sherrod controversy for the last couple of days. At first, it looked like another example of an Obama administration employee showing her true racist sentiments. She was caught on videotape making some inflammatory comments about abusing her power as a government employee by making or rejecting requests for financial assistance based on race.

    On first blush, it looked clear cut.

    The video came out.

    The NAACP rejected her comments.

    She was forced out of the USDA.

    But something was wrong. The video clip ended abruptly. Ms. Sherrod was starting to talk about what her discriminatory thinking revealed to her. It seemed like she was about to admit that she was thinking the wrong way and caught herself, corrected herself.

    I'd like to see the whole video.

    I smell a rat and the rat's name is Andrew Breitbart.

    I sure hope this woman didn't get booted from her job based on a videotape selectively edited to deceive the viewer into thinking a story of redemption was actually a story of bigotry.

  23. Larry G Avatar

    Groveton – you're not smelling a rat – you're smelling your own butt on fire…. for buying hook, line and sinker the right wing propaganda machine media ..FAUX news broadcasting 24/7 what they picked up from a blogger who either purposely misrepresented the information or was woefully inept as even a "pretend" journalist

    and you bought it… and did the same thing that the others did – treat it as truth.

    Don't feel too bad – even the Obama folks took the head fake.

    but this ought to teach you a lesson of listening to the right wing media that apparently cares little if their "news" comes from bloggers masquerading as journalists.

    I hope that you are properly ashamed of yourself.

    I'd say 2 Hail Mary's and an Our Father and no FAUX news for at least a week.

  24. Anonymous Avatar

    If Obama caves to the Hispanic Caucus on opening HCR to illegal aliens after saying "no," does that have racist connotations or is it just another fib?

    "Hispanic Democrats want health care fix . . . 'The expectation was that everybody knew it was unfair and that a new immigration bill would correct that,' Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) told POLITICO.

    "Asked at what level he received such signals, Grijalva said: 'High enough to feel secure about it.'

    . . . 'Earlier this year, the president reassured the American people that illegal immigrants would not be covered by his government takeover of health care,' said Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee. 'Now we see what he means. He intends to give millions of illegal immigrants amnesty in order to give them access to America’s health care system. In other words, the president and congressional Democrats are trying to get illegal immigrants into the health care system through the back door.'”


  25. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    Andrew Breitbart lost a lot of credibility by the way he posted the edited material of Shirley Sherrod, and cost her her job. I am gratified to see that as soon as the facts emerged that virtually all conservatives, including Groveton, backtracked on the story and agreed that the woman is owed a huge apology as well as her job back, and that they didn't dig in their heels and try to convince everyone that a story was still legitimate somehow.

    As for the black panther story, that appears to have legs.

  26. Groveton Avatar

    "I hope that you are properly ashamed of yourself.".

    Hopefully, the NAACP is ashamed of themselves as well. They criticized Ms. Sherrod one day and backtracked the next day.

    Hopefully, Obama will reverse his dismissal of Ms. Sherrod.

    It seems a lot of people must be watching Fox News.

  27. Larry G Avatar

    What Sherrod story shows is how the right wing propaganda machine works in an overt campaign of misinformation – in cahoots with a network that calls itself Fox News.

    You have "a" blogger – one of hundreds who are publishing basically accusations that are intended to attack some aspect of the Obama administration.

    i.e – Obama is taxing the hell out of us – while Fed taxes are the lowest in decades – and then that get put on Hannity and then milions of FAUX viewers believe it as fact.

    Last night O'Relly was STILL CONVINCED that the story was true … not did not retract his call for her firing the previous night but insisted that this was further proof of racism in the Obama administration.

    Now remember, O'Reilly has a large staff of people who are part of a much larger FAUX News network – and they are broadcasting without verification what some blogger posted – that was not only not true – but appears to be a purposeful misrepresentation.

    This – despite the fact that CNN had found and put on the air the farmer, Ms. Sherrod, the NAACP and the other parts of the video that the blogger had and did not provide.

    All FAUX News had – and all they needed apparently was the bloggers name and his edited video to decide to broadcast it as if it were true.

