Faux News is at it again, doing the old Brietbart trick of editing to make a racist point –
Here is the original unedited video, where the protesters are saying something quite different –
Faux News is at it again, doing the old Brietbart trick of editing to make a racist point –
Here is the original unedited video, where the protesters are saying something quite different –
Economist Ben Stein, the poker faced guy in the Visine commercials turns out to be a Republican (no big surprise here)…
Repeating every shopworn Republican racist excuse in the books for Faux News.
If the Republicans were “so good for black folks”…
How come they always come off as bigots?
This is a typical tool used by racist Republicans…It is called Projection.
Projection is a defense mechanism that involves taking our own unacceptable qualities or feelings and ascribing them to other people. For example, if you have a strong dislike for someone, you might instead believe that he or she does not like you. Projection works by allowing the expression of the desire or impulse, but in a way that the ego cannot recognize, therefore reducing anxiety.
Or, in the words of MLK –
“Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity. Hate destroys a man’s sense of values and his objectivity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true.”
Fresh on the heels of the Faux News “Search for a white Trayvon”, the “Santa is white” debacle (parts 1 & 2), we have yet another conservative – who obviously due to a dramatic lowering of standards in order to recruit teachers …
Got a job as a teacher.
Which gets us to the most recent conservative with “foot in mouth” disease.
Looking at the guys work history, it makes you wonder what a background investigation would show up…
A Fairfield Freshman School teacher has been suspended without pay and faces the prospect of dismissal after allegedly making racially insensitive statements to a student earlier this month.
Monday, the Fairfield Board of Education suspended science teacher Gil Voigt. He has 10 days to request a hearing before the school board or a referee.
Voigt, who is white, is accused of telling an African-American male student, “We do not need another black president” after the student said he would like to become president.
The incident occurred on Dec. 3, with several other students present,
according to a report from Assistant Superintendent Roger Martin, who conducted a disciplinary hearing on the matter.
It isn’t the first time the 14-year Fairfield teacher has been disciplined. He received a verbal warning for making an inappropriate racial comment in 2008. That year he also received a verbal warning for improper use of school technology.
Last year he received a verbal warning after allegedly calling a student “stupid” and belittling him. He received a written warning last month for failure to use the adopted curriculum.
“This is a rare occurrence. This is the first time I’ve faced it since being named assistant superintendent (in 2011),” Martin said.
In his report, Martin said he believed four students were interviewed who corroborated the student Voigt was speaking to.
Following a complaint by the student’s parents, the teen was removed from Voigt’s class, Martin said.
“We intend to uphold board policies and to hold teachers accountable for the essential functions of the teacher job description,” Martin said.
Voigt is accused of violating board policies related to staff ethics, staff-student relations and harassment.
Voigt was not present at the meeting and could not be reached on Monday for comment.
According to the report, Voigt said his statement was misquoted by the student, who he said was not a very good student and was troublesome in class.
Voigt has been a Fairfield teacher since 2000. Before that he taught seven years in North Carolina, two years in Florida and six years in the Cincinnati Public Schools.
The bigots at Faux News have done it again in creating a fake story about the “Knockout Game” to justify racism. A white “copycat” conservative punk moron has decided to duplicate the fictional ” massively growing crime wave” by beating up a 79 year old black man. Hopefully this guy gets a real judge instead of a conservative appointed lackey, and gets some real jail time. It would be absolutely perfect if he got to share a cell for the next 10 years or so with a real black thug – perhaps one who committed the same crime. Maybe even get the chance to do a little “jailhouse community servicing” to open his eyes to the fact committing a crime and paying the price of going to jail, where almost all of the black thugs wind up …
Isn’t a vacation on the Med.
Did you hear? A white guy in Texas punched an elderly black man in the jaw, so of course he gets charged with a hate crime, because he’s white. White people arealways the victims. Also: the perpetrator allegedly used a slur and talked about attacking a black guy.
