Bill Maher Reads Quote On “Lazy Black People” From….Michelle Obama

RawStory.com:

Real Time host Bill Maher went to bat to a degree for Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) by comparing his recently-criticized remarks about “inner city men” to an excerpt from a May 2013 speech by First Lady Michelle Obama.

Maher — who noted the “hushed silence” from the crowd regarding Obama’s remarks — specifically quoted from her commencement speech at Bowie State University, in which she said too many young Black people “can’t be bothered” to get a job.

“Instead of walking miles every day to school, they’re sitting on couches for hours playing video games, watching TV,” she said at the time. “Instead of dreaming of being a teacher or a lawyer or a business leader, they’re fantasizing about being a baller or a rapper.”

“I just read this, and you thought it was Paul Ryan,” Maher told comedian W. Kamau Bell.

“Because you told me it was,” Bell replied.

“For a reason,” Maher said. “I’m just asking: Is something less true if a white person says it about black people?”

Maher then said it sounded like Obama agreed with Ryan.

“This sounds even more like, ‘Hey Black people, don’t be lazy,’” Maher said. 

“She’s talking to Black people,” Bell retorted. “We talk to each other differently than we talk to you.”

But Ryan, Center for American Progress president Neera Tanden told Maher, was blaming the Black and Latino communities for their problems. 

“When you look at his budget, what does his budget do?” Tanden said. “Cuts all the programs in these communities — programs that have helped create jobs — and takes it and, until now, his budget has given massive tax cuts to the wealthy.”

Former Rep. Rick Lazio (R-NY) then accused Democrats of squandering the chance to ameliorate the problems when they were in charge of “most of these inner cities,” on top of having a sitting Democratic president in office and a recent majority in Congress.

“They don’t vote,” Maher said of city voters. “They don’t think it makes a difference.”

“Paul Ryan, I would say, made an awkward statement,” Lazio said, as Tanden looked on in apparent disbelief. “At least that guy’s out there talking about poverty. And what happens when Republicans or conservatives pop their head up and start talking about poverty, is that they get smacked down and called a racist.”

RELATED: Michelle Obama Discusses Education Among Blacks and Acting White

Politiks As Usual: In The News 3/30/14

Hollywood, Leave My Childhood Alone: A Guide to What You Can Maim

What Happens When The Facts Don’t Fit The Progressive Script?

Homofascists Turn Their "Gay" Guns On Mississippi

Moviegoers Flood 'Noah' With $44 Million

A Whole Lotta Democratic Corruption Going On

Politico's Dylan Byers: MSNBC in Freefall

How Unborn Babies Become 'Clinical Waste'

Hundreds of Children Abandoned by Illegals Heading into US

NYT Frets as GOP States Burden Blacks Based on 'Unfounded' Vote Fraud Fear

It Has Begun: Connecticut Raises Minimum Wage to $10.10

7 Ways Noah Turns the Bible Upside Down 

Harry Reid Will Refund Campaign For Gifts

Bill O'Reilly (Rightfully) Calls Democrat Congresswoman Barbara Lee A 'Race Hustler'

Anyone who really thinks there's a single, black, Democrat politician out there who truly cares about the needs of Black people in this country is either lying to themselves or a fool:

Fox News host Bill O'Reilly brought Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) on "The O'Reilly Factor" Tuesday to discuss charges of racism made by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) against the former vice presidential candidate.

In recent remarks on poverty, Ryan referred to the "tailspin of culture in our inner cities." Lee in turn called Ryan's comments a "thinly veiled racial attack."

“Let’s be clear, when Mr. Ryan says 'inner city,' when he says, 'culture,' these are simply code words for what he really means: 'black,'" Lee said in a statement.

On O'Reilly's show, Ryan said he has no bad feelings toward Lee, noting he's "a big boy" and understands that "if you challenge the status quo, sometimes you'll be misinterpreted." 

O'Reilly fervently disagreed, saying "race hustlers" such as Lee don't want to have a conversation and that they "get voted into office by portraying their constituents as victims."

"And it's all your fault and it's my fault and it's rich people's fault and the Republicans' fault," O'Reilly said. "It's everybody's fault except what's going on ... The race hustlers don't want to solve the problem."

Watch the full exchange above.

UPDATE: 12:58 p.m. -- Lee released the following statement in response to O'Reilly's remarks: 

Unfortunately we’ve come to expect language like “welfare queens,” “food stamp president,” and now “race hustlers” from the right wing and Mr. O’Reilly. It is disgusting and divisive and should never be accepted in our national discourse. 

For us to achieve the American dream for all, we must engage in this conversation that has been sparked about race and poverty, even if it is difficult for some. Racial discrimination, poverty, and income inequality remain issues that must be debated and addressed, and these kinds of ‘code words’ only get in the way of solving the real problems.

As members of Congress, we must come together to present a budget and funding priorities that create opportunity for all. We must make critical investments in job creation, education, and job training. Among many issues, we must address extending unemployment insurance, raising the minimum wage, enacting criminal justice reform, and securing voting rights for communities of color, so that we can truly find solutions to these critical issues.

RELATED: The Left’s Laughable Effort to Label Paul Ryan ‘Racist’ Crumbles

Liberals Now Smearing Paul Ryan As "RACIST!!!"

