Selectively Edited Video of Obama’s Radical Law School Days Released; UPDATE: Breitbart Team Releases The Unedited Version, as Reported on Hannity
The selectively edited video was released by Andrew Breitbart Ben Smith of Buzzfeed.
By contrast, the full video with the proper context will be released by your hardworking friends in Big Media Breitbart.com.
UPDATE: Title corrected. The footage is from his law school days, not his college days.
UPDATE x2: Here is the Hannity segment:
Open up your hearts and your minds to the words of Derrick Bell! And gimme a hug.
Check out especially Charles Ogletree at 3:50, a top advisor to Obama in 2008, admitting they hid this video during the last election.
Good stuff.
Ding!
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (a18ddc) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:06 pmI had a feeling this video was an effort to steal Breitbart.com’s thunder. Imagine how many other videos, photos, and other information the media has that could be released … but won’t, unless the conservative media is about to do so. (I’m looking at you, LA Times.)
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:10 pmPretty much nails the meaning of “fighting fire with fire”.
nk (dec503) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:19 pmIF the LAT ever decides to release that Obama recording it will be after he leaves office.
Icy (a4ce3e) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:21 pmIf the LAT enters receivership, will someone degauz the Kalidi tape as they are shredding all the files?
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:22 pmI hope it’s big, but I doubt it. The Obamabots didn’t care about Rev. Wright, either. The only hope is that they have lots of tapes and just keep dribbling them out so the MSM has to deal with them eventually.
Patricia (e1d89d) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:29 pmI will never forget the LA Times mocking the people protesting them to release the Khalidi tape.
It is kind of amusing that media people are now trying to scoop Breitbart on this one.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:30 pmLove the selectively-edited video! I’m very interested to see the whole thing!
Thanks, folks at Big Heirs.
Kman (5576bf) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:35 pmhah someone caught rapey talking smack about America on videotape
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:39 pmThe release of the edited tape is an attempt at damage control. There must be something they are afraid of in the full edition.
AZ Bob (3b8a4c) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:40 pmI AM ANDREW BREIBART!A Hollywood writer tells of his experiences in the entertainment-socialism complex in the wake of Breitbart’s loss.
Mutnodjmet (c4995d) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:41 pmYou see this, Mr. Feets? This type of ill-considered poo fling thing surfacing unexpectedly is why you will never be able to run for high office yourself. Poor Barack. He prolly thought he had it covered.
elissa (097996) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:44 pmI fear you are correct
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 3/7/2012 @ 1:59 pmI suspect any and all hype.
Prepare to be disappointed. Whatever “it” is will be quickly explained away and relegated to the conservative media niche.
Besides, racism only goes one way. There are probably no more entrenched American public ideas than that.
One. Way.
Amphipolis (b120ce) — 3/7/2012 @ 2:00 pmPessimism Plus….
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 3/7/2012 @ 2:05 pmThe average American voter will vote to re-elect the President because they deserve each other.
the guy at Buzzfeed that procured that video from WGBH, Andrew Kacynski, as least claims to be a conservative. Buzzfeed didn’t edit it.
based on the Alinsky “blockbuster” from earlier this week, i’m not holding my breath.
milowent (d3dcb6) — 3/7/2012 @ 2:19 pmIf this was a blockbuster, it would have seen the light of day 4 years ago I think.
carlitos (49ef9f) — 3/7/2012 @ 2:27 pmEven some of the Praetorians on the Left are having second thoughts.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 3/7/2012 @ 2:29 pmDid Breitbart have a habit of over-selling his info? Not that I remember. If anything, it appeared like he preferred to let the stories speak for themselves as they were released, little by little. But that is only an impression without a lot of study.
Obama and crew have always been about putting the bad stuff out first to vaccinate against it, like using crack, though they have hidden or tried to hide other things, e.g. buddy Ayers.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/7/2012 @ 2:43 pmEven if the video was of him corn holing an impoverished Taiwanese boy, if people haven’t figured him out by now, they just don’t care to.
Ghost (6f9de7) — 3/7/2012 @ 2:51 pmmy bet is Breitbart.com has more than one video and will pull the same stunt they pulled on Acorn. Release one … get the MSm and Obama to respond with their usual “it was years ago and just once nonsense” … then another one will come out … I’ll bet they have some Rev. Wright footage with Obama in it …
JeffC (488234) — 3/7/2012 @ 3:07 pmI heard Joel and Ben Shapiro on Hannity, and I thought there might be a “tell” in their voices. Not so much. Joel was, as always, the consumate professional, and Ben, as always, sounded like he just got his new Xbox. I’m going to set my expectation bar low.
sybilll (b77792) — 3/7/2012 @ 3:10 pmDiversity for Diversity’s Sake!
No Justice. No Peace.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 3:15 pmI would vote for Happyfeet for any office.
JD (580ac1) — 3/7/2012 @ 3:21 pmJD – He can have my old one, no vote required.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 3:26 pmYou can look at this as a corollary to that tape;
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/us/politics/30law.html?pagewanted=all
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 3:35 pmEven if the video was of him corn holing an impoverished Taiwanese boy, if people haven’t figured him out by now, they just don’t care to.
So in the past coupla weeks, Obama’s Axelrod -tweeted a picture of Obama giving Bo a ride in the limo, saying that’ show loving owners treat their dogs- because decades ago Romney carried his dog on top of the car
-implied Romney was too weak to stand up to Rush because he didn’t fall into the “slut” trap
…and we think it isn’t worth showing video of Obama being stupid because everyone already knows it?
MayBee (081489) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:02 pmRomney is going to get all kinds of stuff tossed his way by Obama. I say I’m happy to see it tossed back by someone.
Well, maybe there’s something good and awful in the video, good enough to ding him now after four years. If it’s more like this, It’ll just be brushed off as “paying his dues” and making connections that would get him ahead. Youthful hippie crap.
We know better, but I think there are few Obama supporters who didn’t figure out he was lying about Wright, Ayers, et al.
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:13 pmHmmm….
Andrew Kaczynski @BuzzFeedAndrew
PBS posts entire news segment on Obama/Bell 1991 rally to prove it was not edited by PBS or BuzzFeed. pbs.org/wgbh/pages/fro…
Retweeted by Ben Smith
=================
Me? I’m just having fun watching Breitbart’s friends trying to get Ben Smith to admit he did the same thing Breitbart did w/ NAACP….run the tape he got, not knwoing it was edited.