Happily, the “knockout game” phenomenon is coasting on fumes at this point, given that it’s 1) two months old and 2) not actually a real “trend.” Thursday’s announcement of federal hate crime charges injected a spark back into the idea, though, thanks to its cutting right to the chase: This is an issue of race.
The conservative Washington Times reports the new development, capturing a lot in one sentence. “Most knockout victims that have appeared in news reports have been white but the Justice Department said in this instance the victim was a 79-year-old black man, and stepped in with federal charges.” The response to the storyon Twitter, the Internet’s comments section, gives you a taste of precisely what you’d expect, outrage at a white assailant getting charges while a black man wouldn’t. The Washington Times‘ Emily Miller offered one of the more restrained responses: “So only white on black is hate?”
First, there are the specifics of Thursday’s case. The Justice Department “said in this instance” the victim was an elderly black man because, in this instance, the victim was an elderly black man. And the attorney general stepped in with federal charges because the perpetrator of the attack, Conrad Alvin Barrett, videotaped both the punch (which broke the older man’s jaw) and his motivation for it. That motivation was, allegedly, racial. The department’s press release alleges that Barrett at one point “makes a racial slur.” In another video, he is reported to have said, “The plan is to see if I were to hit a black person, would this be nationally televised?” After he hit the old man, Barrett is apparently heard yelling, “knockout!” in the video.
The Justice Department addresses the idea of this as a fad: “According to the complaint, the conduct has been called by other names and there have been similar incidents dating as far back as 1992.” This isn’t a 2013 thing where black people pick out white people to be punched. It’s a two-decade-old rarity that suddenly became a media sensation.
Let’s go back to the Times’ s Emily Miller. In November, Amrit Marajh was charged with a hate crime after punching a Jewish man in Brooklyn. Marajh is a person of color; his victim, white. The Washington Times covered it — the paper has written on the topic hundreds of times — but the Marajh story didn’t do nearly as well as today’s article.
Of course it didn’t. When the Times suggests that most “victims that have appeared in news reports” are white, they’re tipping their hand. Most coverage of the attacks has been driven by conservative outlets like the Times, which have not been shy about suggesting a racial disparity. We wrote about World Net Daily’s efforts to that end earlier this month. The attacks are always about race in media coverage because the alleged racial targeting of whites by blacks is the only reason people care about the attacks. It’s not necessarily a conscious filtering, but it is a filter that is applied.
The other recently popular knockout attack was a video usually given a title like “Knockout Game Goes Terribly Wrong.” That’s what BeforeItsNews called it, grabbing the video from WorldStarHipHop. In that video, a black man approaches a woman, who somehow — the tape gets blurry — gets the attacker on the ground and starts hitting him. Another man comes running in and kicks the alleged assailant. This video made it onto essentially every conservative outlet, as AboveTopSecretpoints out, all of which use the same frame for the story: black guy gets what’s coming. At last, a victory for the white team in this “knockout game” thing. (SeeReddit’s comments, if you dare.)
But! In a correction, Glenn Beck’s The Blaze adds a key detail: “Las Vegas Police Department spokesman Larry Hadfield told The Blaze Monday it appears the involved individuals had contact with each other before.” This isn’t a random attack, if it was even an attack at all. It’s dumb jerks being dumb jerks as dumb jerks have done for time immemorial. But by adding it into the “knockout game” genre — obviously incorrectly — and by picturing a white person fighting back against a black assailant, it got huge web traffic.
The weird thing about the Barrett attack — one of thousands of random attacks involving people of various races — is that it likely wouldn’t have happened without the media making “the knockout game” into an official sensation. Barrett allegedly wanted to see what happened when a white guy hit a black guy in the knockout game, because he hadn’t seen those covered by the media. Now he knows what would happen. And some of the same people that helped create the knockout game are, however indirectly, rising to his defense. He’s a victim, too.
This is how racism makes you stupid. A High School in New Mexico allowed the kids to come dressed one day as “Santa, elves, or a Reindeer”. A black kid shows up in a Santa outfit, and is criticised for dressing as Santa…
Because “Santa is white”.