AndrewSullivan.com:

One of the worst traits of some left-liberals is their easy resort to calling those who disagree with them bigots or racists or worse. There are some sites on the web that seem almost entirely devoted to patrolling the discourse for any sign of sin. This one’s a homophobe; this one’s a racist; so-and-so said this and that could be – shock! – prejudiced. It can sometimes be a way to avoid engaging arguments rather than tackling them. And so, on cue, Paul Ryan is taking heat for these remarks:

We have got this tailspin of culture, in our inner cities in particular, of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work, and so there is a real culture problem here that has to be dealt with.

He noted that “Charles Murray or Bob Putnam over at Harvard – those guys have written books on this.” Cue liberal freakout. Josh Marshall focuses on the citation of Murray:

When you start off by basing your arguments around the work of Charles Murray you just lose your credibility from the start as someone actually interested in addressing poverty or joblessness or really doing anything other than coming up with reasons to cut off what little assistance society provides for its most marginalized members or, alternatively, pumping up people with racial resentments against black people and giving them ersatz ‘scholarship’ to justify their racial antipathies.

That’s because Murray’s public career has been based on pushing the idea that black urban poverty is primarily the fault of black people and their diseased ‘culture.’ Relatedly, and more controversially, he has argued that black people are genetically inferior to white people and other notional races with regards to intelligence. Yes, that last part should be crystal clear: Murray is best known for attempting to marshal social science evidence to argue that black people are genetically not as smart as white people.

Sigh. Josh seems to be arguing that Murray blames all resilient urban black poverty on culture …. and then blames it all on genes! Pick one canard, would be my advice. And the truth is: in The Bell Curve, Murray was concerned about the role of genes and environment in the resilient IQ differentials among different ethnic groups, as anyone who actually read his book (I did, most liberals wouldn’t) would know. As for the notion that Murray is useless in actually attempting to help urban poverty, has Josh ever heard of the book Losing Ground? It was the key text for the Clinton welfare reforms of the 1990s – which even Obama now concedes he dismissed too easily. 
 
And it is simply untrue that Murray has argued that “black people are genetically inferior to white people and other notional races with regards to intelligence.” Murray’s work specifically insists that there are countless African-Americans with higher IQs than countless whites and Asians and Hispanics. (He has recently focused his efforts on white poverty as well – which would seem to disprove some of Josh’s claims.) It’s just that the bell curve (which was the title of the whole fricking book) starts at a slightly different place for different racial groupings – something that drives blank slate liberals nuts with cognitive dissonance. Years later, the differentials still exist. Why do you think there are de facto quotas to prevent brainy Asians from dominating the Ivy League? But of course, nothing drives ideologues nuts like reality.

One more thing: I’m sure Murray has gotten used to this distortion of his work. But it still strikes me as outrageous that a scholar like Murray is subjected to being called a racist of the worst sort and a dishonest scholar – simply because the resilient data support his core point, and because he dares to cite genetics. (It’s an old and great line that liberals believe nothing is genetic but homosexuality, while conservatives believe everything is genetic except homosexuality. For my part, it seems pretty damn obvious that almost all human behavior is a function of both – and the interaction between them.)
Josh goes another round:

Weigel notes that it’s not necessarily clear that Ryan was referencing The Bell Curve. He might just as well have been talking about Losing Ground, the critique of liberal social policies, particularly welfare, which put Murray on the map in the 1980s or his more recent work on the ‘white underclass’. To which I would say, maybe? Who knows? And really, who cares? At the risk of sounding wrenchingly corny, The Bell Curve is a bell you simply cannot un-ring. 

As Joan Walsh notes here, in the years since publishing The Bell Curve, Murray has slightly softened his argument. He now refers to IQ and what he believes is the mental inferiority of African-Americans not as ‘genetic’ but rather as ‘intractable.’ By this Murray seems to mean that there are too many factors playing into intelligence to definitively say genetics are behind what he claims are the mental/intellectual shortcomings of black people. The deficit is simply ‘intractable’ – by which he means that whatever mix of genetics, culture and circumstance create it, nothing can be done to change it in any meaningful way.

But if Josh had read the original book, he would have seen that that was Murray’s argument all along! “Intractable” means a function of both culture and genes. Now I should make clear that I’m not entirely persuaded by Charles’ thesis. I think it’s too fatalist and gloomy. The plasticity of IQ is obvious, and culture may matter far more in the long run. If Murray’s thesis requires no government action to help the poor, I’m as opposed to it as David Frum. But Murray is an intellectual adventurer. He speaks things we only talk about in our own heads. And his original prediction – that modern, SAT-based, liberal economies will, over time, lead to greater and greater inequality has not exactly been proven unfounded, has it? And referencing Murray – along with Bob Putnam, one should add – is perfectly appropriate when talking about arguments about poverty and how to tackle it.

Michael Sean Winters gives Ryan the benefit of the doubt:

First, we on the left have been complaining that Republicans like don’t give a hoot about the poor, and not without cause. I remember Cong. Ryan speaking at Georgetown in 2012 and talking about subsidiarity and federalism and how the federal government should not be the lead actor in anti-poverty efforts. I thought at the time: That would be credible if he could point to any single Republican governor or mayor who was actually attempting some innovative anti-poverty efforts, but he can’t, so the invocation of subsidiarity in this regard is a smokescreen. It is obvious that Ryan has been trying to wrestle with the issue of poverty since then, and I think we have an obligation not to throw his words back in his teeth the second they are uttered. That is not the way to create a bipartisan consensus on the need for our nation to confront lingering poverty in our midst.