MayBee (081489) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:16 pmJD – you misspelled “orifice.”
carlitos (49ef9f) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:17 pmObama said. “Under my plan of a cap and trade, energy prices will NECESSARILY SKYROCKET”
They did. Libtards don’t care.
HALF of America has accepted MARXISM as normal now. The LIBTARDS even trotted out FLUKE (probably gay) to tell us that FREE CONTRACEPTION is a WYMYNS RIGHT. And HALF of America eats it up like OH SO DELICIOUS SOLYLENT GREEN.
Gus (36e9a7) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:17 pmAnyone else watching Space Traders yet?
I am excited about this one.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:19 pmHow very racist of you, MayBee. As we now know, when the left wants to leak something, Ben is one of their go-to guys.
JD (580ac1) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:19 pmPeople were so irrationally in love with Obama the first time around, they were too forgiving. Like the song “When a man loves a woman”.
Now a little bit of the sheen is gone. Pointing out Obama’s history illustrates that he’s never really done anything all that well, so his failure as president isn’t some new thing to be blamed on others.
MayBee (081489) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:20 pmI used to think Robert Guillaime was smarter than this,
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/03/07/derrick-bell-obama-wright-farrakhan-hbo-blaxploitation
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:24 pmWe need to keep our focus on Slut Flap!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:27 pmex-politico
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:27 pmsmith goes full ben dover for
media matters
Chickens are finally coming home to roost is uttered in Space Traders!
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:28 pmNow a little bit of the sheen is gone
Racist! He never used it.
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:29 pmobama pitch b*tch
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:31 pmabout “paucity of dope”
during college years
MayBee’s reference to Afro-sheen is the most aggressively racist codeword I can recall. Well, not as bad as calling someone articulate, but close.
JD (580ac1) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:32 pmyou gotta line and
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:33 pmhe gotta pole he meet you
at the fishin’ hole
Skin Whitener! lol
I wonder how many time The President of the United States of America has seen this flick?
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:35 pmYes, regardless of the Afro-Sheen the man is CLEAN. And articulate. Not a hint of ghetto speak!!! It’s almost as if he was raised by white folks.
Joe Biden (36e9a7) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:42 pmJD, not just articulate, but clean and articulate.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:42 pmoh, Peoples of Sun
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:43 pmstrike back against Ice Peoples
Dreams of Narcissist
Maybee,
Ghost (6f9de7) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:44 pmYou confuse my cynicism with defeatism. I want the tape revealed so that at least after the fact, when the lefties are all screaming “but I didn’t know!!” we’ll be able to say, “yes you f**king did, you just didn’t give a damn.” knowledge is power, and secrets lead to tyranny.
to the trenches now!
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:46 pmred diaper doper babies
just quit yer Stalin
stand with Comrade Bell!
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:49 pmcommunity organize
strike wet paper bag!
we are sumb*tches
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:53 pmwe have long been waiting for
at least I think so
They should have listened to the “Oreo” republican.
Also, there was a lesson in there about the 2nd amendment.
All in all I give Space Traders 2 and half stars. If you want to watch it, watch if for free on Youtube (not a date movie).
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 4:55 pmToo bad they don’t have Super 8 film of Barky playing revolutionary with Franklin and Stanley in the backyard as Lenin, Stalin and Trotsky.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:02 pmOk, Ghost. I get that.
MayBee (081489) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:06 pmWhen is selective editing okay?
JD (580ac1) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:12 pmLee’s been leaking info (too much?) on twitter. This is the appetizer, so don’t get too excited. He is being cryptic, but there is a very specific reason they are rolling this video out first.
sybilll (b77792) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:14 pmToo bad they don’t have Super 8 film of Barky playing heroic revolutionary with Franklin and Stanley in the backyard as Lenin, Stalin and Trotsky.
Comment by gary gulrud
FIFY and probably not too far from the truth.
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 5:23 pmIt’s all going to be about Prof Bell.
Look. If people weren’t turned by the revelations of 2008, they won’t be turned by this.
If people aren’t turned by the Obama deficit, it’s time to throw in the towel while we still own it.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:14 pmNothing to see here, racists. Move along.
JD (516dcc) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:20 pmWell, I liked what the Breitbart dudes had to say about their vetting strategy and our corrupt media, but I have to agree with #56 in that idk if it will do a whole lot to sway anyone new.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:26 pmAs I was looking at Bill Ayers on my TV screenm something occurred to me: Has anyone seen it suggested or seen anyone wondering in print about that dinner that Breitbart and Tucker Carlson had at the home of Bill Ayers, cooked by Ayers?
What a perfect opportunity for a malignant, highly ideological fanatic to use a slow-acting, nearly impossible to detect poison.
This may call for Inspector Sammy Finkleman.
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:29 pmIt looks like the only extra bit is the hug.
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:57 pm______________________________________________
Look. If people weren’t turned by the revelations of 2008, they won’t be turned by this.
There certainly is a percentage of this society that is no less screwed up than, for example, a good share of the electorate of Venezuela, where the fanaticism of Hugo Chavez, years after his taking the reigns of power, not only isn’t deemed a liability by many people — based on opinion polls in Venezuela — it may even be seen as a virtue.
In a similar vein, look at urban American areas best exemplified by Detroit, Michigan. No matter how bad things have become, are becoming or have long been, a majority of voters in such communities never stray far from leftist politicians and policies, or from idiocy run amok.
Mark (31bbb6) — 3/7/2012 @ 6:58 pmGuaranteed that the MFM will not look at the radical ideology espoused by the gentleman Barcky was sucking up to.
JD (516dcc) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:01 pmThe hug, better audio, and Ogletree saying they hid it during the 2008 campaign.
Alone, it isn’t much. But it does make one wonder if Obama really did just go to Wright’s church for political reasons.
Did Obama have any non-radical, non-activist friends?
MayBee (081489) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:13 pmI wonder if McCain would use his Senate position to investigate the media, Harvard, Ogletree, and/or whoever hiding this video. I doubt he will since it could make him look like a sore loser, but I think he should. McCain arguably had the most to lose in that election, but we all have an interest in the truth about Presidential candidates’ backgrounds.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:14 pmThe extra stuff is only “extra” because BuzzFeed and PBS chose to dig up this stuff today. PBS in response to Buzz Feed, of course. But I don’t know what motivated Buzz Feed.
