The excerpts below are from an article titled “The Talk: Nonblack Version” by John Derbyshire. It is presented by Derbyshire as a rebuttal to the conversation many African-American parents have with their kids to help them avoid trouble with racist people or institutions they may encounter. However, the only thing that Derbyshire accomplished was to expose his nauseating prejudice and ignorance. Be prepared, as you read this, for some of the most repulsive rhetoric you will ever hear outside of a Klan lynching.
(9) A small cohort of blacks—in my experience, around five percent—is ferociously hostile to whites and will go to great lengths to inconvenience or harm us. A much larger cohort of blacks—around half—will go along passively if the five percent take leadership in some event. They will do this out of racial solidarity, the natural willingness of most human beings to be led, and a vague feeling that whites have it coming.
(10a) Avoid concentrations of blacks not all known to you personally.
(10b) Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.
(10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with blacks on that date (neglect of that one got me the closest I have ever gotten to death by gunshot).
(10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of blacks.
(10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.
(10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians.
(10g) Before voting for a black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a white.
(10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to blacks in apparent distress, e.g., on the highway.
(10i) If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.
(13) In that pool of forty million, there are nonetheless many intelligent and well-socialized blacks. (I’ll use IWSB as an ad hoc abbreviation.) You should consciously seek opportunities to make friends with IWSBs. In addition to the ordinary pleasures of friendship, you will gain an amulet against potentially career-destroying accusations of prejudice.
Derbyshire is a writer for the conservative National Review. It is incomprehensible that they could keep him on the payroll after publishing this disgusting piece of trash. While some of their staff and editors have criticized Derbyshire, there is no indication that he will be terminated, suspended, or otherwise held accountable.
The first consequence for this atrocious column should be for Derbyshire to be forced to forfeit any IWSB’s he may have acquired. Then he should be forever associated with an acronym that better suits him: Ignorant Racist White Fuckwad (IRWF). [Note: African-Americans are not required to collect IRWF’s as amulets or for any other purpose.]
[Update] National Review does the right thing and fires Derbyshire.
This doesn’t need much embellishment. A story on the Fox News web site about an archaeological discovery in China elicited what we now recognize as typical responses from the Fox News community.
The list of brazenly racist comments above was abridged to remove the many duplicates. Apparently the Fox News racists have very limited imaginations and most of them kept posting the same stupid “jokes” repeatedly. In the spirit of the hatred they espouse, I would just like to say that the IQ of the “stone-age” man in the picture is probably two or three times that of the average Fox viewer.
Racism has a home on American television, and that home is Fox News. You might think that they would be embarrassed by this, but it occurs with such frequency that it is clear that they are aiming for this audience.
I guess it had to come to this. The undisguised racism of many pundits on the far right has at least avoided the most vile expressions of their hate when anyone outside of their private circles was listening. Today the hate came bubbling to the surface as Rush Limbaugh said this while mocking the way he thinks liberals view Republicans:
“You notice how everything Republicans do is venal? Everything is calculated for political advantage? Everything is done to try to harm our little boy president, Barack Obama?”
There it is – out in the open. Although this is nothing new for Limbaugh. For three years now he has been referring to Obama as a “man-child.” And what is a “man-child” but a boy. It was his way of calling the President boy without bearing the consequences of being more literal. His listeners knew what he was saying.
This sort of disrespect runs deep through the right-wing media. Fox Nation posted this graphic last year along with a story about Obama:
And even worse, they deliberately mangled the results of a poll in order to run a story with this headline: Obama Has A Big Problem With White Women. Could they have come up with a more racially charged banner with which to introduce a story on a public opinion poll? This framing deliberately recalls the worst of a hate-filled era characterized by irrational fears of marauding black predators stalking innocent and vulnerable Caucasian virgins. I’m just a little surprised that Fox didn’t go with this headline: “Obama Polling: Where Da White Women At?”
Perhaps this is an intentional ploy on Limbaugh’s part. He has been taking considerable heat lately for having insulted Sandra Fluke, a law student who did nothing more than speak her mind on a matter of importance to her and all women. Limbaugh has lost dozens of advertisers. His show airs in some markets with only free PSAs (public service announcements) or even dead air. This may be his way of trying to divert attention from that controversy to something he thinks will be less volatile. Good luck with that, Rush.