    Conservative media – followed suit.

    The the 3rd part of this.

    FAUX News has a viewership of millions – and many of them believe what FAUX News said – and then they repeat it.

    This is exactly what I've been calling the right wing propaganda machine as of late.

    there is a campaign to undermine this administration by what amounts to misinformation…. only this time all the rats got caught red handed.

    this did more than "hurt" the credibility of this blogger.

    It pretty much exposed how the right wing propaganda machine is working – and Groveton helped up by posting what he had heard from the right wing propaganda machine.

    Had Groveton spent even 5 listening to CNN instead of conservative media – he would have known the truth – and not actually participated in helping to spread an untrue thing.

    This was not FAUX News nor the conservative media's finest moment.

    The blogger, Andrew Breitbart, went on Hannity – and the man actually said that CNN had "made the story about Sherrod" and that his intent all along was to capture film of the NAACP engaged in racist rhetoric at it's own meetings.

    by the way folks – you won't hear Ms. Sherrod herself on FAUX News – only CNN and MSNBC.

    Why is that? Why won't the lady go on FAUX?

  28. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Groveton, Larry, Bacon,

    For more perspective on "Fair and Balanced" Fox News consider an interview with Russian-emigre author Gary Shteyngart, who has written "The Russian Debutante's Handbook" and "Absurdistan."

    In an interview with The New York Times about his third, upcoming novel, he says that Fox is follows "a party line without a party."

    In his novel, which is set in New York City of the near future, books are banned, the ultra rich can buy perpetual life, city subways have business class, and the latest fashion is see-through jeans.

    Fox has changed its name to "Fox Liberty Ultra."

    'Nuff said.
    Peter Galuszka

  29. Larry G Avatar

    FAUX has said and continues to say that the Main Stream Media "colors" the news to suit their liberal views.

    But does the MSM publish what bloggers are saying without verifying the facts – as FAUX has been caught red handed in doing?

    Every now and then – the MSM is caught red-handed doing something like this…

    so, let's be fair about it.

    the difference is – that when they do it – it's usually not part of a campaign against a specific President or person but instead one guy trying to make a name for himself…on some random issue.

    and that's what makes this different.

    FAUX and the bloggers are so intent in a steady drumbeat of accusations against this President and Presidency – and many that are clearly false…

    so much so that several "fact-checker" websites have been spawned… in response.

    and the truly laughable thing here is that ever AFTER these things are debunked – there is a large number of clueless people who still believe.

    they still believe that Obama has raised taxes the highest in history.

    they still believe that Saddam had WOD.

    they still believe the President has no birth certificate.

    etc, etc, etc.

    and the right wing media has taken note of this – because if they can broadcast it – even if it is a lie – they can peel off more and more folks from the clueless middle.

    it's pure and simple – assassination politics.

    it's bad enough that the blogger in question admits this.

    but is it a surprise that FAUX News knowingly chooses to participate in it without verifying facts?

    and then has the audacity to say "fair and balanced"?

    Each night – in this order


    along with generous dollops of Karl Rove and the like

    appear and spew a steady drumbeat of anti-Obama blather

    and during the commercial breaks they trumpet:

    " Fair and Balanced"


    " We report and you decide"

    remember – these are the people who said BEFORE Obama was elected – that he was racist and the proof of it was him hanging around with jeremiah wright.

    Now.. they did not do a one-might report of the relationship nor not even a multi-part series.


    EVERY SINGLE NIGHT – prior to the election – either Beck or O'Reilly or Hannity or even Greta would repeat the same thing over and over.

    Now this for BEFORE.. ANYONE accused the Tea Party of racism.

    From the beginning .. Obama has been accused of racism.

    and since then.. every right wing blogger and FAUX news "analyst" worth their salt has set out to get the goods on him.

    I'll say again.

    I'm am no lover of Obama.

    he has his problems not the least of which is his inexperience and arrogance.

    but what is going on is clear.

    and I'd point this out no matter who is President.

    This is about 1.5 years of a presidency … that from before it was even a Presidency, it was accused of racism.