MayBee (081489) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:16 pmGood for Obama. Finally something from that guy I can agree with.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:17 pmI’m a little irritated by some people saying “well it’s not that big a deal” or it’s not that much different than what Buzzfeed posted”. Well the deal IS that this interesting vid’s been around somewhere for ages–was available for the taking with some effort by any enterprising journalist. Buzzfeed would not have posted it, ever, but they were essentially forced to.
I’ll also say that even if this tape had been completely benign and just student Barry walking around campus picking flowers with his 1990’s friends it STILL should have been found and shown by the legacy media during the 2008 campaign –if for no other reason than for public interest and to have a little more background on the young mystery presidential candidate who came out of nowhere. Their supression of this one and probably many other tapes makes the slanders on John McCain (who, horrors!) might have been in the same meeting once with a female lobbyist look all the more slimy and revolting.
elissa (097996) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:19 pmThat Times piece on his lecturing days at Chicago, that totally insane anti military rant he wrote in the Sundial, now this time, the Iowa Peace Pledge,
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:22 pmthat he is following through on, each of these could have been a weeks worth of attention during the campaign, but yet crickets,
Mark- yeah Detroit keeps voting in the very people who destroy them. However, people have left Detroit in large numbers. It’s a smaller and tighter ball of dysfunction with each year that passes, with better decision makers going elsewhere (but still in the US).
MayBee (081489) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:22 pmAh, Detroit the source of the ‘food desert’ that Tracie MacMillan identified, apparently not enough
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:26 pmgrocery stores there, maybe the demilitarized zone out of Robocop has something to do with it, just saying,
I was going to buy a house in Detroit.
I bought a lawnmower instead…
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:28 pmYou guys are skipping the codewords and going straight to the racisms.
JD (580ac1) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:28 pmDisfunction or dysfunction?
Spellcheck is making me go with dysfunction, but that seems too fancy.
MayBee (081489) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:31 pmNah, JD, your dog whistle hearing frequency is just skewed.
elissa (097996) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:31 pmIsn’t Detroit where the county officials are razing large swaths of *
decapitateddilapidated empty houses and letting the land go back to its natural state?*I suppose my typo would work just as well…
[note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:53 pmOh MayBee, just noticed your dys and dis, too. Heh.
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/7/2012 @ 7:54 pmhearing the rapey douchebag talk in that clip I’m struck by how the little twerp really just has the one cadence what he uses for public speaking
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/7/2012 @ 8:26 pmHasn’t changed one iota, Happyfeet.
JD (d246fe) — 3/7/2012 @ 8:29 pmI’m hoping this is just the intentionally underwhelming first offering designed to lure the left into an overreaction or something.
Is there anyone who (a) cares and who (b) already knew even the rough outlines of Obama’s background who (c) wouldn’t already have guessed that he’d be on a hugs-and-kisses basis with a radical racially manipulative professor at Harvard Law?
There isn’t anyone who will be convinced by this who wasn’t already convinced by the Ayers/Wright/Rekzo connections that were already obvious in 2008 to anyone who could penetrate the MSM information embargo.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:10 pmShorter: Nothing in this video ought surprise anyone capable of finding his/her way to this blog.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:11 pmOne more thing: In context, Ogletree (in the 2011 lecture) is clearly laughing when he “admits” to having “hidden” this clip.
If he genuinely thought it was harmful to Obama, why would he no longer care if “they” (Obama’s political enemies) find it now?
I would not overplay this “concealment” argument, and I would not describe Ogletree’s statements without including some context.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:14 pmYes, as Admiral Ackbar would put it, Beldar’ ‘it’s
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:17 pma trap,’ if they think this is the only sliver they will showcase,
Now that I’m on a good and pissy roll:
Why bother with this sort of stuff?
Can there possibly be more than two or three dozen people in the entire United States whose vote is going to be changed by something like this?
By definition, we’re talking about people who are too damned stupid to figure out what an incredibly awful president Obama is now, based not on his credentials or his birth certificate, but on his spectacularly incompetent first term in office! I know there are a whole lot of people who are in that category. It’s just that essentially none of them are going to be persuaded by something like this.
Again, if this is just the first part of a six-part expose that ends with video of Obama receiving his commission as a colonel in the North Korean secret police before going all Manchurian Candidate, I’ll gladly eat my hat. But by itself, this is just another damn distraction from important things like a looming nuclear Holocaust in the Middle East and the impending fiscal collapse of the entire world. Can we keep the focus on those things, please?
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:22 pmPeople who voted for Obama dont care about this. You could show a video of Obama eating a human corpse with fondue stix and MSNBC, the View, Bill Maher, David Axelrove Debbie Whatshername and every single big city newspapewr in the country would find a way to blame George Bush, Enron, the Koch brothers, Rush Limbaugh and the Catholic Church.
For people who voted against Obama this is just making the rubble bounce. 57 million 2008 voters already understood that, as he was mentored and elevated to prominence by ignorant bigoted racialist lefty nutbags, so he became one himself.
I personally hope that smart people focused on defeating Obama in November based on his inumerable screw-ups (both deliberate and accidental, foreign and domestic)dont spend too much time on this.
miked (04e8ba) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:23 pmObama is a brilliant speaker and debater. Only true master debaters know the classic right hand rapid pocket holstering like Obama demonstrates in this video.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:29 pmMuch ado about nothing.
So, Barry O hung out with guys who didn’t think much of America.
Gee, thanks for the newsflash.
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:31 pmI am underwhelmed like a lot of people but I do think you have to applaud them for trying. Let’s face it, if Obama gets another 4 years we are pretty much boned as a country.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:33 pmA couple of weeks ago pre-Fluke, Rush had a theory that many of the voters BO could count on are white and poorly educated. He has it half right. Living on the northside of Chicago as I do, the vast majority of BO voters IMO are almost the opposite: white and very well educated.
Lawyers, social workers (if you call that an education), journalists, and just about anyone with a graduate degree. BO represents their view of themselves as cutting edge thinkers and “progressives.” He also reminds them of their favorite professors, the ones who hold the US (and old fashioned values) in contempt. An attitude and world view that is standard fare for getting ahead in an academic setting (and for that matter, living on the northside of Chicago). There are millions of these kinds of whites in the US today. Which is why the stories like the subject of this thread will not get much traction in the MSM, or in the presidential race come fall, it is not only a reflection of BO, it is a reflection of the people who make up the MSM. ani’t no way they are going to put thier worldview on trial.
