Subscribe via RSS Feed

Because obviously you only need one black person fighting for civil rights in 1959.

[ 65 ] March 7, 2012 |

I’m trying to think of a more counterproductive headline, but I am a man of limited imagination:

Learning that Obama introduced Derrick Bell in a charming and polite manner is sufficiently damning.

Enough to end a Presidency.

Because Derrick Bell was a monster who—wait? This is the video Breitbart was sitting on? This is the video that his new “Editor at Large” Ben Shapiro—yes, that one—will be leaking more “deleted footage” of over the next few hours? Obviously, Shapiro means to say that other people are “selectively edit[ing]” the video, so his crap headline only shows he’s clearly unqualified for the promotion he “earned.” Still, he thinks educated people don’t know what Derrick Bell’s going to say?

One minute now—I see what he did there.

UPDATE: Apparently so many conservatives are dancing with little starbursts that all those links are currently dead. Sorry about that. Exclusivity comes with a price, you know?


Comments (65)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Andrew says:

    Shocking footage shows Obama with black people.

  2. elm says:

    The problem with the link isn’t that the site is down but that you screwed up the URL.

  3. rea says:

    I gather the claim is that Obama said something awful, that was selectively edited out when a Boston TV station played this on its newscasts. What that awful thing might be is going to come as a surprise, when Mr. Shapiro thinks he’s built enough suspense.

    My guess–he’ll introduce Michelle, who will rant about “Whitey”.

    • Rick Massimo says:

      You know what? Barack Obama won an election to be president of the United States. Three-plus years ago.

      At this point, the “unedited” (yeah right) version of this 1991 video could show Barack Obama saying “I will climb through a motherfucking honky’s window and slit his goddamn throat in the middle of the night” and I DON’T FUCKING CARE. In fact, I kind of hope he said that, so that the entire country can learn about it and say “WE DON’T FUCKING CARE.”

      This is what 21st-century racism looks like: “Don’t look at what he’s done as President for three years – blackity black black!”

  4. mark f says:

    Well, I can’t blame ’em for trying; the “Obama knew people who lived and worked near him (some of whom weren’t even white)” gambit worked so well in 2008.

  5. shows a young Barack Obama leading a protest at Harvard Law School on behalf of Prof. Derrick Bell, a radical academic tied to Jeremiah Wright

    My god! I knew there was a connection between Obama and that monster Wright!

    • DrDick says:

      Amazing how all people of color who have the audacity to speak out about racism in this country are radical extremists. Next thing you know, they will be accusing Martin Luther King of being a communist.

      Oh wait ….

      • Malaclypse says:

        No, he’s a conservative now. At least he is in the one and only speech that he gave, which was one sentence long.

      • Manju says:

        Next thing you know, they will be accusing Martin Luther King of being a communist. Oh wait ….

        Who is they? RFK, JFK, LBJ, Hoover?

        David Garrow is the point man on this issue. Using the Freedom of Information Act, he forced the FBI to release the King wiretapping files… of which he was the first to review.

        On October 10, 1963, U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy committed what is widely viewed as one of the most ignominious acts in modern American history: he authorized the Federal Bureau of Investigation to begin wiretapping the telephones of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. Kennedy believed that one of King’s closest advisers was a top-level member of the American Communist Party, and that King had repeatedly misled Administration officials about his ongoing close ties with the man.

        It was the Kennedy administration and its successor that did the most to label King a communist.

        • c u n d gulag says:

          Manju is SO right!

          Ike was a big fan, and had MLK Jr. over all the time for sleep-overs in the Lincoln bedroom.

          It’s true, the Kennedy’s were no great angels early in the Civil Rights era. But Bobby eventually came around – and stopped a potential riot in Indianapolis on the night MLK Jr. was assassinated.

          Prior to the early 1960’s, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats, as parties, had great reputations as far as race was concerned.

          However, it was Truman, a Democrat, who integrated the military.
          And it was NORTHERN Republicans and Democrats who took the lead, politically, in the Civil Rights battles.
          And it was LBJ, a Democrat, who pushed the Civil Rights Acts through – with a lot of help from Northern Republicans.

          And Hoover was a major player in trying to take down MLK Jr.
          He HATED him!
          And, Hoover had a little something on the Kennedy’s – and just about every single other politician of both parties.

          J. Edgar Hoover was the great cancer in DC for decades. But no one could get rid of him, since he knew everyone’s secrets.

          • DrDick says:

            it was LBJ, a Southern Democrat, who pushed the Civil Rights Acts through

            Just to make this even more clear.

            • Manju says:

              I don’t object to this.

              However, I won’t allow you to erase from history the fact that the Southern Dem in question continued to smear King as a Commie, even after 64.

              He was upset with MLK over Vietnam. I think the Garrow piece I linked to goes into detail about LBJ’s post-64 smears. If not, I’ll find the book and link it…but gotta run now.

          • Manju says:

            Even if what you are saying were 100% accurate, how does it change the fact that the 4 men…LBJ, JFK, Hoover, and RFK…most responsible for the Communist smear (taking power into consideration) were not part of the “they” to whom Dr.Dick refers.

            Nor can modern-day conservatives (the “they”) trace their roots back to these men.

            Even if you go a notch down on the power scale, lets say to the likes of Stenis, Earvin, Faubus, Wallace, etc…the “they” are Dems…or ideologically speaking: moderates who are lean to the left (once you exclude civil rights, as serious Political Scientists do).

            That is why there was hardly any migration of these folks to the RWing party, despite DrDick’s assertions to the contrary (tho, in all fairness, his delusion is a common lefty racist belief).

        • joe from Lowell says:

          Are you talking about something that happened a decade or more before I was born?