Now never mind the fact that none of the Kids dressed as elves…Are the fictitious creatures…
Or the fact that any of the kids with their little antlers on are remotely related to genus Rangifer…
There is no “black Santa”.
This guy must have got his teaching certificate from on of those conservative Voucher schools.
A New Mexico high school teacher has been disciplined after a parent says the man told his black son that Santa Claus is white.
Officials at the school in Rio Rancho, about 15 miles north of Albuquerque, announced Friday that the teacher recently was disciplined for his comments to the student, but they declined to say how, KOB-TV reported (http://goo.gl/GYqcJr).
The move came after students at Cleveland High School were told they could come to class dressed as Santa, an elf or a reindeer.
Michael Rougier said his ninth-grade son, Christopher, arrived wearing a Santa hat and beard, and the teacher asked the boy: “Don’t you know Santa Clause is white? Why are you wearing that?”
The teacher’s name was not released, and attempts by The Associated Press to reach school officials Saturday were unsuccessful.
Michael Rougier said the teacher’s comments enraged him.
“There’s no room for that in the classroom,” he said. “Whether this teacher felt Christopher may have been wearing this out of context, there’s no room for it. There’s just no room for it.”
The incident happened the same week that Fox News Channel’s Megyn Kelly said on the air that both Santa Claus and Jesus were white. Her comments drew national attention and prompted a slew of heated comments on blogs and social media sites.
A spokesman for Rio Rancho Public Schools said the Cleveland High School teacher knows he made a “dumb” mistake and has since apologized to the Rougier family.
Michael Rougier said he still has concerns. “If he has that attitude, how is it affecting students, studies, grading habits, trending toward Caucasian kids?” Rougier said of the teacher.
The teacher still works at Cleveland, but Christopher has been removed from his class, KOB-TV reported.
First the Faux News racist sensationalism –
The stories are chilling–conjuring a world of senseless, alien violence as incomprehensible as it is reprehensible. Rightfully, we are mortified and outraged and we fear for a country in which A Clockwork Orange ultra-violence finds life in our streets. The analysis of many pundits is startling: these attacks are racially motivated hate crimes against whites by black youths and the media and our politicians refuse to identify these racist motives out of political correctness.
What goes mostly unspoken in these commentaries on the “knockout game” is the idea that these assaults are racially motivated and so white people should be wary of groups of black men. Some take this further and blame the “liberal media” for the violence, since the media allegedly hid the “truth” about the race of the criminals. If only the media would tell us when black people attack white people, we’d know to not trust them and we’d be safe, the logic goes.
But are these pundits correct? Are these crimes committed by roaming packs of black “savages” against white people?
Here’s the fascinating thing about this “spreading” trend: nobody seems to have any evidence that it’s spreading, or that it’s new, or that it’s racially motivated, or that black youths are the ones typically responsible, or that whites are typically targeted. This hasn’t stopped Mark Steyn, Thomas Sowell, andMatt Walsh from describing this specifically as a crime committed by blacks against whites, CNN from claiming that it is “spreading,” or Alec Torres at NRO from say it is “evidently increasing [in] popularity.” Most sources claim that it is spreading, and a number of sources claim that it is racially motivated. But how do they know? Where are they getting their data from?
Alec Torres wrote what appears to be the most thorough survey of all the reported accounts of the “knockout game,” but these “reports” are actually newspaper reports, not police reports, so they don’t give us a reliable picture. Yet, Torres is confident enough to conclude: “Most of the victims have been whites and Asians, and attackers tend to target Jews, immigrants, and the elderly in particular. Most of the attackers have been African American.”
“Most” is an awfully slippery word to describe a increasingly popular, violent hate crime.
What’s very perplexing about Torres’s post is that he quotes multiple times from an award-winning article by John H. Tucker in Riverfront Times titled, Knockout King: Kids call it a game. Academics call it a bogus trend. Cops call it murder. I say this citation is perplexing because Tucker’s article explains quite clearly why sweeping claims about rising incidences of the “knockout game” and the racial identities of the perpetrators and victims are bogus. Tucker helps us see how many commentaries about these assaults are deeply flawed.