Ipso Fatso (7434b9) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:36 pmThe deadwood’s incompetency and the waste of Palin in 2008 makes me
nk (dec503) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:37 pmwonderthink that McBeerhusband was a Trojan Horse in the finest tradition of Chicago politics. They must have had something on him from the Lincoln S&L thing.Well, it’s not an academic discussion, this worldview informs how he thinks ‘cops acted stupidly, why didn’t have to read SB 1070, to condemn it, etc
narciso (87e966) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:38 pmWhy bother with this sort of stuff?
Geez oh pete, Beldar. Nobody’s asking you to expend any effort. These people are at least trying to do something. You don’t like it, you don’t have to work with them.
But in a world where “macaca” brings down a highly regarded senior senator, and *Bill Clinton* is turned into a raging racist, you never know what is going to be the thing that works.
MayBee (081489) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:44 pmMayBee, I don’t fault anyone’s intentions. But I will continue to remind those who want to see Obama denied a second term to focus on his abysmal performance in his first term.
Obama, by contrast, wants the election to be about anything and everything other than his abysmal performance in his first term. Let’s not help him with that.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:52 pmWhat exactly was incompetent about Palin, nk? She kept McCain from losing by 10%+
JD (516dcc) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:53 pmDEREK BELL = NEGRO = Protected class.
DEREK BELL = VICTIM = Protected Negro class.
DEREK BELL = RESPECTED PROFESSOR of IMPECCABLE pedigree.
Rinse and repeat as necessary.
The next 2 weeks DEREK BELL will be AMERICA’S LIBTARD HERO. Sorry SANDY FLUKETARD.
Gus (694db4) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:57 pmBtw BELDAR. You are correct and Obama is TOAST.
MEPS MEPS.
Gus (694db4) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:57 pmALLCAPS makes it more convincing.
JD (516dcc) — 3/7/2012 @ 9:59 pmexactly JD.
Gus (694db4) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:01 pmThis might sound crazy, Beldar, but I suspect the media likes to cover little controversies rather than focus on Obama’s record. The social media certainly does. So I am more than happy to see someone on the right help them find some fodder.
The idea that by ignoring the crap we can get everyone to focus on substance seems waaay too idealistic. I’m not saying ask the candidates about it. I’m saying help feed the beast.
MayBee (081489) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:02 pmHow can you not lol @ Gus’ response to 96?
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:08 pmThank you Noodles. And I was “subtle”.
Gus (694db4) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:13 pmYou made me watch Sean Hannity – one of the smarmiest assh*les ever to grace a television set – to see a HUG?
OH NOES! A HUG!
Beldar nails it.
Leviticus (870be5) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:15 pm1991 Obama video aired in 2008
By JOSEPH WILLIAMS |
3/7/12 4:23 PM EST
POLITICO
The “racially themed” video of President Barack Obama as a 29-year-old Harvard law student that’s gone viral on the Web was broadcast as part of a PBS documentary on the future president nearly four years ago.
On the eve of the groundbreaking 2008 presidential election, the Boston-based documentary program “Frontline” broadcast a program on Obama titled, “The Choice,” which featured a version of the same video: Obama introducing Derrick Bell, Harvard’s first African American tenured law professor, at a rally in solidarity with Bell and support of affirmative action in the law school’s admissions process. The video was part of an extended broadcast tracing Obama’s path from childhood in Hawaii and Indonesia to his election as the nation’s first black president.
Steve J. (c7e05c) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:19 pmLeviticus was drugged and held against his will in the #HannityBarn.
MayBee (081489) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:23 pmOgletree hid the video in the rape barn.
Patterico (feda6b) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:25 pm“Obama introducing Derrick Bell, Harvard’s first African American tenured law professor, at a rally in solidarity with Bell and support of affirmative action in the law school’s admissions process.”
A shocking abuse of power!
If this doesn’t bring down Obambi, nothing will.
[rolls eyes]
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:26 pmAntoine Dodson’s advice holds for rape barns.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMtZfW2z9dw
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:29 pmDamn that Hannity, he keeps trying to take down a BLACK MAN!!!
Gus (694db4) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:40 pmIt was kind of weird having to watch FOX. I mean I watch it when something breaks or something and Red Eye, but I am pretty much sick of everyone there.
The way they trounce the other networks you’d think there could be a conservative alternative to them.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:45 pmNoodles, FOX is the REPUBLICAN PARTY of NEWS CABLE MEDIA.
They are NOT….CONSERVATIVE….they are just PROFITABLE.
Gus (694db4) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:48 pmI wasn’t sure what you were trying to say there Gus, luckily you used some CAPS. =]
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:50 pmI presume it’s still o.k. to use caps at the beginning of sentences.
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/7/2012 @ 10:59 pmFox News is gayer than when Putin crashed BroNYCon yelling cranky doodle donkey I got your pinkie pie right here
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/7/2012 @ 11:01 pmthat last bit might need an additional link really
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/7/2012 @ 11:02 pmNoodles, you are the BEST.
Gus (694db4) — 3/7/2012 @ 11:04 pmSammy hasn’t watched the Hannity clip yet, but he’ll opine on it anyway.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:11 amMany of you have already read Jodi Kantor’s carefully spun January 2007 story in the New York Times entitled “In Law School, Obama Found Political Voice.” In it (boldface mine):
Does the hug really add that much? I’m not seeing any new news here.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:11 amWell, I’ve been a thorough-going prune tonight already, so I will close for now with this:
Breitbart’s death doesn’t mean that everyone he collaborated with suddenly got stupid or forgot the plans he’d made or was making. To the contrary, my admiring working assumption is that this is just the first — and therefore quite deliberately the least significant — of a series of Obama videos that will be cleverly and methodically released between now and the election. I hope there are indeed one or more that are worthy of the term “October Surprise.” And if from this modest start great things happen, that would be lovely.
In the meantime, I’m going to continue focusing my fire on Obama’s objectively, quantifiably awful performance in office on matters both domestic and foreign.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:38 amBeldar – The important thing is the left and the MSM (BIRM) essentially hid the video in 2008 because they understood its potential significance. The front running of the story today by Buzzfeed, Andrea Mitchell and others to spin it as a nonevent again fails to explain who Derrick Bell was – another radical, anti-Semitic, race pimp in the center of Obama’s solar system, just like Jeremiah Wright. Wright and Bell were both big fans of Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam.
Why would anyone want to hush those connections up? I have no idea, do you?
The Obama Campaign almost succeeded in scrubbing the internet of his connections to ACORN. They tried to stonewall Stanley Kurtz from investigating the Annenberg Challenge and prevent him from talking about it.
