Breitbart is laughing his ass off right now in his grave.
The media responded just like he thought they would with the latest video of Obama recently released by Breitbart.com:
You really need to spend a few minutes watching the video because it is a classic example of our (unbiased) media backing their horse in the race. In it we see the CNN host, Soledad O’Brien, dismiss the video. When Breitbart.com editor-in-chief Joel Pollak explained the significance, that being the relationship between the racist professor Derrick Bell and Barack Obama, O’Brien tries to school Pollack, and in so doing gets schooled herself:
“Derrick Bell is the Jeremiah Wright of academia,” Pollak stated. “He passed away last year, but during his lifetime, he developed a theory called critical race theory, which holds that the civil rights movement was a sham and that white supremacy is the order and it must be overthrown.”
“So that is a complete misreading,” O’Brien interrupted. “I’ll stop you there for a second — then I’ll let you continue. That is a complete misreading of critical race theory. That’s an actual theory. You could Google it and some would give you a good definition. So that’s not correct. But keep going.”
“In what way is it a critical misreading?” Pollak countered. “Can you explain to me? Explain to your readers (sic) what it is,”
“I’m going to ask you to continue on,” O’Brien quickly replied. “I’m just going to point out that that is inaccurate. Keep going. Tell me what the bombshell is. I haven’t seen it yet.”
Pollack keeps his cool as O’Brien loses it and after repeatedly being asked to explain to her viewers what Critical Race Theory is she, as Ed Morrissey describes, “beclowns” herself:
“Critical race theory looks into the intersection of race and politics and the law and as a legal academic who would study this and write about it, he would advance the theory about what exactly happened when the law was examined in terms of racial politics,” O’Brien explained. “There is no white supremacy in that. It is a theory. It’s an academic theory and as one of the leading academics at Harvard Law School, he was one of the people as part of that conversation. So that is a short definition.”
Completely wrong.
But that’s what happens when a ‘unbiased” network producer uses Wikipedia to try and save their host.
Oh, and what do you know, that Wikpedia entry got changed today.
The coup de grâce?
When another panelist on the show accuses Pollack of being racist:
Then Panelist Jay Thomas interjected. He asked if Pollak was afraid that a secret black movement was going to rise up and murder him.
Guess he didn’t know that Pollack is married to a black woman.
Woops.
The lengths that our media will go in defending this poor excuse of a President is exactly what Andrew wanted to prove. And prove it he did.
Visitor logs show that Derrick A. Bell visited the White House twice since President Obama took office. The logs show two visits by an individual of that name on January 29 and 31, 2010.
Well why wouldn’t he? Bell was REQUIRED reading for Obama’s students.
Ain’t that special?
More here
See author page
I watched that video earlier and Soledad made a complete ass of herself she was so rude to Mr. Pollack but he knew what he was talking about and gae it right back to her but in a nice way. I guess Jay Thomas feels that everyone is a racist if you speak your mind. I have no use for the MSM anymore because of people like Soledad….
Most people wouldn’t know what the host and guests on CNN didn’t know when they tried to paint Mr. Pollak as a racist: Mr. Pollak’s wife is black.
In Prof. Bell’s Obit is this tidbit:
Was Obama VETTED or not?
In 2008, Obama said, “I have been a consistent, before I go any further, a consistent denunciator of Louis Farrakhan, nobody challenges that.”
That should have been challenged.
If Obama had been VETTED it certainly would have been challenged.
Joel Pollack, a critical thinker that can crucify the lame brains of the president’s propaganda bureaus. Thank you Joel, we have been waiting for someone like you for a long time, well done sir, well done indeed!
Curt, an addition to the defining characteristics of “critical race theory”.
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/bridge/CriticalTheory/critical4.txt.htm
Note the location of the link. Amazingly enough, Soledad O’Brien received her degree, a Bachelor of Arts, from the same school. Unsurprisingly, she was there at the same time the “esteemed” Prof. Bell was.
JG, I read through the link you gave us. I think we can be grateful for one small thing, it is fortunate that Obama and his deceased professor were not men of imagination or creativity or we would be up to our necks in manure, for they have missed many opportunities to capitalize on this charged material; instead, they try to bamboozle the public into believing they have developed great critical racial theories, rather than a smokescreen for racial hatred.
I viewed the video twice for a full understanding. This crap is new to me. The humor in this is very amusing.
Hey Solenoid, your audio prompt failed or your audio prompter had the wrong propaganda.She had the look of one who hit her own forehead with her own hammer. Joel schooled that bunch of seals. The colored gal got it right. The MSM has not vetted this precedent. The moral of Joel’s interview was the vetting or lack of it.
Again, Solenoid, don’t drown while you’re in the tank.
JG and Skookum, here’s another UCLA paper that defines Critical Race Theory, or CRT from UCLA.