Yesterday was the day that the video Andrew Breitbart promised of a racially divisive Barack Obama in his days as a student at Harvard was released. It was almost universally panned as a pathetic and desperate boatload of nothing. After first yammering that the video posted by Buzzfeed (scooping Breitbart) was “selectively edited,” the Breitbartians posted what they said was the “uncut” video. Their version contained about two seconds more that consisted entirely of Obama hugging Prof. Derrick Bell, whom he had just introduced at a rally.
Since the video itself was proven to have no material evidence of anything the least bit detrimental to Obama, much less the cataclysmic data that would doom his career, the Breitbartians resorted to Plan B: Demonize Prof. Bell and tie him around Obama’s neck. This was a coordinated plot that began with Breitbart editor-in-chief Joel Pollak robotically repeating the mantra that “Derrick Bell was the Jeremiah Wright of academia.” Pollak even went on CNN and admitted that the video was irrelevant, and when Soledad O’Brein asked him “Then where’s the bombshell, I don’t see it?” Pollak responded that “The bombshell is the revelation of the relationship between Barack Obama and Derrick Bell.” But that wasn’t any revelation at all.
The argument that the Breitbartians are making rests on their assertion that Bell’s writings on Critical Race Theory define him as a racial radical. In fact, CRT is an aggregation of legal concepts that bring together law, politics, economics, etc., in a broad-based study of race and power in society. It posits that there are institutional barriers to eradicating racism that must be addressed at the root level. Those barriers are evident in things like employment practices and school admissions. Another example is the judicial system that incarcerates a higher percentage of African-Americans than their representation in the population. Affirming that example is the fact that crack cocaine, used by more African-Americans than whites, is punishable by sentences ten times more severe than powder cocaine, for which you find more white offenders.
Nevertheless, the Breitbartians are deliberately misinterpreting the legal theory in order to condemn its proponents, including Bell. In this way they can assert that Obama, as a result of his having studied at Harvard, is also a racial radical. The object is to incite fear among those who are ill-informed that Obama aspires to threaten their status in society. He is coming after your jobs, your schools, your churches, all the trappings of your comfortable, privileged lives.
In the wake of the initial flop of the video’s release, the right-wing media has been redoubling its efforts to stir up a phony controversy. Fox Nation has posted multiple stories on the subject (it has been at the top of their page for two days running). Fox News has featured it on their broadcasts, notably the video “exclusive” presented by Sean Hannity. Ironically, Fox Nation posted a video of a debate about Bell between Michelle Malkin and Juan Williams, but edited out Williams entirely.
Note the edit at about 2:20 where Hannity says that Juan’s gonna disagree, but then fades to Malkin saying “No, no. no.”. What Williams said in between was…
“Well, first of all, I must say, I thought this was going to be so much more. I thought this was going to be the smoking gun, as you describe it. But it really didn’t come too much. I mean, I just don’t think that there is.”
And that’s all that Williams was permitted to say in the entire segment, but they even cut that out when they put it online. And then they have the nerve to complain, falsely, that others “selectively edited” video.
Pollak and his Breitbart colleague Ben Shapiro have been making the rounds on the lamestream media. On CNN they argued with Soledad O’Brien over the meaning of Critical Race Theory, but spoke very little about what any of it had to do with Obama, despite O’Brien’s attempts to steer them back to the topic. That’s a tactic designed to keep the focus off of substance and aimed squarely at innuendo and slander. For good measure they threw in a bashing of the media for trying to suppress the video (for what reason, they never make clear), and to silence them (even while they are speaking on the air).
For its part, the Breitbart web site has been piling on with articles that reek of racism. One article was authored by J. Christian Adams, a notorious race-baiter who has accused Eric Holder’s Justice Department of coddling civil rights violators if they happened to be black. He wrote that…
“Both Obama and Bell demanded that Harvard hire professors on the basis of race. […] The Obama-Bell connection is the latest in a pattern of Barack Obama’s associations with individuals who promoted a racially divisive America.”