Many of Obama’s appointments share the same radical views on race as Wright and Bell and Eric Holder just uttered some pretty disgusting comments on the subject last week.
This type of connection helps inform a lot of Obama’s actions in Illinois and his divisive rhetoric as president.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 1:24 amdaley–thank you for being the voice of sanity. I tried to make similar points upthread but did not construct them as well as you have. This story is about the media and the Obama insiders. But I repeat myself.
I am incredibly disappointed and gobsmacked from reading the combination of nonchalance if not outright hostility in some of the comments here toward the airing of this Obama tape now. I had not ever seen this piece before. I consider myself to be a fairly aware person who is very interested in politics and history. I do not live in a cave. I reside in one of the three big media markets in the country. As I said, I had never before seen these images of Obama *actively* being a (not very post-racial) community organizer. Fess up. How many others commenting here on the thread had ever seen video of the event before yesterday? Or stills either? So, shouldn’t average, busy, non-Frontline -viewing, only kinda- paying-attention-sorts-of voters have at least been made aware of it and the Bell backstory, regardless of whether it would have changed their vote or not? Should not Obama at least have been asked a question or two about it at some point?
Had it been a part of a broad and comprehensive media coverage in 2008, seeing Obama in action in that setting would not have surprised me. It would have been just one more dot to connect. (Like many people here I already knew that there were plenty of sound reasons that Obama should not be elected president, so seeing the tape would not have altered my vote.) But it was not part of broad media coverage was it?
This is not about me, or you. It is about the damn media and the complete and total whitewash of this man to which they subjected us in 2008 and still continue, up to this day, to subject us to. This is what Andrew Breitbart understood better than most and tried so hard to address.
elissa (097996) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:22 amI can appreciate your post Elissa. For me it is partially just how I am and that 4 years of seeing lots of radicalism out of Obama and seeing it go nowhere has drained me of all my shock and outrage.
Also, I bought into the hype of a big reveal (not to say there isn’t a lot more coming).
Here is new one Stranahan linked. This time of Michelle.
http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2012/03/07/more-obama-tapes-michelle-obama-a-race-agitating-occupier/
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:37 am120-nothing shocks me about these traitors.
sickofrinos (44de53) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:04 am————-
But Santorum professing to follow the tenets of his religion is somehow out of the box crazy and worhty of headlines on Drudge and screaming pundits day in and day out. To summarize:
1. God-loving, faithful Christian = bad
2. Race-baiting agitator = good
Got it.
AJsDaddie (79daea) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:44 am—
Remember, always trust comments by carlito.
I suppose the video could have some effect on the youtube generation, who are a bit solipsistic. But mostly meh. I do like the idea of Leviticus watching Hannity though. 🙂
carlitos (49ef9f) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:53 amyawn
So what was Fox pushing last night – Mercedes, deodorant, office products?
Amphipolis (b120ce) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:55 am
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:58 amHerculesyoung leviticus cleaning the Augeanstablesbarn…As you can see and hear in that video, Obama was perfecting that annoying speech cadence of his… a sort of release of compressed air/rapid-fire flatulence at the end of each sentence.
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:01 amThese are the courting disaster clowns who have set themselves up to run the nation’s healthcare system? I don’t think so, throw the bums out:
“With new legislation authorizing incentive spectrum auctions, it’s tempting to think the crisis in mobile broadband has been avoided. But it will take at least 10 years to put new spectrum to work, and the FCC’s own estimate is that we have only three years left before hitting the wall.
With the passage last week of legislation authorizing the FCC to conduct new spectrum auctions, you might think that the looming spectrum crisis has been averted.
Nothing could be farther from the truth–or more dangerous to the continued health of the mobile ecosystem.
To avoid severe service interruptions or outright collapse of mobile networks, the FCC’s 2010 National Broadband Plan estimated that mobile users will need an additional 300MHz of spectrum by 2015 and an additional 500 MHz by 2020. Many industry insiders believe these estimates are actually low.
The FCC now has the authority to conduct auctions to get that capacity into the hands of mobile carriers. The problem is that we don’t have anywhere near that much usable spectrum left.
The federal government itself holds vast swaths of spectrum, much of it warehoused, but no central authority has the power to free up under- or unused bands.”
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57385202-94/averting-a-spectrum-disaster-now-for-the-hard-part/?tag=cnetiosapp
[note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:10 amAyers, Wright and Bell: new Axis of Evil.
AZ Bob (3b8a4c) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:14 amMore like evil, metastasized, Bob.
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:18 amBeldar,
I’m glad Obama’s racial organizer background is being exposed. We need to bombard voters with as many snapshots of his history as possible.
I think this is something Breitbart realized about modern culture. So while I agree having a central theme is an excellent way to get a point across in a courtroom, debate or interview, it may not be the best way to reach youngish voters in an era when most people under 40 value constant media and intellectual bombardment.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:34 amJealous much?
carlitos (49ef9f) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:35 amAmphipolis – apologies if I misread your intent there.
carlitos (49ef9f) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:38 amCrits! hahahaha
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:47 amThere are the facts and also the manipulation of the facts involved. Perhaps Buzzfeed releasing a version as a premptive PR manipulation had a role. I don’t know. I never studied propaganda campaigns.
It would be in keeping with Breitbart to release little by little in a crescendo effect, so I hope more will be coming. I doubt if this itself would be described as a “game changer” by too many people. Did Breitbart ever use phraseology like that himself, or is that what many of us heard?
Obama’s defense would seem to be:
1) hide info
2) release preemptively some info when it will not hurt
3) release preemptively some info and say “Is that all you got?” to make people ignore the more complete story
4) watch stuff be ignored by the MSM and those who depend upon the MSM for information
I don’t know what will make an impact. In one way, I’m not sure if watching Obama and Ayers argue over whether 20 or 25 million Americans will die in the revolution would make a difference.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:02 amDRJ@129–You’re not taking into account the very large segment of people who would think his actions on that video are positive. And that Jodi Kantor story, if what is told there is true*, depicts a man who was anti-ideological, and who didn’t act in the classic race baiting fashion. I said a long time ago that the only -ism which Obama adheres to is Obama-ism. He found leftist ideology a useful tool to advance his career, but that doesn’t mean he actually believes in it–or anything else, for that matter. I have always had the sense that with Obama “there’s no there there”.
