NYC Activist Takes on Bill O’Reilly

This is a fun one. Bill the O’Bigot gets a lesson on stereotyping from New York Civil Rights Coalition president Michael Meyers. Michael Meyers called Bill O’Reilly and his network out to his face on Monday, accusing Fox News of engaging in a pattern of demonizing black men “You are painting black men as society’s moral monsters,” said Meyers…

Another Bill the Bigot lesson was given in December of last year by Russell Simmons on the show:

Simmons and Murray make a key point, thet the creation of the carceral state more than any other cause is the source of many maladies affecting poor black communities – Best summed up in Caught: The Prison State and the Lockdown of American Politics, by Marie Gottschalk and described in this review

 Caught: The Prison State and the Lockdown of American Politics – Pathology of the Carceral State

For 40 years now the United States has been creating a vast and unprecedented carceral machine. Its size and reach stagger the imagination: jails and prisons, immigration detention and deportation centers, parole and probation offices, digital, electronic, and human surveillance. Its human costs are enormous — federal and state prisons and jails hold over 2 million people in custody at any time; if you include those under parole, probation, or other forms of government surveillance for crime the number exceeds 8 million. Tens of millions of Americans have some form of criminal record. Their families are drawn in to the reach of the carceral state along with them. In global terms the United States stands alone. It has the highest incarceration rate in the world. Its penal practices are brutal compared to Europe. It deepens the racial divide in the country. It distorts the economy and polity. Above all it degrades lives and the country as a whole.

To understand this machine means holding a series of seemingly contradictory notions at once. Mass incarceration extends long-standing tendencies in American penal history while being a bold departure from previous practice; it has at its core a system of racial subordination, although race is now arguably less important than previously; it has marked an expansion in state power but is driven in important ways by the search for private profit; it is an instrument of law and order that operates in arbitrary and uncontrolled ways. Incarceration, originally justified as a defense of human dignity against the bodily brutality of ancien regime punishments, has now become the site of physical and psychological torture. And there is no end in sight to either mass incarceration or the wounds it imposes on human beings and American society…

The broad history of mass incarceration is well known. Prior to the 1980s the size and reach of imprisonment in the United States was not significantly different from its western European counterparts. For most of the 20th century the United States sent slightly more than 100 per 100,000 people to prison. (That number is now over 500 in prison and over 700 if you include jails.) The death penalty had been in long secular decline and the Supreme Court suspended it in 1972. Courts began to take steps to ensure minimal constitutional standards for prisons and protections for prisoners. Serious criminological and legal opinion believed that there was a real possibility that the prison would soon fade away.

Of course past is not always prologue. At precisely the moment when the country’s use of imprisonment appeared to face the possibility of serious reduction, states began a new expensive spree of prison construction. In 1976 the Supreme Court approved the restart of the death penalty. A bipartisan move toward determinate sentences (supported by liberals who thought it would curb the arbitrary authority of prison officials and by conservatives who aimed to curb the power of judges), combined with increasing lengths in mandated sentences, helped trigger vast expansion. Prison officials drew upon fears of riots and “revolutionary” inmates such as California’s George Jackson to justify intensified control over their prisons and increased use of solitary confinement. In the early 1980s the “war on drugs” took off and with it not only a rise in the size of the federal prison system but also the exacerbation of extreme racial inequities in sentences and prosecutions…

These developments, to be sure, did not emerge out of thin air. Instead they built upon initiatives begun earlier under the Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Carter administrations. In particular Johnson’s signing of 1968’s Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act dramatically increased federal engagement with local policing and punishment. One effect of the act was to encourage the growing militarization of police forces, primarily through the Law Enforcement and Assistance Administration. Johnson and his allies may have thought that by imposing new federal standards they would help protect minorities from local abuses (as well as preempt more radical conservative proposals) but as Naomi Murakawa has argued, this liberal emphasis on procedure and uniform standards helped legitimate the idea that new regulations could justify and control the expansion of the prison state. As the continual revelations of prison abuses show, this hope was a false one…(…More…)

How Dylann Root Learned to Hate

Take a look at the video below which illustrates the soft pedalling of racism by Faux News …

Kirsten Powers destroy O’Reilly’s strawman arguments one after another. As usual, O’Reilly resorts to bluster. Other Faux News hosts are more direct…

Dylann Root the 21 Year old man who massacred 8 black churchgoers last week was introduced to the language, code, and basis of hate by people like O’Reilly, and the daily dose of racism from Sean Hannity on Faux News. Those of you who participate or read online boards on any subject having to do with race are familiar with the conservative and Republican memes on race…

They are the same as Dylann Roots.