That’s an open assault on affirmative action, which was not developed to produce hiring on the basis of race, but to put an end to it. Adams also repeated the lie that Obama had appeared with a member of the New Black Panther Party. In fact, Obama attended a civil rights rally that was attended by thousands of people, one of whom happened to be an NBPP member. Obama had no control over who came to a massive, public rally. Adams also characterized cases of civil rights abuse as “crackpot racial grievances.” That pretty much reveals his personal bias.
Another story posted by the Breitbartians alleged that “Obama Forced His Students To Read Bell at the University of Chicago Law School.” Their evidence was a document describing a course that Obama was teaching. The course was “Current Issues in Racism and the Law.” It would be difficult to teach such a class without the textbook materials by one of this generations most respected scholars on that subject. But the allegation is made even worse by that use of the word “forced” as if it were under duress. By that measure isn’t every student forced to read something? In fact, many of the references to Bell’s writings specifically said that they were optional reading.
Meanwhile, over at NewsBusters, there was an article that alleged that the non-event video was being suppressed as part of a conspiracy orchestrated by George Soros (Isn’t it always?). The evidence of that was that Soros’ foundations had made donations to Harvard (where the video took place) and WGBH (the public TV station that owned the video). Using their logic I can surmise that the Koch brothers are behind this whole phony video scandal because they have made contributions to NewsBusters.
And, believe it or not, they even have a Plan C: It’s a Cover Up! The video was a bust. The racial attacks could backfire. So if all else fails, blame it on a massive cover up. The Breitbartians took on another black Harvard professor, Charles Ogletree, by posting a video wherein he said that “We hid this during the 2008 campaign…” He was referring to the video of Obama at Harvard. Of course there would have been no reason to do that since, if anything, the video shows Obama in a positive light. The truth is that Ogletree was joking. He even laughed immediately after, which proves that he was humorously dismissing the throw-away line. but, not surprisingly, the humor-challenged righties didn’t get, even though Ogletree’s audience did.
The absence of any substance on the video has led to a redirection by the right to their usual stance against Obama – he’s black. His associates are black. And they advocate for radical concepts like equal justice under the law. They support fairness in hiring and other social contracts. They oppose discrimination.
If anyone is advancing a racialist philosophy, it’s the right-wingers who are peddling this repulsive nonsense. And if there is anything positive to take away from this, it is that they have once again shown their true colors. It isn’t about a video of a young future president. It isn’t about health care or oil prices or deficits. It is, and always has been, about one thing for these meatheads. They just can’t accept a black man in their White House.
Here we are on the morning after the Super Tuesday primary that may decide the GOP nominee for president of the United States, and what does Fox Nation regard as the most important story of the day, posted atop their web page?
As usual, some context is necessary to grasp the overt prejudice in the story and headline published by the Fox Nationalists.
The incident occurred at a high school basketball game. Ordinarily the jingoistic chanting of “USA! USA! USA!” is something that occurs when an American team is playing a team from another country. But that’s not the case here. This was a Texas high school team (Alamo Heights) playing another Texas high school team (San Antonio Edison). The difference is that the Alamo Heights team was predominantly white, while the opponents from San Antonio were mostly Latino.
The clear inference was that the other team was not American. The only other explanation was that the chanters were cheering for both teams, which was definitely not the case. An Alamo Heights district official even noted that this isn’t the only time this has happened:
“If this chant was commonplace – chanted at their games with other schools — it would not be a problem. It was targeted at a school that is predominantly Hispanic.”
There is no other interpretation of this behavior than racism. Even the district official from Alamo Heights (the white school) recognizes it. But Fox doesn’t. And they leave their readers with the false impression that the school district has engaged in some sort of rabid political correctness and is opposed to national pride.
Fox News has proven that it will go to any lengths to dismiss allegations of racism in the hopes of making every authentic claim appear to be invalid. That’s the tactic of a propagandist with an agenda to peddle. That’s the tactic of a racist.
Once again Fox News is demonstrating their overt hostility to anything and everything in the Obama administration. It doesn’t matter if unemployment has dropped two points or that Osama Bin Laden is dead, somehow everything this administration does is tantamount to treason.