By the way, check out Murray’s responses in our Ask Anything series to get his recent take on the Bell Curve criticism. A long thread on race and IQ is here.

RELATED:  MSNBC’s Alex Wagner Finally Finds Kneejerk Racism Accusation That Isn’t Legitimate

How Godless White Liberals Dupe Blacks Into Supporting Welfare State

WashingtonExaminer.com:

People in the media and academia are mostly leftists hellbent on growing government and controlling our lives. Black people, their politicians and civil rights organizations have become unwitting accomplices. The leftist pretense of concern for the well-being of black people confers upon them an aura of moral superiority and, as such, gives more credibility to their calls for increasing government control over our lives.

Ordinary black people have been sold on the importance of electing blacks to high public office. After centuries of black people having been barred from high elected office, no decent American can have anything against their wider participation in our political system. For several decades, blacks have held significant political power, in the form of being mayors and dominant forces on city councils in major cities such as Washington; Philadelphia; Detroit; Washington, D.C.; Memphis, Tenn.; Atlanta; Baltimore; New Orleans; Oakland, Calif.; Newark, N.J.; and Cincinnati. In these cities, blacks have held administrative offices such as school superintendent, school principal and chief of police. Plus, there's the precedent-setting fact of there being 44 black members of Congress and a black president.

What has this political power meant for the significant socio-economic problems faced by a large segment of the black community? Clearly, it has done little or nothing for academic achievement; the number of black students scoring proficient is far below the national average. It is a disgrace -- and ought to be a source of shame -- to know that the average white seventh- or eighth-grader can run circles around the average black 12th-grader in most academic subjects. The political and education establishment tells us that the solution lies in higher budgets, but the fact of business is that some of the worst public school districts have the highest spending per student. Washington, D.C., for example, spends more than $29,000 per student and scores at nearly the bottom in academic achievement.

Each year, roughly 7,000 -- and as high as 9,000 -- blacks are murdered. Ninety-four percent of the time, the murderer is another black person. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, between 1976 and 2011, there were 279,384 black murder victims. Contrast this with the fact that black fatalities during the Korean War (3,075), Vietnam War (7,243) and wars since 1980 (about 8,200) total about 18,500. Young black males have a greater chance of reaching maturity on the battlefields than on the streets of Philadelphia, Chicago, Detroit, Oakland, Newark and other cities. Black political power and massive city budgets have done absolutely nothing to ameliorate this problem of black insecurity.

Most of the problems faced by the black community have their roots in a black culture that differs significantly from the black culture of yesteryear. Today only 33 percent of black children are raised in two-parent households, but as far back as 1880, in Philadelphia, 75 percent of black children were raised in two-parent households -- and it was as high as 85 percent in other places. Even during slavery, in which marriage was forbidden, most black children were raised with two biological parents. The black family managed to survive several centuries of slavery and generations of the harshest racism and Jim Crow, to ultimately become destroyed by the welfare state. The black family has fallen victim to the vision fostered by some intellectuals that, in the words of a sociology professor in the 1960s, "it has yet to be shown that the absence of a father was directly responsible for any of the supposed deficiencies of broken homes." The real issue to these intellectuals "is not the lack of male presence but the lack of male income." That suggests that fathers can be replaced by a welfare check. The weakened black family gives rise to problems such as high crime, predation and other forms of anti-social behavior.

The cultural problems that affect many black people are challenging and not pleasant to talk about, but incorrectly attributing those problems to racism and racial discrimination, a need for more political power, and a need for greater public spending condemns millions of blacks to the degradation and despair of the welfare state.

RELATED: Black Unemployment Rose in January to 12.1 Percent

Politiks As Usual: In These News 3/2/14

Costs Of ObamaCare Bungles Start To Add Up, With Maryland First At About $30.5M

Brewer’s Foolish Veto  

Kerry Disputes That Putin Seized Crimea Because He Thought Obama Wouldn’t Respond 

In Mississippi, 72% of the Babies Aborted Are Black 
 
Kristol Blasts Maher's Claim That Obama's Race Fuels Tea Party
 
Biden Tries to Sign Canadian Woman Up for Obamacare
 
Radical Left Amazed MSNBC Can Be 'So Unabashedly Left-Liberal and Survive In the Corporate Media'

How Season 2 of “House of Cards” Murders the 25th Amendment

Even the Left Hates the IRS's New Proposed Rules, But Nets Won't Report

'Dallas Buyers Club': A Tea Party Movie Dressed Up in Liberal Drag

The Ten Most Abusive Obama Executive Actions

Ted Cruz: Liberals Should Love the Keystone Pipeline

Movement to End Solitary Confinement Gains Force

Liberals Draw a Blank When Asked About Tea Party Racism

These are the naive idiots liberals rely on to keep their Godless agenda moving forward:

When asked by a Fox news reporter for examples of Tea Party racism liberal protesters get uneasy. According to one woman, "they're racist against Blacks, Hispanics...I think their racist against...women." 