I do think Beldar is correct–people who don’t think Obama has done anything seriously wrong while in the White House are not going to be converted by this or any other video from his past. Even it does show him taking a commission in the North Korean army….
JBS (9ee373) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:15 amif what is told there is true*
meant to footnote that with a quote from Shakespeare:
There’s much virtue in an If.
JBS (9ee373) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:19 amDustin, DRJ, elissa, MD- thank you for your well stated points.
Hotair links to a CNN panel led by my favorite, Soledad O’Brien, calling the Breitbart editor racist. I think that tells us something, doesn’t it?
It also demonstrates why I can’t stomach people here complaining they aren’t doing enough. It takes a lot of bravery to show any truthful evidence about this president’s behavior. I am not that brave.
MayBee (081489) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:43 amWe all know things like, Obama and his people blatantly lied about his relationship with Ayers, and actually hid from public view his own participation on the failure that was Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Obama was a failure in many things he did! But most outlets only really covered Ayers when they could bring Sarah Palin’s “Palling around with terrorists” rhetoric into it.
I’m happy for whomever is brave enough to reintroduce any of it back into the public discourse. It really does illustrate who Obama is today.
MayBee (081489) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:52 amMaybee, I understand where you’d coming from there. It’s only natural to see what they do to people who really put themselves out there, and worry what it would be like if you were in their shoes.
That’s what they do. They’ll call you racist, sexist, even rapist if they can get away with it. They won’t just say ‘I disagree with Rush’. They will try to eliminate that voice from the debate.
That’s why I give O’Keefe some slack. I think he’s made mistakes here or there, but people that brave don’t grow on trees.
I’ve only had little brushes with bravery, such as a few tweets with Breitbart or explaining someone’s argument to those who have distorted it. Even for this, I’ve noticed creeps occasionally send me that little warning. Maybe a proto-lie, maybe a creepy reference to my family or my dog or where I live, maybe a liberal urging people to out me.
They things they did to Breitbart (still suing his estate) are far worse, but in both cases, a major motivation is to chill speech. How many folks wanted to do what Breitbart did, but changed their minds because they didn’t want to run the gauntlet?
Anyway, I agree with you totally, Maybee, that those who bravely vet Obama deserve a great deal of respect. Those who think they can do better should go ahead and do so.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:03 am“Ayers, Wright and Bell: new Axis of Evil.”
AZ Bob – I would add Farrakhan, Khalidi, ACORN, Pfleger, Van Jones, and Edward Said among others.
Eric Holder last week:
“Holder expressed support for affirmative action, saying that he “can’t actually imagine a time in which the need for more diversity would ever cease.”
“Affirmative action has been an issue since segregation practices,” Holder said. “The question is not when does it end, but when does it begin … When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are entitled?””
MLK would be very proud.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:26 amI have to agree with MayBee. I have been a big politics follower ever since the Clinton Shenanigans and had never seen this video of Obama and Bell. Not that it would have changed my vote. I held my nose and voted for McCain. And I can’t believe this was all Breitbart had. There has to be more.
PatAZ (2c3538) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:28 amit must be important if they’re trotting propaganda slut María de la Soledad Teresa O’Brien out to lie about it
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:29 amOh, man was I wrong about my cynicism before. Sure this isn’t going to convince the majority of blacks to vote against him, but what about the Jews? We’ve got Sharkmouth even saying that her Jewish friends and family doubt obama’s commitment to Israel, show him endorsing a rabid anti-Semitic asshat and a few more will wake up to see who he really is.
And the media will pull a Dory. “just keep spinning, just keep spinning, just keep spinning.”
Ghost (6f9de7) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:32 am“I do like the idea of Leviticus watching Hannity though.”
– carlitos
Hannity and O’Reilly are locked in a deadly struggle to see who can be the first self-satisfied moron to get me to throw a hatchet at my television set. Since I’ve most recently watched Hannity (THANKS FOR THAT, PATTERICO), Hannity is in the lead. But I might see Bill O’Reilly at some point. And then he’ll no doubt take the lead.
MayBee’s comment at #103 was hilarious, by the way. The hashtag was a very nice touch.
Leviticus (870be5) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:33 amMLK would be very proud.
You take that back, you son of a… Oh, wait. You were being sarcastic.
Ghost (6f9de7) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:36 amLeviticus, I share your opinion of Hannity’s program. I think O’Reilly is considerably less annoying, but that is not to say he isn’t very annoying.
That Fox News is so successful speaks more to the dearth of good news on TV than Fox News.
Except for Red Eye.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:39 amcarlitos –
My intent is to point out that the biggest impact this has had is on Fox’s ratings last night, which I’m sure they milked dry. How many times did they show the teaser?
This all makes me retch. It’s not funny. It’s not entertaining. It’s not decisive. And it’s not a surprise.
Amphipolis (b120ce) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:42 amAmph, I prefer to use Breitbart’s websites for this info.
The over the top promotion and drama is simply how Fox (and its competitors) do business. Sadly, if they present everything in proper tone, their ratings will dry up.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:45 amDitto with all the above thoughts on Fox. I’d much rather read conservative stuff online, and listen to the BBC/NPR for balance. What started with 1/2 hour of Crossfire (or maybe the McGlaughlin Group) has degenerated into a 24/7 circus. I can’t watch it. Even when I agree with them on an issue, I find the delivery insulting to my intelligence.
carlitos (49ef9f) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:52 amMcLaughlin.
carlitos (49ef9f) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:53 amWow… Joel Pollack and Amy Holmes do
good worka great job here in exposing CNN – and MSM – collusion and perfidy:http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/08/The%20Vetting%20CNN%20Implodes%20Over%20Obama%20Bell%20Video
Colonel Haiku (b0c693) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:01 amI do like NPR’s presentation. What they say is often BS, but the bongos or jazz in between segments is fun.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:02 amHey, I have no objection to Fox making a buck (although I reserve the right to mock them). I choose to spend my evening reading a book instead (The Portuguese Seaborne Empire) and talking to my children. I generally get my current events from the web.
The whole thing, including the hype, just makes me sick.
Amphipolis (b120ce) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:06 am_____________________________________________
Hannity and O’Reilly are locked in a deadly struggle to see who can be the first self-satisfied moron
But if they were of the left, I bet you’d find yourself saying, “well, they may be bombastic, but they’re also well-intentioned, compassionate and humane. So let them be.”