First of all, we don’t have reliable data:
A variety of factors make it impossible to quantify how many assaults can be attributed to Knockout King. For one, police often categorize such attacks as attempted robberies; though participants say theft isn’t the motive, they’ve been known to add larceny to injury when the opportunity presents itself. Moreover, because victims usually don’t get a good look at their assailant, incidents seldom result in charges. Many of the most vulnerable victims don’t file police reports, either because they fear revenge or were taught in their native countries not to trust police.
In order to draw any remotely competent conclusion about these assaults, you’d have to deal with all the above problems and also consider if crimes by whites are reported as frequently as crimes by blacks, whether teens of other races might refer to the game by another name or not label it at all, how the percentage of attacks by blacks compares to the general percentage of assaults by black teens, and so on. Analyzing data is not as simple as watching some YouTube videos and Googling “knockout game.” Here’s Tucker again:
Given that 4.3 million violent attacks were reported by U.S. citizens in 2009, according to the National Crime Victimization Survey, Males [a research fellow at the nonprofit Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice] says reporters should know better than to highlight a handful of random attacks by kids and call it journalism. It’s the same thing as plucking a few instances of attackers with Jewish surnames who beat up non-Jews and declaring it a “troubling new trend,” he argues.
All but two of the ten victims . . . interviewed were white (one was black and was Latino), and all of the players were black. But Knockout King does not appear to be bounded by race. Jason, from St. Louis County, says two white friends were part of his punch-out crew. One Dutchtown woman, agreeing to speak on the condition that her name not be published, says police caught her son, who is white, playing Knockout King. . . .
“It’s not a black thing, it’s a kid thing,” the woman says. “It’s teenage kids trying to be cool. My son’s as white as can be. He doesn’t have a black bone in his body.”
How could Torres read this article and yet still come to the conclusion that the assaults are on the rise and that “most” of them involve black assailants and white or asian victims? In his defense, other pundits have drawn the same conclusion, despite the lack of evidence.
Of course, there are some things we can confidently say about these crimes: “Most criminologists and youth experts agree that unprovoked attacks by teenagers on strangers are a real, if extremely rare, phenomenon,” notes Tucker. What’s more, unquestionably these attacks are horrid and inhumane, Mark Steyn is right that these perpetrators lack a basic moral fortitude, the guilty parties must be apprehended and punished, and the public should be warned about the realities of random violent crime. And we might even admit that some of these assaults appear to have been hate crimes. None of these claims are objectionable because we have evidence for them.
What we don’t have evidence for is the claim that this “game” is becoming increasingly popular or that it is part of a larger problem of black mob violence which the media is ignoring. To support such absurd claims we need to turn elsewhere, away from the experts and the data, to a man who has made a name for himself peddling a book which purports to show that a covert race war is being waged by blacks against whites all across the country, and the knockout game is just one weapon in their arsenal.
Before almost anyone else was talking about the “knockout game,” Colin Flaherty was reporting on it and other incidences of what he calls “black mob violence” for WorldNetDaily, the notoriously deceptive, far-right news and opinions site. His schtick is simple: every time he finds a report of black “mob” violence or black on white violence, he writes about it. He’s compiled many of these incidences into his book, White Girl Bleed A Lot, which is ranked #1,455 under “Books” at Amazon as of Sunday evening, 24th of November. Its high ranking is undoubtedly due to the press he’s been getting. Hannity had him on his radio show. And Thomas Sowell’s article on the knockout game, which was published in the New York Post and the National Review Online, cites Flaherty and repeats much of the WND author’s rhetoric about the national epidemic of racial violence that the media has covered up. This isn’t too surprising, since Sowell’s original review of the book was actually published on the NRO’s website, where he gave the book high praise. His book has also received praise from Allen West, David Horowitz, and American Thinker.