Case in point: The Department of Justice recently announced that it had promoted Tony West, the head of the Civil Division, to a new post as Associate Attorney General. This promotion was the result of his exemplary performance. In his role as the head of the Civil Division, West “recovered more than $8.8 billion in taxpayer money, the highest three-year total in department history.” Ordinarily that sort of accomplishment would be heralded by a deficit-obsessed right-winger. But we are dealing with an epidemic of Obama Derangement Syndrome, the symptoms of which are all too predictable. Here is how Fox News framed the story:
The headline on the Fox News web site declared “Terrorist Lawyer Gets Influential Justice Post.” On the air Fox News described Mr. West as a “Taliban Defender.” Both of these were deliberately designed to create the impression that West is affiliated with America’s enemies. Even worse, the story is being driven by a former DOJ attorney from the Bush administration, J. Christian Adams, who is defaming West and the entire Justice Department. Adams appeared on Fox & Friends with an all-encompassing allegation that Attorney General Eric Holder is…
“…filling [the Justice Department] with attorneys that, before they came to Justice, took on the most radical causes. And now they’re filling the Justice Department from top to bottom.”
Adams provides no support for his charge. And for someone with a record of dubious accusations that were easily debunked, Adams should be more careful with his unsubstantiated rebukes. He has previously tried to concoct DOJ conspiracies to prosecute civil rights cases against white defendants while letting black defendants off the hook – again, with no evidence to support it.
The characterization of West as a terrorist sympathizer stems from his having worked for a law firm that defended John Lindh, aka the American Taliban. That service is viewed by right-wingers as fraternizing with the enemy. American conservatives have long sought to portray themselves as the defenders of the Constitution despite the fact that they frequently show disdain for its most fundamental principles. For instance, the Sixth Amendment that guarantees a right to an attorney. That is the principle that West was patriotically upholding when he helped to represent an American citizen charged with a serious crime. But Adams expressly believes that respecting the Constitution in this manner disqualifies you from ever serving your government.
The larger condemnation that Fox is attempting to assert is that Obama and his entire administration is in cahoots with Al Qaeda. It is part of their years long effort to paint the President as a foreigner, a Muslim, and an anti-American socialist. That anyone actually believes those allegations is a testament to the success Fox has had in instilling ignorance in their audience. In the three years that Obama has been in office there have been more terrorists brought to justice (captured or killed) than in eight years of the Bush administration – and that includes Osama Bin Laden. So obviously Obama is working with Al Qaeda. It is part of their devious plot to allow him to dispose of their own members to make the American people think he isn’t one of them.
It is also notable to observe just who the right chooses to target when they make nonsense allegations like this one against West. The previous targets have included Van Jones, Valerie Jarrett, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, Eric Holder, UN Ambassador Susan Rice – all African American advisers and cabinet members. And let’s throw in Energy Secretary Steven Chu (Asian American) and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis (Latina American). But how often do you hear right-winger complaints about Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta, Tom Vilsack, Shaun Donovan, Ray LaHood, or Arne Duncan – all white cabinet members? I’m sure it’s just a coincidence.
Continuing their campaign to disparage the Obama family at every opportunity, Fox Nation posted an article this morning that asserts that Michell Obama is engaging in “damage control” because “people try to paint me as some angry black woman.”
Hmm. I wonder who would try to paint Mrs. Obama as an angry black woman. Could it be Fox Nation, who last October published an article calling her “The Very Angry First Lady?”
In that article Mrs. Obama was described as “ready to spew her bilious disgust with America on the campaign trail.” They provided no evidence whatsoever to support that hateful representation. It was just a dangling invective meant to perpetuate a racist stereotype.
Now the Fox Nationalists seem confused as to why the First Lady would be so sensitive about how the media is portraying her. But it is Fox News who is most guilty of those false, insulting, and racist portrayals in the first place.
The unvarnished racism of Fox News continues to reveal itself – over and over and over again.
The latest example of their repulsive hate messaging is an article purporting to show contrasting photos (below) of President Obama and Texas Governor Rick Perry in their youth. It’s actually generous to call it an article. To be accurate, it is just a link to a photo that some wingnuts are distributing on Twitter. The photo juxtaposes an image of Perry in military garb with an image of Obama that packs a more ethnic punch.