RELATED: Don’t blame the Tea Party for America’s inward tilt

RNC Chair Reince Priebus Calls for Complete GOP Boycott of MSNBC over ‘Demeaning’ Tweet

Mediaite.com:

Republicans are fuming at MSNBC tweeting out a derogatory message last night about the right wing “hating” a cute Cheerios ad featuring a biracial family, and now RNC Chairman Reince Priebus is openly calling for a Republican boycott of the network until network head Phil Griffin apologizes.

In a memo posted on the official Republican party website, Priebus attacks the tweet as the latest example of comments from MSNBC “that belittle and demean Americans” with a conservative philosophy, and says until Griffin takes action and apologizes publicly, no Republican official or elected representative should grace the network with their presence.

This morning I left a message with MSNBC President Phil Griffin to express my displeasure. I have sent him a letter demanding that he personally, as president of the network, take responsibility and apologize for the disgusting tweet. Until he takes internal corrective action and personally apologizes—not just to the RNC but to all right-of-center Americans—I’m banning all RNC staff from appearing on, associating with, or booking any RNC surrogates on MSNBC.

As an elected official, strategist, or surrogate, I’m asking for you to agree to the same.

Priebus takes shots at recent comments made by current and ex-MSNBC personalities from Alec Baldwin and Martin Bashir to Melissa Harris-Perry and Alex Wagner, saying it all adds up to “toxic programming” coming from the liberal network.

Michael Steele, the head of the RNC before Priebus, is currently a political analyst for MSNBC.
This is the offending tweet that set off the controversy:

Several hours later, after an Internet outcry from conservative bi-racial families, MSNBC deleted that tweet and sent out two others apologizing for the “offensive line.” Richard Wolffe, the executive editor of MSNBC.com, also tweeted out an apologetic message, saying the offending tweet was “not who we are at MSNBC.”

RELATED: MSNBC fires staffer after new controversy

NAACP Stands by Chapter President Calling Sen. Tim Scott a Ventriloquist’s ‘Dummy’

Mediaite.com:

The NAACP’s North Carolina President Rev. William Barber II ignited a firestorm when, in an extensive profile in a South Carolina paper, he attacked Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) as a being a puppet and a tool of the “extreme right wing.” Scott did not respond in kind, but Republican officials demanded that Barber and the NAACP disavow those comments. Far from distancing themselves from Barber or his statement, the NAACP issued a statement defending the North Carolina-based chapter official and standing by his comments. 

“A ventriloquist can always find a good dummy,” Barber said of Scott, one of just two African-Americans in the U.S. Senate.

“Dr. King emphasized love and justice rather than extremism,” a statement issued to Fox News read. “Unless we stand for justice we cannot claim allegiance to or pay homage to Dr. King.”

“In a state such as South Carolina, politicians, whether they be black or white, should not be echoing the position of the far right,” the statement concluded. 

RELATED:  Sen. Tim Scott Responds to NAACP Official Who Called Him a Ventriloquist’s ‘Dummy’

Ann Coulter Calls Melissa Harris-Perry MSNBC’s ‘Token’ African-American

So on point as usual is Ms. Coulter:

Sean Hannity is not letting MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry off the hook any time soon. On Monday night, he and Ann Coulter said Harris-Perry’s tearful apology for a segment making light of a picture of Mitt Romney and his white family with an adopted black grandchild was insincere and pushed by management, while Coulter went so far as to call Harris-Perry the “token” African-American at MSNBC.

Coulter found it ironic that Harris-Perry would insinuate that anyone else, like Kieran Romney, is a token, because “what does she think she is at MSNBC?”

Hannity was actually stunned Coulter would say this, giving the slightest of defenses to MSNBC by saying they have other black personalities like Al Sharpton. But aside from that, he agreed with Coulter that the network is full of “lunatics” who just can’t get enough of their own hyperbolic rhetoric.

Coulter also pointed out the irony of MSNBC taking on race in this fashion while they’ve gone above and beyond in finding ways to accuse Republicans and conservatives of racism. She said, “Unfortunately for liberals, there is no more racism in America. There is more cholera in America than there is racism.”

RELATED:  WSJ Columnist: MSNBC Has a ‘Pattern’ of ‘Hiring Black Mediocrities’ to ‘Race-Bait’

Politiks As Usual: In The News 12/29/13

Unemployment Benefits For 1.3 Million Expire

Minimum Wage To Rise In 13 States On Jan. 1

LGBT Is The New Black Power

Duck Patriarch: Man-Man Sex ‘Not Logical'; CDC: ‘Anal Sex is the Highest Risk Sexual Behavior’ 

The Secret Danger Liberals Don't Want You to Know: Fracking is Safe

Obama's War on Coal Will Harm Economy, Do Little for Environment

Obama Family Christmas Card: No Mention of Christ or Christmas

Bristol Palin: 'Warning: You Might Lose IQ Points By Watching This MSNBC Clip'

MSNBC's Hayes Derides FNC 'Obsession' with 'Knockout Game' That Targets Whites

Raising Children With an Attitude of Gratitude

National ID Headed For Your Wallet, Purse

New York Times Wonders: Was Chris Stevens Out of His Depth in Benghazi?