Beyond that, I love the way that so many liberals will impugn the intelligence of conservatives, particularly by conjuring up the image of “rednecks” in “trailer parks,” while sidestepping the fact that almost every interminably screwed-up (and excessively corrupt) city in the US (hello, Detroit, Michigan!), and almost every interminably screwed-up society in the world (hello, Greece!, hello, Argentina!, hello, Mexico!, etc!), often are greatly tilted to the left.
Mark (31bbb6) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:09 amColonel @150 – Good job by Joel in that clip. The hostility and fear on the part of the left and media (BIRM) show how worried they are about what is coming contrary to those who are minimizing these disclosures.
Media bootlicking gave Obama at least 10 points in 2008. ACORN, Ayers, Wright and any other potential damaging news or associations were minimized and quickly swept under the rug. There was no vetting. We have no transcript. We have no Illinois Senate records. He was not called to account on his Tony Rezko or Blago relationships. The radical causes funded by the Annenberg Challenge would have made Derrick Bell proud.
Also remember that Soledad O’Brien went nuts on Jodi Kantor over her Obama book. Soledad is a member of the Praetorian Guard.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:51 amRedEye is great.
Leviticus (ebddfb) — 3/8/2012 @ 11:25 am“But if they were of the left, I bet you’d find yourself saying, “well, they may be bombastic, but they’re also well-intentioned, compassionate and humane. So let them be.””
– Mark
No, you’d find me saying that they were obnoxious, smarmy morons – which I’ve said over and over about people like Olbermann and Ed Schultz. The difference is, I actually watch Fox from time to time – because, unlike MSNBC, it’s actually a relevant social force (albeit a destructive and manipulative one, as Amphipolis discusses above). I try to keep tabs on it because it’s influence is worrisome.
Leviticus (ebddfb) — 3/8/2012 @ 11:29 amhttp://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2012/03/rally-for-rush-just-how-stupid-is-wapos-alexandra-petri.html
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 11:37 amBeldar and JBS,
The only way to change under-40 liberal minds in today’s world is to bombard them with contrary information and opinion, because that’s how schools and the media influenced their minds in the first place. It’s Breitbart’s ADHD brand of journalism and it works.
Leviticus,
I don’t care for Hannity or O’Reilly, either, but I like Red Eye on those nights when I can tear myself away from the internet.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 11:37 amBooga booga!!!
Icy (76598a) — 3/8/2012 @ 11:46 am“Affirmative action has been an issue since segregation practices,” Holder said. “The question is not when does it end, but when does it begin … When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are entitled?””
MLK would be very proud.
Comment by daleyrocks — 3/8/2012 @ 8:26 am
— Proudly spinning in his grave. Holder actually said “people of color … are entitled”? Well, that’s a progressive for you; boldly proclaiming that entire segments of the population are incapable of progressing without help from the nanny state.
Icy (76598a) — 3/8/2012 @ 11:53 amMayBee — 3/7/2012 @ 7:13 pm
Any non-radical pals?
I’ve never heard that he did. Not beyond acquaintance.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/8/2012 @ 11:53 am#160 was for Leviticus
Icy (76598a) — 3/8/2012 @ 11:53 amDaleyrocks & elissa: I like and respect you both. Neither of you have responded to the substance of my observations, however. You, and others, have said, basically, that you enjoy reading stuff which confirms and further “informs” your existing beliefs about Obama. That’s fine, but it doesn’t change any votes.
The election is about votes. Further convincing the two of you that you shouldn’t vote for Obama is not a bad thing, but it’s a distraction.
When we pretend that the Left has “hidden” something that’s in fact been made very obvious already in MSM organs like the New York Times diminishes our credibility among those whose votes might be affected. The substance of what’s in this video wasn’t hidden, and even when focused upon, is still very unlikely to change any minds.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/8/2012 @ 11:57 amLeviticus:
How can you be worried about Fox News and not MSNBC?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:01 pmBeldar, actually, I think repeatedly hitting the same notes over and over has proven to be a powerful way to turn voters against Newt and Palin. I recall endless claims of disgrace about Newt, for example.
You wind up sucking up a lot of O2 and eventually narratives sink in.
You have more faith in Romney’s ability to GOTV than I do, then. I think rallying Republicans about Obama is in fact more critical than ever.
And I think this election will ride on the rust belt. We need people to understand what Critical Race theory is. What is the world it envisions? How stupid are the people who promote it?
This marries will with reminding people about Ayers and Rev Wright. It pulls them out from under the bus, to some extent.
I do think discussing how the MSM hides things… often mentioning them in some way anyhow, will fly over many heads. But there are more videos coming.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:04 pmDRJ, you wrote, “The only way to change under-40 liberal minds in today’s world is to bombard them with contrary information and opinion, because that’s how schools and the media influenced their minds in the first place.”
I agree with that if we’re talking about what Obama has done in office, or even if we’re talking about something genuinely new and previously unknown about his history before that.
This isn’t that. This is more of what was already known about Obama by anyone who cared to look in 2008. Bloggers like you, me, Patterico, and others were doing our best to bombard people with this sort of fact about Obama in 2008 as well. We persuaded some people; others are unpersuaded and and likely not persuadable by evidence of this sort.
What we have now that we lacked in 2008 is proof positive — through (non)performance — that Barack Obama is wholly incapable of adequate performance as POTUS. We have proof now — proof that we necessarily lacked in 2008 — that as president, this guy is a disaster. We have a combination of new problems (e.g., Obamacare) and aggravations of preexisting problems (e.g., Iran closing in on a nuke) which can and should be used to persuade anyone who’s persuadable.
The current proof is so much more powerful and relevant. Why do we need to waste breath on showing that Obama was a hard-left race-baiting radical in the 1990s at Harvard Law School when there’s ample evidence that he’s been a hard-left race-baiting radical as POTUS from 2009 to today?
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:09 pmWhy do we need to do this? Because many liberals and independents approve of and discredit people based on who they are and what they say, not what principles they believe in. Some will applaud Obama’s PC beliefs and actions but others (especially the kind who don’t read websites like this) will see the real Obama for the first time.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:21 pmFurthermore, if they see Obama has always been this way, they will be much more likely to believe it instead of accepting the media spin that this is just GOP sour grapes.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:24 pmHowever, I agree this isn’t the main argument against Obama’s re-election. Unemployment and the economy should be the GOP candidates’ focus.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:27 pmI read Derreck Bell’s “The Space Traders” so you don’t have to. click on my name for the link.
Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:29 pmDRJ, I don’t think the person you hypothesize — who sees “the real Obama for the first time” after viewing this video — exists.