Dylann Roof’s racist manifesto: A funhouse mirror reflection of right-wing American politics

…It gives the lie to the ruling conservative meme that Roof was just a loan wacko with no affinities with the white-militia movement that the respectable right has tried to keep offstage. It also shows how the accused killer of nine in a Charleston church has roots in weird ideas that are part of even the think-tank culture of the right: Roof’s manifesto is a kind of distorted, funhouse-mirror reflection of Tea Party-era conservative white America’s core beliefs, and it shares the ahistorical way many conservatives deal with race…

1. Trayvon Martin was a dangerous thug and George Zimmerman was right to kill him.

Roof writes that from the Wikipedia entry on the shooting,“It was obvious that Zimmerman was in the right.”

2. Law and order in this country is threatened by dangerous, murderous blacks.

“The first website I came to was the Council of Conservative Citizens. There were pages upon pages of these brutal black on White murders.”

3. Blacks are obsessed with race; they won’t stop talking about it. 

“Black people view everything through a racial lense. Thats what racial awareness is, its viewing everything that happens through a racial lense. They are always thinking about the fact that they are black. This is part of the reason they get offended so easily, and think that some thing are intended to be racist towards them, even when a White person wouldnt be thinking about race.”

4. Slavery was not so bad. 

“I have read hundreds of slaves narratives from my state. And almost all of them were positive. One sticks out in my mind where an old ex-slave recounted how the day his mistress died was one of the saddest days of his life.”

5. Segregation was not so bad, either. 

“Segregation was not a bad thing. It was a defensive measure. Segregation did not exist to hold back negroes.”

6. Black people are intellectually inferior. 

“Anyone who thinks that White and black people look as different as we do on the outside, but are somehow magically the same on the inside, is delusional. How could our faces, skin, hair, and body structure all be different, but our brains be exactly the same? This is the nonsense we are led to believe,” he writes. “Negroes have lower Iqs, lower impulse control, and higher testosterone levels in generals. These three things alone are a recipe for violent behavior. If a scientist publishes a paper on the differences between the races in Western Europe or Americans, he can expect to lose his job.”

Now, just about all of this stuff sounds pretty extreme when coming from Dylann Roof, who stands accused of heinous crimes to which he has reportedly confessed. But they’ve all, in some form or another, been heard in establishment or mainstream parts of the U.S. conservative movement. The George Zimmerman defense, which was supported by many conservative talking heads, has its roots in the larger “blacks threaten law and order” belief, an outgrowth of the GOP Southern strategy that dominated Republican politics for decades — the patrician George H.W. Bush (with Atwater’s help) struck gold there with his Willie Horton ad.

As an example, a few of the posts from the political section of the Magazine “National Review” and an article entitled “Step Aside, Reverend Al: The Next Generation of Race-Baiters Has Arrived

MittyMo

  • Keep imagining that. If they all became Republicans, Democrats wouldn’t have won another election.
    They’re still Democrats, but they’ve chained blacks to their political plantations by giving them entitlement crumbs & blaming their malaise on the GOP. KKK Grand Kleagle Robert Byrd must have thought the strategy up for Democrats.
    No need for Democrats to suppress the black vote as long as blacks are voting for them.