Cruz To Dump Canadian Citizenship

MSNBC’s Resident Black Obamabot Michael Eric Dyson Disses Christianity: Men Loving Jesus More Than Women ‘Sounds Interestingly Homoerotic’

Newsbusters.org:

Have you ever wondered what MSNBC president Phil Griffin uses as qualifications to hire on-air personalities for his so-called "news network?"

Consider the case of perpetually race-baiting contributor Georgetown professor Michael Eric Dyson who on Monday’s Ed Show actually said that Christian men claiming to love Jesus more than they love women “sounds interestingly homoerotic”


I’d say the idiocy on display here was astonishing, but as readers know, it’s quite commonplace on MSNBC with all the idiotic contributors and hosts that have been hired in recent years.
As for this Georgetown professor/MSNBC "political analyst," his understanding of Christianity is abysmal.
"And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength." - Mark 12:30.

Evangelist Greg Laurie observed last month:

This statement reveals that God is not simply looking for some emotional, gooey kind of love. He is looking for a complete, true love.

You see, some people only love the Lord with all of their soul or with all of their emotion, but they don't love Him with all of their minds. Other people love God with all of their minds, but they neglect the emotional side of loving the Lord.

Jesus is saying, "I want a love that possesses an emotional, intellectual, and physical backbone." Jesus desires a love that draws from every fiber of your being-inside and out. Any other kind of love is no love at all.

This is in keeping with what truly religious Christians have told me: you are supposed to love Jesus more than anyone else - including your spouse and your children.

However, what Dyson was also missing is that this love isn't sexual.

Maybe he wasn't aware that humans can love without sexual intimacy. We love our parents, siblings, and children without having sex with them or desiring to do so.

That a Georgetown professor and MSNBC "political analyst" doesn't understand that should be very concerning to the heads of this so-called "news network."

That it's apparently not says a lot about this farce.

RELATED: Michael Eric Dyson: Don’t Cut Public-Sector Jobs because the Private Sector Is Racist

Noted Adulterer, Hypocrite and Race-Baiter Jesse Jackson Calls Phil Robertson’s Comments ‘More Offensive’ Than Rosa Parks Bus Driver

Mediaite.com:

Lest you thought the battle over Phil Robertson’s comments about gays and Jim Crow-era relations might be calming—or even taking Christmas Day off—Reverend Jesse Jackson has waded in, and brought the controversy’s second Rosa Parks reference to boot.

“These statements uttered by Robertson are more offensive than the bus driver in Montgomery, Alabama, more than 59 years ago,” Jackson said in a press release. “At least the bus driver, who ordered Rosa Parks to surrender her seat to a white person, was following state law. Robertson’s statements were uttered freely and openly without cover of the law, within a context of what he seemed to believe was ‘white privilege.’”

An Illinois congressional candidate compared Robertson favorably to Parks earlier in the week.

In the statement Jackson demanded meetings with A&E, which suspended Robertson indefinitely, and Cracker Barrel, which momentarily pulled Duck Dynasty products from its shelves before replacing them following a public outcry. He also joined GLAAD and NOW in calling for Robertson’s suspension to continued until the issue is resolved.

RELATED:  Former Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. reports to federal prison

Politiks As Usual: In The News 12/15/13

Kerry Comments Add to Mystery About Rogue CIA Agent Missing in Iran

Hillary Clinton, Too Cozy With Banks?

Has Hollywood Seen The Light? Biblical Films Abound!

Ron Christie to MSNBC Guest Claiming Tea Party Is 'Racial': 'I Will Not Sit Here and Allow You to Say That'

Arapahoe High Gunman: Republicans Are the Party of 'Let 'em Die'

3 Reasons Why Our Teenagers Can't Find Jobs

Honeymoon Cut Short: Court Overturns Australia’s First Same-Sex Marriage Law

Is Conservatism Being Marginalized On Capitol Hill - by Conservatives?
 
O, Come Let MSNBC Adore Lord Obama
 
Ex-Gay Group Files Sexual Orientation Discrimination Complaint with Department of Justice
 
Pope Francis Addresses ‘Ultraconservatives’ (and Limbaugh?) Calling Him a Marxist
 
Mike Huckabee Talks 2016, But Is Anyone Listening?

Liberal Media Desperately Playing Word Games to Dismiss 'Knockout Game' As Phony Threat

Newsbusters.org:

Whenever liberals are in a tight spot, they adopt the scorched-earth policy of argumentation. With no answer, they start demanding that you define words: What do you mean "liberal"? What do you mean "democracy"? What do you mean "patriotism"?

They retreat from argument, burning the English language as they go.

Accustomed to playing the role of Soviet commissar censoring the news when it comes to black violence, the Non-Fox Media are in a panic now that the alternative media can post videos of young black males punching out random strangers.

As a result, liberals are denying the "Knockout Game" exists by refusing to understand the meaning of basic words, such as "game" and "trend."

Knockout Game-debunkers place great significance, for example, on the fact that the assailants have not signed affidavits calling it a "game."

Thus, The New York Times noted that in one recent case of a random stranger being knocked out by young black males, "the attacker insisted the assault was not part of any organized 'game.'"

A 78-year-old woman is punched by a young black male for no reason, and the Times' central point is: "Perp says it's not a 'game.'"