More to read there. I just grabbed the first couple of paragraphs as a “trailer” tease… LOL
I haven’t seen the infamous video. But from what I’ve heard, I don’t believe that Breitbart… bless his heart.. is really telling us anything new. We already know that Obama has his past associations with the DSA, and extreme leftist thinkers that stay focused on “social justice” and inequalities. That continued trend of politi-think is further demonstrated by his choice of advisors in the WH. Therefore this video and association is far from a revelation.
Rather you might consider Derrick Bell this election season’s Jeremiah Wright… Farrakhan and all. New day, same story. Perhaps that’s why Curt chose to focus the context of his post on the predictable “in the tank” media apology and excuses, instead of the association (minor as it is, in reality) with Bell itself (or the CRT). My guess is this video and association will have as little impact as Wright did on the last election. Fact is, there are far too many citizens who embrace the “fairness” of perceived “social justice”.
@Nan G, perhaps you missed it in Curt’s post, but he pointed out that Pollack’s wife is black.
@Oil guy from Alberta:
The “colored gal”, one Ms. Amy Holmes, was quite right to inject that bit of sanity into their “panel”. I found it quite amusing watching O’Brien attempting to say that Obama was vetted while Ms. Holmes shut her up on that point. O’Brien failed on so many levels during this video, with help from Mr. Thomas.
Obama was never truly vetted by the media. Coverups, lightweight “questions” and an adoring cadre of media personalities on the MSM let quite a bit slip by. I don’t think they will ever do their job on Obama as they should now because if they did, it would be admitting to their own failure in 2008. Therefore, they will continue to carry his water for him, call anyone critical of Obama a racist, and avoid anything that could even remotely question Obama’s policies and actions. They truly are a bunch of useful idiots.
I think they would argue with you on that, johngalt. They did indeed cover the Rev. Wright stuff, old associations. They also asked “some” questions. The trick is how they framed both the coverage and questions… allowing for Obama to easily dismiss it. Also how most of the media made light of it, and instead used it to portray conservatives as conspiracy theorists. So technically, they can look you in the face and tell you – without lying – that they did cover it.
Like I said… all comes down to the new day, same story. We already know they will do exactly the same with this fodder…
The question is, how many want to take another trip down yet another rabbit hole, and remove the focus from the only two genuine winning issues for conservatives – the economy and energy policy?
This revelation is no surprise to most Americans. The MSM bias in favor of Democrats, understatement of the millennium!! Sad is that the Republican Party doesn’t have the backbone to declare the obvious and tell the MSM to shove it!! The proof is evident and can be demonstrated. Instead they display their dirty laundry for them to poke fun at!!
@MataHarley:
I have a different take on this video, Mata. I don’t think they have released the most damaging ones yet, and that each one will be progressively worse. I think the MSM’s reaction will be to continue to downplay the videos until they cannot do that anymore, and then they will fall all over themselves in trying to “vet” Obama. Now, I don’t necessarily believe that their vetting will be thorough. Probably not even close to it. However, many of those fence sitters will be turned away from Obama, even if they don’t end up voting for the GOP candidate.
Wishful thinking? Maybe. But judging from Breitbart’s modus operandi, this isn’t the only video he had.
@MataHarley:
The problem is that not only is Obama setting the stage for those two issues, with the help of a compliant and complicit media, but the GOP “frontrunner” is shooting himself, and possibly the GOP’s chances, of being able to adequately confront Obama on them.
The MSM and the Left for some strange reason “Doesn’t get any of this this”. Perhaps more so they [surprise] “don’t want to get it”…. go figure.
I give editor-in-chief Joel Pollak kudos for keeping his cool. He is very composed, very intelligent on the issue(s) and very, very articulate. You go Joel!
Jay Thomas – willful ignorance…. Soledad O’Brien – even more willful ignorance – did anyone notice her body language when they pulled back the camera to show everyone at the “round table” – arms folded tightly in front of her?? She was having none of it! No tolerance or open minded-ness there!
Does the logic for CRT follow the “Do you still beat your wife?” syndrome. There is no solution, but to accept the emergence of Black racism as the rule of law, and until Black Racism is the standard of America, only then, will we be a free nation.
And if you believe this crack head dream, you will love Orwell’s Utopia.
@MataHarley: I think that in typical Breirbart fashion, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Remember how he slowly fed the ACORN videos, starting with just one, so that the MSM would cry that it was merely a fluke, not a pattern. Then he hit ’em right between the eyes with the rest of the vids.
I see the same thing playing out here, in all likelihood.
Edited to add:
What JG said… 😉
.
.
Obama hugs Prof. Bell like a lover. Egad. In public and on tape, he gives a grinding, full body hug to another man. Yuk.
It was a different Derrick Bell.
