For some reason, people keep putting this buffoon on TV
In a discussion on the August 4 edition of CNN Newsroom, Hill attacked Israel’s Iron Dome system, seemingly lamenting the fact that it has limited Israeli deaths, leading to the disproportionate outcome of the war liberals so often mention. He absurdly claimed:
But what the Iron Dome does is it also takes away all of Hamas’s military leverage which is very different than say, 10 years ago or 15 years in other wars like Lebanon, et cetera. As a result, it serves a defensive purpose but de facto serves an offensive purpose. It allows Israel to essentially assault and siege Gaza without any retribution or response on the other side. So again, to some extent, they are not just funding defense, they are funding an offensive war and ultimately an occupation. That for me, is the problem.
In short, it seems Hill objects to U.S. taxpayer funding of Iron Dome because it “serves an offensive purpose” by limiting the ability of the Islamist terror network Hamas to slaughter Israeli citizens in “retribution.” Hill misses the point about military conflicts: the ultimate goal is to win and at the same time limit civilian casualties on your own side.
Hill is a classic example of someone who is educated beyond their hat size. The man has no common sense, no wisdom, he has nothing but a perverse desire for “equality”. In this case it is, apparently, an equality of casualties
What has Clarence Thomas done to outrage the Left so? Well, for one thing marrying a White woman is just not “tolerant” or something
Supreme CourtJustice Clarence Thomas can add another insult to the list of things “liberal elites” have attacked him for: his marriage to a white woman.
While on the floor of the Alabama House of Representatives, state Rep. Alvin Holmes, a black Democrat, explained why he so dislikes Clarence Thomas: because “he’s married to a white woman,” reporter Mary Sell of The Times Daily and Decatur Daily tweeted Wednesday.
Holmes denied saying such a thing about Thomas, who he then called an “Uncle Tom”. Man what tolerance huh? But that was just the tip of the Iceberg of liberal Bigotry. Thomas REALLY got the Left into full blown nut job mode when he dared to share some memories of Georgia in the 1960’s.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas spoke at Palm Beach Atlantic University on Tuesday, and Yahoo’s Chris Moody reported that he used the occasion to say the United States is still way too sensitive about racial issues, lamenting how much “more race and difference-conscious” the country is now than in the 1960s. He said race “rarely” came up when he became the first black child to go to a white school in Savannah, Georgia.
Nowadays, however, you can’t escape people being overly sensitive about race and sex, Thomas said, and revealed that he was treated much worse Northern liberals than by anyone in the South.
“The worst I have been treated was by northern liberal elites. The absolute worst I have ever been treated,” Thomas said. “The worst things that have been done to me, the worst things that have been said about me, by northern liberal elites, not by the people of Savannah, Georgia.”
Whoa! Who does Thomas think he is? He is not allowed to challenge the Left’s narrative on race! He cannot tell people what HIS personal experiences were. No! He must parrot the Left’s narrative that the South was RAAAAACIST! And lynchings were an everyday event, and the South, of course, was, and is a land of evil bigots that hate all minorities. Of course, to his credit, Thomas likely gives not the first damn about the Liberal’s version of American history. He experienced what he experienced, and he shared some of that. And for that, he is being raked over the coals by who else, some of the same Liberal elites that demand Blacks walk, talk, and think in lockstep with Leftist ideology, or else!
The guests on CNN on Wednesday excoriated Thomas for his lack of racial consciousness, and particularly his lament that the country is more conscious of racial difference than it was, in his opinion, 50 years ago.
“What’s so remarkable about this statement that it neglects the fact that in the mid-60s, when he was a kid, you could get killed if you were a black person for speaking about race,” CNN Senior Legal AnalystJeffrey Toobin asserted.
Excuse me Mr. Toobin, but Thomas spoke about HIS experience. He did not “neglect” any facts. The problem here is that Toobin expects anyone who talks about the South in the 50’s or 60’s to follow the Leftist script that Toobin obviously follows. By the way, my mother, who grew up in the South, in the 50’s and 60’s has told me things that are similar to what Thomas said. That is not to say everything was peachy during that time, not at all. Those years are a black mark on my beloved Southland, and many awful, inexcusable events did happen, but does that mean positive things cannot be shared? Does that mean we cannot have an open honest dialogue? You know, the kind of dialogues the Left is always calling for?
Columbia University associate professor Marc Lamont Hill took the like-thinking Struggle Session a step further when he asserted that, not only is Thomas racially conscious, but he has actively made life more difficult for fellow African-Americans.
“He’s had a long history of walking through doors and closing them behind him,” Hill said. “He acknowledges no part that affirmative action played in his life but he wants to close the door for others.”
Hill took issue with Thomas’ desire to eliminate race as a social issue, preferring instead to work toward a merit-based society in which racial concerns play no part. He said it was disturbing, particularly for a powerful justice like Thomas, to “make decisions on color blindness.”
“It shouldn’t be to be post-racial but post racist,” he concluded.
Ah yes, Marc Lamont Hill, who is truly race obsessed and himself, in my view, a racist. Hill is disturbed that Thomas wants to see no skin color. Hill is Black, and apparently, he sees his skin color as a tool to use when it suits his needs. How pathetic!