Similarly, in Philadelphia magazine, Stephen Silver said of two recent knockout attacks in Philadelphia that he wasn't counting either one as "confirmed cases of the Knockout Game" on the grounds that the puncher said he "was not participating in the Game."

Until the assailants admit they're playing a game, liberals say the Knockout Game is a "hoax."

Obviously, it doesn't matter what the participants call it. I don't know anyone who calls himself a "pundit," but that doesn't mean people don't go on TV and give their opinions. Every liberal denies he's a liberal, but that doesn't mean "liberals" don't exist. (Would that it were so!)

While we're on the subject, I can't think of a single instance in which someone has admitted to committing a "hate crime," but liberals are always calling things "hate crimes."

The Huffington Post concluded that the Knockout Game was "fabricated" based on one of the most famous victims, James Addlespurger, denying that it was a game. Instead, he calls his knockout an "assault," saying "game" is just a "label."

Hey, you know what else is just a label? The word "assault." "James Addlespurger" is a label. Another expression for "label" is "word" -- meaning, "something liberals try to blow up whenever they're about to be trapped into admitting the truth."

As Sgt. Tom Connellan of Syracuse, N.Y., patiently explained to the Times, it's called a "game" because there is no other motive for these attacks. They're not done for vengeance, robbery, gang initiations or payback. Strangers are being punched out strictly for amusement. Also, there are rules. You get only one punch to knock someone out.

(Incidentally, the reason the Times was quoting a policeman from Syracuse -- in an article questioning the reality of the "Knockout Game" -- is that two recent knockout attacks in that city were fatal.)

RELATED: Larry Elder Blasts Media Outlets for Downplaying ‘Knockout Game’

Democrat Pollster Shocked to Find No Racism in Tea Partiers, So They Invent Some

Mediaite.com:

The Democratic pollster Democracy Corps, commissioning research from Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, recently dug into that foreign species commonly referred to as “the conservative voter.” In a dispatch that reads like the curious field notes Charles Darwin scribbled while observing the natural wonders of the Galapagos, the Democratic pollsters have found that the family Republican is made up of a variety of genera, including moderates, tea partiers and socially conservative evangelicals.


Perhaps unsurprisingly, the pollsters discovered that these factions are distinct and not especially friendly towards one another; but the report is not without surprising findings. 

The top of that list is the discovery that the majority of Republican voters are fed up with litigating social issues via the electoral process. A wave of pragmatism is overtaking the GOP’s subgroups, setting up a collision with the last remaining holdouts within the GOP who view politics as the last weapon in a dwindling arsenal aimed at halting what they view as a debasing of the culture. 

“We know that Evangelicals are the largest bloc in the base, with the Tea Party very strong as
Well,” the memo reads. They feign shock at the notion that Republicans view President Barack Obama as a “liar” and a “manipulator,” two designations that the majority of American voters would agree with but to which the Democratic base’s Pavlovian response is to point and shriek “racism.”

Indeed, the pollsters even confess that they “expected” to find more racism among Republican voters. “We expected that in this comfortable setting or in their private written notes, some would make a racial reference or racist slur when talking about the African American President,” they confess. “None did.”

But this response by the voters they surveyed is viewed by Democracy Corps pollsters more as a clever evolutionary response to a history of predation. The Republican voter, the pollsters declare, harbors racial consciousness that is only masked by an effective camouflage:

They know that is deeply non-PC and are conscious about how they are perceived. But focusing on that misses how central is race to the worldview of Republican voters. They have an acute sense that they are white in a country that is becoming increasingly “minority,” and their party is getting whooped by a Democratic Party that uses big government programs that benefit mostly minorities, create dependency and a new electoral majority. Barack Obama and Obamacare is a racial flashpoint for many Evangelical and Tea Party voters.

The capable naturalists at Democracy Corps are trained to recognize even the latent, recessive racism lingering deep within the Republican genome. Like the human coccyx, the vestigial prejudice in the GOP voter is betrayed when the subject is scrutinized by those with trained eyes.

Looking past the obligatory nods to partisan shibboleths contained within this memo, however, are a series of interesting nuggets that contribute to the political debate. “Evangelicals who feel most threatened by trends embrace the Tea Party because they are the ones who are fighting back,” the memo reads. “They are very in tune politically, but the Tea Party base is very libertarian and not very interested in fighting gay marriage.”

This spells trouble on the horizon. The tense truce between socially conservative evangelicals and tea partiers, two groups which largely agree on philosophy but greatly differ over tactics, will certainly find themselves again at odds when the Republican Party’s presidential primary process heats up after the midterm elections. The clash may, however, come sooner. 

As National Journal‘s Charlie Cook observes, Sen. Harry Reid’s (D-NV) best shot at maintaining his majority in the upper chamber of Congress by scuttling a small budget deal and forcing House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) to take an unpalatable measure back to his members in order to force another shutdown. This cynical tactic is among the last tools in the toolshed for Democrats, and it just might work. 

In the same way, Democrats can shatter this fragile truce between purist evangelicals and pragmatic tea partiers by forcing the issue of national gay marriage legislation. It would tear the country apart, but with the country will go the GOP. 