What’s surprising about all the positive press Flaherty has received is that his articles purporting to prove this epidemic of black racial violence are incredibly, basically absurd. And that absurdity, the lengths Flaherty is willing to go to support his assertion about the secret race war can really only be interpreted as bigotry. Flaherty deceives his readers to sell his book, peddling the classic white fear of the savage, violent, black man, mixed in with a little contemporary rhetoric about how the “liberal,” politically correct media is covering up for black thugs. This narrative fits nicely into the larger perception that Obama has created a nation of entitled, lazy, and violent blacks, which I have written about before.
The most basic flaw in his argument is that his entire project is one big stacked evidence fallacy. If you only cite examples of black crime, of course you’ll conclude that there’s a national racial crime wave! Using that “logic” I can prove that any group is waging a secret race war (it is interesting to note that Robert Spencer of JihadWatch uses a very similar method to argue that Muslims are dangerous). On top of that egregious error, Flaherty entirely ignores all other characteristics of the crimes: social class, education, setting; nothing else matters except race to him. Any respectable criminologist would scoff at such a methodology, not because they want to be politically correct, but because it’s a gross reduction of the factors that actually contribute to crime. Next, Flaherty fails to recognize that correlation does not equal causation. So, because a black person commits a violent crime, his blackness must have caused it, in Flaherty’s logic. And because a black party got out of hand, it’s a “race riot.” Yes, that’s right, because the partiers were black, it was a “race” riot. Because “black” is a race. Makes perfect sense, right?
When the media doesn’t mention that a violent crime was committed by a black person, that’s evidence of a cover up for Flaherty. In one article, he describes calling and emailing the police to try to learn the racial makeup of a party that turned into a “mob”:
“What happened? Was this a case of black mob violence?”
No reply. I get that a lot. It is a red flag.
So, he called the police and explicitly asked if an incident was “black mob violence,” and when he got no reply, it was confirmation to him that the police were hiding the truth. My guess is that in most of these cases, the media and police are silent about the race of the perpetrators because “race” isn’t really a factor in the crimes.
Colin Flaherty and his project have been cited repeatedly to support the claim that the “knockout game” is really about racial violence against whites. He’s been cited to this end not just in far-right publications like WND, or FrontPageMag, but in the National Review Online, one of the most respected conservative journals, and one that I like to recommend. His conspiracy is extremely racist, as Flaherty reduces everything down to the color of the criminal’s skin, regardless of the facts. He consistently distorts the truth in order to portray black people as the savage, animalistic, and Other.
We need to be honest and accurate about these crimes, neither sharing the hysteria and racial fear-mongering nor trivializing the reality of these crimes. This isn’t easy to balance. We have the right to be concerned about random violence and the authorities have the responsibility to protect us and prosecute violent criminals. But we also have the responsibility to tell the truth about our neighbor and the world.
And no Faux news race baiting is complete without the resident ncle Tom –
Sometimes on blog you get folks commenting who spew the Party line so exactly you have to wonder if they aren’t shills…
Turns out Faux News operatives have been behind some of that with a cadre of fake posters!
In a chapter focusing on how Fox utilized its notoriously ruthless public relations department in the mid-to-late 00’s, Folkenflik reports that Fox’s PR staffers would “post pro-Fox rants” in the comments sections of “negative and even neutral” blog posts written about the network. According to Folkenflik, the staffers used various tactics to cover their tracks, including setting up wireless broadband connections that “could not be traced back” to the network.From the book itself:
Fox PR staffers were expected to counter not just negative and even neutral blog postings but the anti-Fox comments beneath them. One former staffer recalled using twenty different aliases to post pro-Fox rants. Another had one hundred. Several employees had to acquire a cell phone thumb drive to provide a wireless broadband connection that could not be traced back to a Fox News or News Corp account.Folkenflik’s book has already roiled News Corp with its account of Wall Street Journal staffers who found their attempts to report on the company’s phone hacking scandal met with roadblock after roadblock. (The company denied the account.)