This deliberate attempt to insult the President is wrong on many levels. First, Perry’s photo may indeed be of him at or around the age of 22, but Obama’s photo is obviously much younger. [Note: I have confirmed that Obama was 18/19 when the pictures were taken by a student photographer, Lisa Jackson in 1980]. Second, while Perry did serve in the Air Force, he avoided combat duty despite the fact that his service began in 1972 and the Vietnam war was still raging until 1975.
The Fox Nationalists might just as well have featured a very different pair of photos that more realistically conveyed the contrasts between Perry and Obama. After all, Obama was an honors student who was the editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduated Magna Cum Laude. Perry, on the other hand, was a yell leader at Texas A&M and barely graduated with a 2.2 grade-point average and almost exclusively Cs and Ds on his transcripts.
It is painfully clear what Fox is trying to convey to their gullible and bigoted audience. This sort of open prejudice and hate mongering needs to be exposed and disseminated widely so that Fox does not get away with such revolting behavior. And every day that the rest of the media continues to treat Fox as if it were a legitimate news enterprise is another day of shame for the press.
And on the lighter side, the brainiacs at Fox can’t even count:
Notice that the article refers to Gawker and 7 other web sites that are dead or dying. However there are eight additional web sites represented by the logos. In fact, there are nine if you include the one in the bottom right corner. So Fox is admitting that they are dead or dying. And why not when they can’t even count to ten.
In a featured article today on the Fox Nation, an editorial presents a picture of President Obama that harkens back to an era when African Americans were relegated to tap-dancing, watermelon-eating, entertainers and servants. The article from a Marietta, Georgia, opinion columnist, Melvyn L. Fein, was titled: “Obama’s Rage Starting To Show.”
It’s surprising to read something so overtly racist from a modern, mainstream news source, but leave it to Fox to find it and promote it to a national audience.
The article began with feint praise of Obama as a conciliatory black man, as opposed what Fein called angry “street thugs” like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. But it just got worse from there. Fein initially described Obama in terms that portrayed him as acceptable and unthreatening to whites:
“He was not angry. Far from it, he was affable. With a smile on his face, and a lilt to his voice.”
In other words he was grinning negro, shuckin and Jivin for the folks, and never stirring up trouble like those rabble-rousers who keep clamoring for their “civil” rights.
Fein goes on to assert that all of that was a mask that Obama wore and that “the anger underneath his facade of cordiality has started to show.” As evidence of this hidden anger, Fein cited Obama’s “arrogance” for “summoning” congressional leaders to the White House to discuss the debt ceiling and for the “stipulation” that they bring viable solutions with them. That language would be admired as an expression of leadership in white politicians, but to Fein, with regard to Obama, it was “imperiousness” and “authoritarian.” In Fein’s world it’s unseemly for black men to be seen as issuing orders to white men, even if the black man is the President of the United States.
In an effort to explain what Fein theorized was Obama’s innate rage, he resorted to amateur psychology based on a fictional account of Obama’s past:
“We must remember that Obama was abandoned by his birth father, semi-abandoned by his mother, raised by contentious grandparents, exposed to virulent Indonesian racism before the age of 10 and then subjected to the ignominy of being racially marginalized in Hawaii.
How could anyone escape being irate at such an upbringing? Rage would be the normal human reaction to this sort of abuse.”
In the real world, Obama recalls his upbringing with a mother who loved him dearly and cared for him throughout most of his childhood, interrupted briefly by a period where his loving grandparents stood in for her. He never expressed any experience of racism outside of that that any minority child would encounter in a prejudiced society. Fein’s rantings closely mirror those of Glenn Beck and Mike Huckabee, who believe that Obama harbors some sort of Kenyan, Mau Mau, anti-colonialism, inspired by a father he barely knew. Beck even did his own psychoanalysis of Obama that virtually drips with dementia. Here is an excerpt of my take on Beck’s psycho-escapade:
“Beck’s conclusion is that Obama was so traumatized by abandonment issues related to his parents’ absorption in Marxism that Obama, in retaliation, did what any child would under those circumstances — He became a Marxist. It makes perfect sense. What other choice did he have other than to adopt the philosophy of the thing that allegedly tore his family apart? It is a sad, tragic story, isn’t it?