Desperate times…

RELATED:  Tea party brews up a 2016 presidential straw poll - and Cruz is in the lead

Stupid, Race-Baiting, MSNBC Host Melissa Harris-Perry Says “ObamaCare” Was a Word Coined by Wealthy White Men to Diminish Obama’s Accomplishments

Right. And "Bush Tax Cuts" and "RomneyCare" were terms coined by poor, black people to diminish George W. Bush and Mitt Romney's accomplishments. In other words, Melissa Harris-Perry is a total idiot:

Via RCP. By coincidence, Charles Cooke has a piece out today on the alternate universe you too can inhabit if only you Lean Forward far enough:

America II, as anyone who watches the channel will discover rather swiftly, hosts a supermajority of well-meaning multi-culti, progressive types whose foolproof plans for explosive economic growth, uniform social justice, and general human utopia are constantly being undone by a blossoming white-supremacist movement, split apart by neo-secessionists, and existentially threatened by traitors whose defining characteristic is a never-quite-explained hatred for progress. America II features no gray areas whatsoever: All local variation is apartheid, each and every identification requirement is the second coming of Jim Crow, all criticism of the government is sedition. It’s exhausting.

On a network where smirking references to “teabaggers” are treated as witty, Harris-Perry’s attempt to rehabilitate “ObamaCare” as some sort of slur practically qualifies as clever. How to square the fact that O himself now uses the term with the quasi-religious belief that any Republican messaging about him, no matter how innocuous and easily explained by basic partisanship, must be proof of racism in America II? Simple: Claim that “ObamaCare” was a slur, but now, by embracing the word himself, Obama’s taken the power back. If you find that unpersuasive, remember, decoding conservative criticism of O for alleged racial subtexts is a sort of parlor game on MSNBC. Previously identified dog-whistles include “IRS,” “Chicago,” and my favorite, “golf.” Usually the game ends with some variation of “and that’s why it’s racist,” but MHP’s argument has a whole second part to it. Consider this bar raised.

Legal Insurrection has a nice post tracking the origins of the word “ObamaCare,” including a claim from none other than Anthony Weiner that he coined the term himself. Which, if true, partially vindicates Harris-Perry: A wealthy white man really is responsible. By the way, as I write this, there are roughly 575,000 results for “RomneyCare” on Google. On this site alone, that word appears in more than 250 posts. 

RELATED:  No, Melissa Harris-Perry, “Obamacare” was not conceived by rich white men

Chris Matthews to Barack Obama: 'Everyone Knows' Republicans Want to Stop Minorities From Voting

Newsbusters.org:

Chris Matthews received his long-desired wish on Thursday, an exclusive interview with Barack Obama. The Hardball anchor didn't exactly live up to the title of his show, wondering about Republican efforts to "make it difficult for minorities to vote" and questioning who was better, Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden?

Talking to the President at American University, Matthews read a question from a viewer via Twitter: "What can we do to stop the GOP, the Republicans, from rigging the states, rigging the votes, state by state, to disenfranchise voters and destroy our democracy?" The host added, "Thirty six states right now led by Republican legislatures have been trying to make it difficult for minority people to vote, especially in big cities and older people. Everybody knows the game."

Tossing a softball to Obama, he queried, "What's your reaction?"

At one point, the MSNBC host playfully teased the President, joking, "I have to ask you a little question you may not like to answer." He continued, "It's an essay question. The qualities required of a president. Vice President Joe Biden, Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, compare and contrast."

Smiling at the cozy question, Obama laughed and then responded, "Not a chance I'm going there."

RELATED: Obama Takes Swipe at the Media on MSNBC: Actively Trying to ‘Divide and Splinter’ Us

White, Liberal Writer Tommy Christopher Defends Racist ‘Knockout Game’

With no reports on gangs of white kids attacking innocent minorities as well as the mainstream media playing down reports of deaths occurring around the country due to the racist "Knockout Game", it's left up to white, liberal journalists (and resident Obamabot) like "Tommy Christopher" to whip out the race card and defend bad behavior by blacks at any cost. It's what they do to keep blacks poor and dependent as well as to keep the black vote in their pockets:

The so-called ‘Knockout Game’ has been gathering steam as a news narrative, with conservatives demanding that the media finally focus on crimes committed by black people. On Monday morning’s edition of CNN’s New Day, expert guest Harry Houck, a former NYPD detective, went there, explaining to the New Day anchor team that while “not every black kid is doing this,” the only suggestion he could offer to avoid such attacks was “crossing the street, getting away from them” if you see “a group of black youths.”

Reporting around the “Knockout Game” has been of the sketchy Shark Week variety, with a handful of cases being amplified by media attention, even when some of those cases might not even be related to the trend. For example, as The New York Times pointed out this weekend, one of the attacks that’s most played by national news outlets doesn’t appear to fit the narrative:

Much news coverage of reported knockout attacks includes 2012 footage from a surveillance camera in Pittsburgh of James Addlespurger, a high school teacher who was 50, being swiftly struck to the ground by a young man walking down an alleyway with some friends. Yet the Pittsburgh police said the attacker insisted the assault was not part of any organized “game.”
“This was just a random act of violence,” Police Commander Eric Holmes said in a televised interview last year. “He stated that he was just having a bad day that day.” The assailant saw Mr. Addlespurger, the commander said, “and decided this was a course of action he was going to take.”