He was part of a White House Tour. On both visits. Among 300+ and 282 other people, respectively.
If you have ever been on one of these tours, you are shepherded through rope lines as a crowd, led by a tour guide, to view areas of the WH specifically dedicated for the tour–then out.
This Derrick Bell had an entirely different birth date than the man you have been speaking of.
Now: The fact that he was on a tour each time, and had a different birth date, means that this was a different person, no matter how much your feverishly driven mind so wishes to believe otherwise.
Antipsychotic medications such as Clozaril are useful in such cases.
@noncomposmentis: Okay, show us how you came to that conclusion.
One nice thing about not having a news type blog (I don’t have any blog) is that I don’t have to read any of the propaganda media info if I don’t want to. Since I only want the truth, I stay away from them. I feel sorry for the news type bloggers and reporters who HAVE to read the trash and filter it for us, but I am glad they do. Thank you for wallowing in the filth for us so that we don’t have to.
What was the alternative reaction to dismissal for the “secret, explosive” video Brietbart claimed to have, which turned out to be a lie, and instead it was the one that PBS screened prior to the last election and has been available via PBS since then ?
Do I get to claim there is something wrong with radio stations if my secret George Carlin CD I release doesn’t capture the public’s interest today ?
Seriously, WTF? This was broadcast in 2008. The iPhone was released in 2007. WTF is your question again? Why isn’t anyone interested in this new development? Lie to us and claim even you believe this.
I got a Casio watch, you will shit your pants when you see it. Calculator and everything. Shhhhhh its a secret, its explosive.
I question the value of claiming Joel Pollack as an intellect extraordinaire, just because he had an opinion—for which Andrew Breitbart was responsible, in this particular case, anyway. The fact that the media (MSM as conservatives like to exhort) may have a bias is common knowledge—that’s the reason we all have to take what they say with the proverbial grain of salt. I personally prefer the liberal media—on television and radio that means MSNBC, Free Speech Network, Link TV, PBS, POTUS. For conservatives, that means the Fox News Media (FNM) and the various right-wing radio talkers that populate the conservative media—which represent a variety of conservative opinions from Rush Limbaugh to Alex Jones. I personally believe that if you take what most right-wing talkers—Hannity and O’Rielly, for example—I can find more ‘provable’ false information than with Rachel Maddow and Cenk Uygar, for example. But, never-the-less, I must always be aware of the potiential for falsehood, and not become a ‘ditto-head’.
Like all of us, President Obama was once young and impressionable. College exposed many of us to a multitude of new ideas—that’s part of the university experience. Many of us tried on these new ideas—like a new set of clothes. Some of us decided that maybe the shoes, but the rest didn’t and so they were discarded. Along the way, some of us enhanced these new beliefs with stories that seemed to fulfill our new outlook on life—our Weltenschauung.
During our lives most of us tempered our world view with reality. But some on the left and the right still maintained extremist conspiracy theories—whether they be about Marxism or the New World Order—untempered by reality. Each of these extreme sides continued to spins these yarns which seem to justify and be in line with their basic beliefs. They do this without without any logical or evidentiary basis. For example, I may believe that New Gingrich is staying in the primary race for the Republican nomination because Sheldon Adeleson is paying him to do so in order to keep Rick Santorum from getting enough delegates to beat Romney. Now, this may be true, or it may be false, but I have no evidence to prove it—it could just as well be an undocumented opinion. It’s the same with basing an opinion on Obama because he was photographed introducing a ‘radical’ professor with a hug att a speaking engagement some 20 years ago.
@johngalt and @anticsrocks, even if Breitbart has a series of Obama clips, associating him with those of this political leaning, are we really learning anything new here? I don’t think so. I don’t need more clips to prove the Obama tends to lean Euro-socialist or “equal/social justice” in his politics. One need only look at his advisers and appointees to confirm that.
Again I will stress there are only two winning arguments for the GOP right now… energy policy and the economy. And they are intrinsically linked. Forays off those winning points are simply going to be spun (erroneously, but since when has that stopped the left…) as racist, petty and conspiratorial. They will, justifiably, point out that these are not Obama’s words, but those of others.
This is adeptly proven by @Liberal1 (objectivity) who likes to claim Obama was “once young and impressionable”. That might have been a reality, were it not for evidence that Obama has not changed his personal agenda by the choice of those that surround him, and his continued campaign strategy of “fairness” and social justice.
@MataHarley: I think the point of the videos is in proving to the non-political wonks, i.e. majority of Americans, the liberal bias in the news media.
I agree we aren’t breaking new ground here as far as Obama’s belief systems, but for folks like my elderly parents who believe it if it is on one of the three big networks, these videos have the potential to get enough attention that the big three are forced to cover them. I could be wrong, but I think that is the point of the vetting system that Breitbart put into place before his death.