“Perhaps on tomorrow’s show Beck will tell his own sad, tragic story? The one where his mother abandoned him by killing herself. Obama’s mother went away for a while, but she came back and witnessed her son on an historic path to the presidency of the United States of America. For Beck’s mother only death was sufficient to separate her from her demon seed. What kind of scar does that leave on a boy? Well, in Beck’s case it left a scar that led to dropping out of school, to alcoholism, drug abuse, a failed marriage, a career as an AM radio shock jock, and fame as a hate-mongering conspiracy nut who contributes nothing to society but fear and division.
“Contrast that with Obama who, while scarred, worked his way through school, graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law, dedicated himself to helping the disenfranchised, taught law at the University of Chicago, entered public service and politics, and went all the way to the White House. So sad – so tragic.”
Fein’s puerile psychoanalysis surmises that Obama’s allegedly troubled past created a false persona wherein, “rather than fight back openly, [Obama] smiled and allowed the insults to roll off his back.” And remember, it’s that Obama that Fein considered to be “gracious” and “intelligent.” As soon as Obama demonstrated any determination to assert the principles in which he believes, and for which he was elected, Obama was transformed into a raving dictator with an inability to love. Fein’s closing paragraph sums up his disturbingly maniacal view:
“[A]s his policies have revealed, our president is more concerned with his own welfare than anyone else’s. This is not a man who loves others. It is a man who is angry at others, including his nation. As alarmingly, it is a man who acts on these impulses.
The rest of us had, therefore, best beware!”
That’s right. Beware, brothers and sisters. Beware the angry black man rampaging across the land with no love in his heart and no knowledge of his “place.” Didn’t y’all like him better before he talked back, when he was carrying your bags and shining your shoes with a big, toothy grin?
Conservatives have lately been escalating their umbrage at being called racist. I keep telling them that the best way to get people to stop calling you racist is to stop being racists. But do they listen?
Today on Fox Nation there is a featured story with the headline: “Obama Has A Big Problem With White Women.” Could they have come up with a more racially charged banner with which to introduce a story on a public opinion poll? This framing deliberately recalls the worst of a hate-filled era characterized by irrational fears of marauding black predators stalking innocent and vulnerable Caucasian virgins.
What makes this even worse is that the article to which the Fox Nationalists linked was an Associated Press report on presidential approval polling that cited numerous reasons for recent declines. Among those were that support from women declined about 9%. However, support from independents declined 19%. The AP’s headline had nothing to do with women, reading: “Economic worries pose new snags for Obama.” The main focus of the article pointed to issues like jobs, housing, and gas prices, as the the primary factors contributing to weakening poll numbers. So Fox had to purposefully stretch the story to fit their predetermined racist theme.
They could have borrowed the economic angle that the AP used in their headline. They could have noted that independents were leaving the Obama camp, which would have been more correct because more of them were leaving. They could even have broadened the angle to attribute the polling slump to women generally. But, no. The issue was white women. I’m just a little surprised that Fox didn’t go with this headline: “Obama Polling: Where Da White Women At?”
Fox Nation, in citing the AP, also conveniently left out that…
“…16 months before the November 2012 elections, Obama also is perceived favorably by 56 percent of respondents and 52 percent approve of his job performance overall. Despite the overwhelming sentiment that the national economy is in poor shape, more than three of five of those polled rated the financial situation of their own households as good. And, echoing previous findings, about three-quarters of the survey participants said it is unrealistic to expect noticeable results on the economy in one term.”
These numbers are not particularly bad. And that last statistic is pretty remarkable. That’s about 75% who say that Obama should not be regarded negatively for not having repaired, in a single term, the titanic destruction done to our nation by the previous administration and GOP policies. And since Republicans have been throwing up obstacles to everything the President has proposed from Inauguration Day on, we’re lucky to see the progress that we have.
In light of this, the Fox Nationalists deemed it necessary to twist the story into something that would harm the President and stir up vile, anachronistic fears. And their implementation of that spin could not be more offensive. This is not the way to get open-minded, tolerant people to stop calling you racist.
In a featured article today on the Fox Nation, an editorial presents a picture of President Obama that harkens back to an era when African Americans were relegated to tap-dancing, watermelon-eating, entertainers and servants. The 