That clip was part of New Day‘s package, as was CNN correspondent Pamela Brown‘s framing that incidents of the  Knockout Game “have been reported in six states and Washington, DC.”
In her report, Brown conducted man-on-the-street interviews in which she showed videos of attacks to stunned subjects.
Anchor Kate Bolduan asked former NYPD detective Harry Houck  for his take on the phenomenon. “Is this a growing trend?” she asked. “Is this an urban myth, or maybe better stated as growing trend or group of isolated incidents?”
Houck replied that the trend is real, adding that “Urban myths don’t exist. These attacks exist in everyone’s minds, especially in those victims.”
That’s when the familiar language of race-baiting began. Asked if the media was contributing to the problem by hyping the attacks, Houck replied that “I think we have to let the public know what’s going on to protect ourselves. That’s our job. That’s the police department’s job to protect the public. No matter how politically incorrect it might be. It’s to know what is going on and how to protect themselves.”
This is where the hustler hides the red card, because when co-host Chris Cuomo asks Houck to explain his remark about “political correctness” (insulating himself and his show from criticism), Houck lays his suggestion off on other people. “I ask people who I run into every day, ‘What are you doing?’ They say if they see a group of black youths, they cross the street.”

Co-host Michaela Pereira pushed back, telling Houck that “black kids don’t need to be feel, made to feel they’re a threat simply because they are hanging out with friends.”

Houck generously allowed that “Not every black kid is doing this. it’s very few, but if you are the victim, if you are a potential victim and you are afraid walking down the street, you see a group of black youths, everybody I am talking to says they are crossing the street, getting away from them,” and added that “the good black kids will be saying ‘Why are you crossing the street when I walk by?’”

While Pereira pointed out that the “majority” of black kids aren’t doing this, and Cuomo added that “Black kids are getting clocked, too,” their guest expert never gets around to offering any alternative to crossing the street to protect yourselves. He even reiterated it later in the segment, in what could double as a spot-on media criticism. “This is creating terror on the streets, I know,” Houck said. “People are, as soon as they see black youths, like I say, everybody I have talked to, I know you don’t like that, Michaela, but you can understand why they think that way.”

Houck also referenced the classic “the good blacks” frame, which reinforced his earlier suggestion that black teenagers who don’t viciously knock people out are someho the exception.

As far as anyone can tell, of course, these crimes are exceedingly rare, and you are orders of magnitude more likely to be killed or injured crossing the street than walking past a group of black youths. This sort of fear-mongering is nothing, new, though; it’s not as if white people really needed another excuse to be scared of black kids. What is somewhat new is the attempt to normalize it. Pereira’s objections notwithstanding, little is done to challenge the logic of Houck’s commentary.

CNN, and the rest of the media, would do well to resist focusing on the racial aspect of these crimes, and instead serve the public with information they can use, such as the serious medical consequences that loss of consciousness can entail.

RELATED: Horrifying New "Knockout Game" Trend Responsible for 7 Deaths

Conservative Writer Matt Lewis Takes on Race-Obsessed MSNBC Contributor Michael Eric Dyson

Right Professor Dyson. And everyone can recall those lovely days when Democrats not only worked with white, Republican President George W. Bush, but heaped him with nothing but praise and repeated accolades:

Daily Caller and The Week columnist Matt Lewis appeared on MSNBC with Martin Bashir on Wednesday to discuss the Affordable Care Act’s roll-out and the lack of Republican alternative proposals to replace that law. Within minutes, the debate exploded as Lewis was accused of appealing to “white privilege” by Georgetown University Professor Michael Eric Dyson.


Bashir began by playing a clip of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) being grilled over a lack of an alternative GOP plan to replace the ACA. Lewis defended Cruz, saying that he was effectively representing his base and playing a smart political game by not taking the media’s focus off of the presently failing ACA roll-out. 

Lewis conceded, though, that Republicans need to coalesce around a single ACA alternative in the coming days. “It’s not enough to say ‘Obamacare’s bad,’” he insisted. “You have to have a solution.”

Bashir insisted that it is not just health care reform, but that the GOP routinely has no alternative to Democratic proposals on a host of issues.

Dyson insisted that this reflexive opposition from Republicans to President Barack Obama’s initiatives was, as Oprah Winfrey recently suggested, due to his skin color.

“It took ten minutes – ten minutes to get to the race issue,” Lewis interjected. The pair exploded over Lewis’ suggestion that race was an inappropriate topic of debate on this issue. 

“Don’t deploy the very principles of white privilege to silence a black man on the panel because you don’t want to talk about race,” Dyson shot back. 

Chaos ensued. “You can’t talk about policy,” Lewis declared. “The only thing you have to talk about is race.”

Lewis blew up at Bashir when he was asked to let Dyson finish his tonight. “Please allow him to speak,” Bashir insisted. 

“The vast majority of Republicans are mindless and incapable of articulating a solid, serious, intellectual conception, or a political fix or remedy to the problem we have here,” Dyson insisted.

“This is a joke,” Lewis concluded. 

RELATED: MSNBC Hosts Claim GOP Blocking Obama’s Nominees Due to Bigotry, Contradict Selves Within Minutes