          Funny how none of your attempts to slam the Democrats involve color photographs, just black and white.

        • DrDick says:

          I have no idea what his part affiliation was, but Hoover was a staunch, strongly reactionary conservative throughout his life. As I have told you many times, do not confuse Democrat/Republican with Liberal/Conservative before the 1970s (and only conditionally 1970-1984). Both RFK and LBJ changed their minds and their ways during the 1960s (as did your personal obsession, Robert Byrd).

          • Manju says:

            Both RFK and LBJ changed their minds and their ways during the 1960s (as did your personal obsession, Robert Byrd).

            And yet Byrd voted against the 1970 Voting Rights Act.

            Please do the right think: retract.

          • Manju says:

            Hoover can be segregated from the rest, if that makes things more palatable for you. I have no way of objectively measuring his ideology.

            But JFK, LBJ, Stenis, Earvin, etc hold.

          • Manju says:

            As I have told you many times, do not confuse Democrat/Republican with Liberal/Conservative before the 1970s (and only conditionally 1970-1984).

            Its a little wonky, but you’re an Academic…Are you familiar with DW_Nominate? Its the Gold Standard of ideological measurements. In short, Dem = Liberal. Repub = Conservative for like a 100 years now. See 1st chart by Nate Silver:


            I don’t think Nate points this out, but civil rights are excluded in this analysis, because the topic does not align to the left-right paradigm (in other words, otherwise more conservative legislators were more pro-civil rights than than lefty counterparts, historically speaking).

            The idea of the parties switching ideologies is part of the lefty denailism on civil rights that I routinely demask here on LGN (I mean, I was just told that a Liberal who voted against the 1970VRA was pro-civil rights in the 1960’s!)

    • Jeffrey Kramer says:

      Who has introduced, applauded, or sat at the same table as the scariest, most dangerous people? Let’s start with this one:

      OBAMA: introduced, at a Harvard rally, Derek Bell, law professor, who said that there is still a lot of racism in America;

      RICK PERRY: invited to Texas, for a big prayer rally, John Benefiel, preacher, who said the Statue of Liberty was a demonic idol.

      (We could stay with Perry for at least eight more turns based on “The Response” alone.)

  6. mark f says:

    From Wikipedia:

    [I]n The Constitutional Contradiction, [Derrick] Bell argued that the framers of the Constitution chose the rewards of property over justice. [ . . . ] Finally, in The Price of Racial Remedies, Bell argues that whites will not support civil rights policies that may threaten white social status, like the affirmative action hiring through which he acquired his status.

    Why, this man is a radical, what with describing the things George Will and William Buckley often say.

  7. rea says:

    And this whole protest and speach by Bell led, a few years later, to Lani Gunier on the Harvard Faculty. Shocking!

    • joe from Lowell says:

      Lani Guinier FTW!

      You choose your grudges well.

    • SEK says:

      And this whole protest and speach by Bell led, a few years later, to Lani Gunier…

      You misspelled “Quota Queen.”

      Utterly inane personal aside: the first ever issue of Time I read, when I just started paying attention to politics, had a brief sidebar about her nomination. I remember thinking, “Shouldn’t that merit more attention? I just don’t understand this politics thing.”

  8. Hogan says:

    I prefer my editing to be unselective. Random, even.

  9. Roger Ailes says:

    I look forward to the Virgin Ben attacking Professor Bell, if only for the headline “Schmuck v. Bell.”

  10. Davis X. Machina says:

    The harpist for the Chieftains was black?

    I’d have never guessed. But then, it is Boston…so I guess Irish music would have been a big deal.

  11. c u n d gulag says:

    I’m still waiting for the much vaunted “Whitey” tape to be shown!

    That fact that this hasn’t been shown is the REAL conspiracy!
    How many Conservatives have died, Oh Lord? How many have died?

    And then, to prove there’s a conspiracy, Breitbart was murdered – probably by the same Seal Team that eliminated Vince Foster almost 2 decades before they went after Osama bin Laden.

    Dan Brown’s working on a new book – “Da Obama Code.”

    • Warren Terra says:

      Now I’m waiting for the conspiracy theory about how all those people in Seal Team 6 didn’t really die in that helicopter crash, but in fact are now Sekret Obammunist Assassins. Breitbart knew all about it.

  12. gocart mozart says:

    Harvard law student introduces Harvard law professor to other people. Oh the humanity.

    • Richard says:

      Its even worse. The unedited video shows Obama shaking hands with and hugging Professor Bell after he introduces him. This is the “scoop” sure to bring down the Obama presidency which Drudge and Breibart and Hannity trumpeted all day long (although Drudge, realizing the insignificance of it, now has dropped the story from its banner headline).

  13. rea says:

    I’ve seen it now, and it’s hard to see how it could possibly be spun negatively. No doubt we shall find out how, soon . . .

    • Richard says:

      It also turns out that this footage, all of it, was shown on Frontline in 2008 and has been available on the Frontline web site and on YouTube since then. Not much of a scoop.

  14. Manju says:

    Don’t you lefties get it?

    Professor Derrick Bell of Massachusetts is a famous Man of the Law. James Joseph Bulger, Jr. is a famous Outlaw from Boston, Massachusetts.

    It therefore stands to reason that Bell and Bulger are at odds. By praising Bell, Obama is clearly communicating that he hates Whitey.

    Larry Johnson was right all along.

  15. […] resist watching the Hannity re-run, on which Ben Shapiro and some other very dumb person opened up Al Capone’s vault. Derrick Bell was so radical that he believed that there was still racism in […]

  16. […] King Jr. is no loner a consevrative. This breaks with recent Republican dogma, which as Malaclypse notes holds that MLK was clearly a conservative “in the one and only speech that he gave, which was […]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.