    Black-“Americans” ought to be THANKFUL their ancestors were brought here,even as slaves. Otherwise,they would have been born in AFRICA,and never have the rights, education,economic prosperity,opportunity,or peaceful living that they enjoy in the US. No TV,and in many places,no electricity or clean water!!
    The worst-off black-“Americans” are FAR better off here than the average African.
    Militant black America is at a peak right now. They have been successful in getting “working whites” to cave to their demands to avoid protests, sit-ins, sit-downs and shut-ups; not to mention riots, looting and burning. As we learned from physics however, what goes up must come down and at some point, all this hot air is going to dissipate.
    What will be left will be black communities more shunned than ever as businesses turn away from blighted areas and police and fire personnel only show up to peak emergencies. The deepening despair will need a face and a name. DeRay McKesson fits both requirements.
    If he really cared about “black lives” then why isn’t he protesting in southside Chicago, or downtown East Saint Louis? He might want to wear a bullet proof vest himself in one of those places.
    Charleston is an aberration, a nutcase. McKinney wasn’t racial at all, it was trespassing, a cat fight, and some shouting and pushing. Baltimore has questions, but race wasn’t part of it. Ferguson wasn’t racial either; it was a thug who happened to be black.
    If “black lives mattered” then stop chasing ghosts and straighten up the failed black family.
    Jim Crow hasn’t been around for centuries,not even one century.
    Slavery actually BENEFITED the blacks;
    the slaves children and descendants got to be born in the US instead of Africa,and their descendants got to be American citizens,and FAR better off than if they had been born and lived in Africa.
    All in all,it was a pretty fair trade for their labors and suffering. The poorest black in America lives far better than the average African. And has a lot longer life expectancy,too.(until they start murdering each other…) Access to education,healthcare,decent medicine,etc.
    Slavery has always existed in many civilizations, from Pre-Columbian Americas to Africa, Europe, the Middle East, even China. It is not a 400 year old invention of whites to own blacks to grow sugar cane and cotton.
    And for the record, you may wish to look up Anthony Johnson, a free black man who was one of the first slave owners in the North American colonies. He also owned whites.
    Your quoting of slavery and Jim Crow is a cop-out. You want an easy excuse for bad character and misbehavior. Prior to Lyndon Johnson, the majority of black families were intact. The part of my city where I live has a median household income of about $145,000 per year. About 5% of the households are black. Every single one of them is headed by a married couple. Go a few cities away to the housing projects, and about 80% of the population is black and very few households are headed by a married couple. Let’s see if there is a correlation…. wealthy blacks – 100% married; poor blacks – practically no one married.
    And to answer your question, at least three thousand years.
    The liberals are responsible for much of the current mess. They wanted welfare and affirmative action that IMO have caused the destruction of black societies and culture in cities.
    I’ll start believing that black lives matter when blacks start believing that black lives matter. DeRay, take your show to the hood, where you might actually save some black lives from your murderous black brothers.

Obama…”The Racist”

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.”

 

Ebola And Media Hysteria

About once every year or two, somebody on Faux News says something intelligent. Shep Smith seems to be one of the more frequent commentators over there who actually speaks to reality, instead of fear mongering to the right. The most accurate, intelligent thing said on Faux News about the Ebola scare so far…

Faux News Spurs Copycat “Knockout Game” Attack

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.

The real “Knockout Game”. These guys are trained professionals, do not try this at home!

White People Are the Victims of the ‘Knockout Game’ Even When They’re the Ones Punching

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.

Searching for a White Trayvon – The “Knockout Game”

First the Faux News racist sensationalism –

The Knockout Game Myth and its Racist Roots

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 SteynThomas 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 Lotwhich 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.

Flaherty regularly stacks and exaggerates the evidence (also see here, or here, or here).

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 –

Faux News…Fails!

How stupid is Faux News?

 

Fox News’ Anna Kooiman Falls For Parody About Obama Funding Muslim Museum

Fox News host Anna Kooiman fell for a fake story that said President Obama is using his own money to keep a museum dedicated to Muslim culture open during the government shutdown.

The government has been shut down since Tuesday. The co-hosts of “Fox and Friends Saturday” lamented the closure of the World War II Memorial, which Kooiman claimed “doesn’t seem fair especially” because “President Obama has offered to pay out of his own pocket for the museum of Muslim culture.”

The fake report came from National Report, a parody news site. The story said that Obama told reporters earlier this week that the shutdown was “a great time to learn about the faith of Islam.”

Even worse is the manufactured “wire” around the Memorial. They did put up the little rope barriers with metal stands every 20 feet, and nice signs asking folks to stay out. I think at the WWI Memorial they actually put up the little fold up metal fences they use for demonstrations and the July 4th celebration on the Mall. Which hardly constitute concertina or razor wire barriers.

The Zoo has metal gates which are closed, and the doors to the Smithsonian are closed and locked… But that is about it.

Of the places the Rethuglys voted to have shut down – the issue now is how to protect the sites from vandals since most of the people who do that are now furloughed.

And then we have this right-wing ass, blessing out a poor Park Ranger for the mess he caused…

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 177 other followers