    It's not racist for George Bush to want comprehensive immigration reform – almost identical to what Obama supports.

    But Obama is a racist for wanting it whereas as far as I can recall..Bush was never called a racist once for supporting the same thing.


  30. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    C'mon, Larry, get off your high horse. Have you been reading the stories about the "JournOList" scandal, in which liberal media players discussed a collaborative effort to spike the Obama-Rev. Jeremiah Wright connection? It's a huge journalistic scandal, but it is getting very little traction in the Mainstream Media.

    A favorite trope of conservative blogs is complaining about stories and scandals that get buried by the MSM. It happens all the time. If you are outraged by Fox, then you know how conservatives have felt for years about NBC, CBS and ABC.

    The main difference between the "Right Wing Propaganda Machine" and its left wing counterpart is that conservatives have far fewer resources to dedicate to original reporting and fact checking. That's a shame. They need to do better.

  31. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    It is no longer Fox News.

    It is "Fox Liberty Ultra."

    This is a mandatory definitional change on a par with "patterns of human settlement" instead of "zoning."

    Let's get with the program.

    Peter Galuszka

  32. "…milions of FAUX viewers believe it as fact."

    It is nice to see that intelligent people like Groveton don't take Beck et al seriously, but apparently a lot of others do. The net result is the Big Lie strategy in action (primarily but not entirely) in favor of conservatives.

    Consider Groveton's list. Beck, Hannity, Coulter, Limbaugh, Olberman, and , oh yeah, Maddow.

    Clearly Maddow is an entertainer, not a newscater, but she relies heavily on irony, sarcasm, apparent contradictions, etc. that she backs up with quotes and clips. My observation is that Hannity and Limbaugh are much more likely to rely on bald assertions such as "Everyone knows big government is always a bad thing." or dubious premises such as "the economy has been in trouble ever since Obama took office", or "Anyone can see the stimulus has been an abject failure", repeated ad nauseum like plaudits in an infomercial.

    Maddow had a bit that consisted of clips of the audience during the State of the Union address. It showed the Democratic side (mostly) applauding and standing to applaud the president and the Republican side (to a man) scowling and sitting on their hands. Over and over. Obviously it was edited, but just as obviously it contained a grain of truth.

    It is hard to find that kind of truth from Beck or Limbaugh, and the sheer volume of shows favors the conservative side.

    Another thing I notice is the difference in the quality of the advertisers. The conservative shows seem to be supported by get "rich quick" or "get out of debt", or "sell your gold" kinds of advertising wile Maddow has more mainstream advertisers.

    Bacon is right: conservatives have far fewer resources to dedicate to original reporting and fact checking. That's a shame. They need to do better.

    One way they might be able to do better is to not spread their resources so thin amongst so many shows, repeating the same tired themes. And it might help when they do regain power, to actually show some results.

  33. Larry G Avatar

    re: "do better"

    "not enough resources"?

    Let's see.. FAUX and O'Reilly make a point every chance they get that FAUX news has more viewers (and presumably more ad $$$) than CNN & MSNBC combined and then some..

    and so the excuse for not telling the truth is that you did not have enough resources to check a lie before you broadcast it as the truth?

    and this is the MSM's "fault"?

    ha ha ha ha ha ha

    ya'll are truly living in a dream world … self-induced but never-the-less

    the problem is that the dream world is also promoted to the clueless middle and apparently to some well-meaning folks who have not been able to adjust to the internet/blogger world when it comes to vetting information.

    Surely.. if it is on a blog site, in an email… spewed out by "official" folks like Beck, Hannity and company then… it must be true.

    And the hell of it is – that it works.

    You KNOW that it works when the NAACP and Obama fears it – to the point where they will throw the latest target of the witch hunt under the bus as soon as the bulls-eye is drawn on the hapless victim by the RWPM.

    ya'll have seriously confused the difference between the MSM "coloring" or "slanting" (in your words) of the news – and the outright misrepresentations that are emanating these days from the right-wing media.

    And their excuse?

    well of course… the blogger did it.

    this is a reputable news organization?

Leave a Reply