This is analogous to the problem of conservatives making Fox News a singular focus of efforts to combat liberal media bias. As early as February 2009, I described what I called “The Fox Trap”:
Media-wise, the GOP made the mistake of putting all its eggs in one basket. I enjoy Fox News, but it has created a syndrome where Republicans watch Fox all the time and delude themselves into thinking, “Hey, our message is getting out! We’re winning!” Fact: The evening news broadcasts of ABC, NBC and CBS reach a combined audience of about 22 million; the top rated Fox News show, “The O’Reilly Factor,” reaches 4 million viewers. So if the three broadcast networks are viciously biased against Republicans – and they are – then that anti-GOP message is reaching more than 5 times as many TV viewers as Fox.
[D]uring the Bush presidency, the Left created institutions (notably Media Matters) based on the dubious theory that Fox News and other conservative media had too much influence.
That theory cannot be reconciled with the facts:
NBC Nightly News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3 million
ABC World News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2 million
CBS Evening News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3 million
Fox News (The O’Reilly Factor) . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 million
MSNBC (Hardball with Chris Matthews) . . . . . 940,000
CNN (Anderson Cooper 360) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 605,000
Fox News is, as it proudly boasts, Number One in Cable News, accounting for 68% of the cable news audience. Add in the major network evening news broadcasts, however, and the total news audience is closer to 30 million, of which Fox’s share is about 11%.
In other words, 89% of news on TV is reliably liberal in its perspective, and the Left’s obsession with Fox News is absurd. Why should Media Matters have an annual budget of $10 million to counteract the influence of a network that gets 11% of the news audience?
We could discuss at length the ramifications of this data, but the point to be made immediately is that Fox News has functioned like a channelizing terrain feature in the informational battlefield. For the defenders of liberal media hegemony, all they had to do was to isolate Fox — identify it as a hostile force in the eyes of other media — and then to target both the network’s messages and its messengers.
Some very good points raised there. Fox has not influenced the rest of the media to change their game. Instead they have just been pigeon-holed as “Right Wing” by the Left, and to many, many Americans, who get their news from NBC, CBS, and ABC, well, Fox has a, shall we say tarnished reputation. In short, we cannot just rely on Fox News folks. Or on talk radio, which also has been smeared mightily by the Left, or on blogs, which have also been smeared and marginalized by “real journalists”. Stacy McCain sums it up very well
Andrew Breitbart understood this tactic, and fought very hard to escape the “Fox Trap,” which is why he delivered one of his biggest scoops on the WeinerGate scandal — the Meagan Broussard story, which confirmed that Weiner was “sexting” with multiple women — directly to ABC News as an exclusive. If conservative messages and messengers can be limited to one media channel, and that channel reaches no more than a minor fraction of the total news audience, liberals win. It’s really that simple
Wait till those employer provided plans start getting 86ed next year. Then the real caca hits the fan
One of the things you may have noticed in the past couple of weeks is that some liberal pundits are claiming that ObamaCare is essentially a public relations problem: The program is just wonderful, but there have been some P.R. problems with the rollout.
Democrats need to learn that denial is not the name of a river in Egypt:
Democratic leaders claim the bungled launch of Obamacare is just the latest news sensation — a media-stirred tempest that looks in the heat of the moment like it could upend the midterm election, but ends up fizzling well before voters head to the polls.
Some party strategists say they’re in denial.
And that perceived gap between party spin and facts on the ground is fueling worries that the White House and Democratic higher-ups aren’t taking the possible electoral blowback seriously enough or doing enough to shield their candidates. Democratic contenders in the toughest races are distinctly less convinced that Obamacare will fade as an election-year issue — and they can’t afford to just cross their fingers that things get ironed out or that Republicans revert to political hara-kiri.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said at a forum hosted by BuzzFeed recently that the rollout won’t “hurt us in 2014,” adding that “we’re proud” of the law. Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, in a recent appearance on CNN, went so far as to assert that Obamacare would be “an advantage” for Democratic candidates next year.
“Democrats will run on the Affordable Care Act and win,” she has also told reporters.
The White House, meanwhile, has come across as equally dismissive of Obamacare’s consequences for 2014.
And the worst news of all came out today in a CNN Poll
And speaking of complete meltdown . . .
We are starting to see a broad polling trend for Barack Obama, and it should have the White House worried — but maybe Obama’s fellow Democrats in Congress even more. The latest CNN poll confirms what the Washington Post/ABC poll first noticed, and what the CBS poll corroborated — Obama’s approval decline involves more than just his performance. The Americans public is souring on Obama as a person and as a brand, and that spells real trouble for his agenda . . . .
President Obama will not be on the ballot in 2014 or 2016, but the American people will be angry with him, and guess who else? His fellow Democrats, and likely any nominee the Democrats put forward in 2016. They will take the losses, and then the only question is will the GOP use enough common sense to reap the electoral benefits?
Via The Other McCain who notes that Alec’s temper tantrums are too much for even MSNBS
Evil Blogger Lady calls attention to the shocking news — shocking! — that the network suits aren’t eager for a return to Baldwinism:
Alec Baldwin is not welcome back at MSNBC because of his infamous angry behavior, network insiders say — including complaining that “the air at 30 Rock is too dry.”
Sources exclusively tell us that MSNBC chiefs are not exactly falling over themselves to get boisterous Baldwin back in the building. One insider said, “He would only show up at work an hour a week to prep for the show, and when he did turn up, he was in an angry mood, red-faced, and shouting at all the staff. And he said the air at 30 Rock was too dry, it was bad for his voice, he needed a humidifier.” .
Poor, poor Alec, it is so sad that not everyone understands how entitled he is.