I do think, however, that there are a lot of people who voted for Obama in 2008 who may reconsider their preferences in 2012 because of what’s happened since 2008. I hope those people will either vote GOP or, more likely, simply not vote at all, because they’re disillusioned with Obama’s performance in office.
Indeed, some of them will be disillusioned because he hasn’t been radical enough (Gitmo, etc.).
Others will be disillusioned because they’ll self-identify as rubes, i.e., they’ll realize that they were completely snookered by that whole “uniter not a divider/fiscal moderate” nonsense. But it won’t be evidence from 1992 that persuades those people either. And they’re the ones we should be trying to reach now.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:30 pmI agree this video won’t be the sole reason people change their minds about Obama but if my theory s correct that younger people need to be bombarded with information, it could play a role.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:35 pmBut the economy might improve, and I think we can cover both.
Furthermore, tactically, the MSM will be blasting Romney or whoever our nominee is. By bringing up Obama’s background, they will spend some time defending it that otherwise would be spent trashing our candidate.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:35 pmThe current proof is so much more powerful and relevant. Why do we need to waste breath on showing that Obama was a hard-left race-baiting radical in the 1990s at Harvard Law School when there’s ample evidence that he’s been a hard-left race-baiting radical as POTUS from 2009 to today?
Comment by Beldar — 3/8/2012 @ 12:09 pm
— Thread-winner! Move along.
Icy (76598a) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:43 pmI think Breitbart probably had something much more interesting to say and I’m not ready to move along. In fact, CNN’s interview with John Pollack is one of the most compelling examples of Breitbart’s point about how the MSM spins and attempts to decide what is and isn’t news. Instead of letting us see it, they argue for why it’s not worth seeing.
Yeah, Beldar has a point that Obama’s work in office is bad enough. Perhaps we don’t need more than that to decide whether to reelected him. But we need some kind of fight against the MSM. It needs to be organized and thoughtful instead of reactive to their every move.
there are much bigger things going on than which guy sits in the oval office.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:46 pm“Neither of you have responded to the substance of my observations, however.”
Beldar – I completely disagree. In no way were Obama’s associations or activities vetted by the media in any kind of detail as I pointed out above. I am very surprised that you believe they were.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:49 pm“The current proof is so much more powerful and relevant.”
Beldar – The current proof is not being provided by the left and the MSM (BIRM), just as it was being hidden in 2008, that’s why it is important to show Obama has been a fraud all along, protected by the media which has been unwilling to do its job.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 12:57 pm“Yeah, Beldar has a point that Obama’s work in office is bad enough. Perhaps we don’t need more than that to decide whether to reelected him. But we need some kind of fight against the MSM.”
Dustin – Exactly. The media and Obama are complicit. It is necessary to expose both.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 1:00 pmLong term, this stuff changes a lot of minds. It’s a constructive way to promote what is apparently a very long term battle. They will lie and lie, and once someone recognizes it, they can lie no more.
I think Beldar is immune to the lying. He got the message about Obama ages ago. That Obama was charmingly encouraging a Crit is no change to his view of Obama.
But to those who are still susceptible, it’s beneficial to constantly use whatever comes up. I disagree with Beldar that because the NYT discussed this that it costs credibility, but I do understand his point. I am assuming that there will be much more.
For example, Obama taught Critical Race theory and required the reading of some very radical stuff. At least that’s my understanding.
I’m assuming there is more coming.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 1:06 pmI’m not sure which is the bigger “untruth”, that the MSM is objective or that Fox is a reliable indicator of what conservatives think.
If anything, i like to watch greta, I think she is reasonably “balanced”, but often to a fault and will not “go for the jugular” when it is staring you in the face. Besides, she’s from Appleton.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/8/2012 @ 1:26 pmIf folks are looking for more, I found Aaron’s post on Bell to be hilarious.
Yeah, he already offered the link, but it’s hilarious.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 1:27 pmWell, the “hiding stuff” is helpful, if it makes people feel a little less ashamed of ditching Obama. But there still has to be someone to ditch him for. I don’t know if Mitt would be acceptable, I know Santorum could not. Newt would have to make some sense and have some direction to pull in swing votes.
Mitt does have the advantage of being Obamalite – fewer marxists/maoists in his coterie, a reputation (even if it doesn’t withstand scrutiny) of rescuing the bottom line. Republicans didn’t do themselves any favors the last week or so. Mitt might not be able to shake that business off.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/8/2012 @ 1:37 pmThere are some conservative commentators who still think (or say they think) that Obama is just not a very good president, and that links to Alinsky, etc. are a bunch of distraction and nonsense.
I agree, as I think I suggested before, that what we have seen so far is not anywhere near as dramatic as I expected from Brietbart’s announcement. Whether AB had an inflated opinion of it, or I/we overread into what he said, or there is more to come, I don’t know, but I hope it is possibility #3.
I don’t know what works to get through to people who are believing a lie. Maybe some people have studied this and actually have more knowledge, but to me, i have no clue as to what will “work the best”.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/8/2012 @ 1:38 pmOne thing I have observed, however, is at times it is easier to “win an argument” by not “winning the argument”. In other words, you don’t work to hear the other person say, “I was wrong, you are right”, you work to hear the other person say, “I realize something I did not see before…”; you allow them to “save face”, to agree with you but come out looking as if it was their own idea. I think this is called diplomacy. I saw it once when on a jury. The lone holdout was never going to say, “You’re right”, she needed a way to appear to change her mind based on her own evaluation of something not previously discussed.
I like and respect you too, Beldar. But I really do feel like we are talking past each other. I know quite a few people (whom I never considered to be kool ade drinkers) who unfortunately voted for Obama under the “oh, how bad could he possibly be?” theory. These people are now telling me they won’t vote for him again in 2012. Each cites a different reason for their change of heart.
Conversely, and interestingly, I know not one single person who didn’t vote for Obama in 2008 now saying they wish they had done so and that they now plan to vote for him in 2012. He is losing steam. I don’t know if he will lose enough steam to get him out of the White House. I sure hope so. That is why I try not to prejudge what old suppressed story, what newly exposed association, which campaign point, what video, what commercial, which figure of speech, which lie, what gaffe may end up being “the one” that reaches yet another former Obama voter–gives them their “aha” moment and releases them from the chains of the MSM approved narrative.
elissa (0cce36) — 3/8/2012 @ 1:41 pmI agree with what elissa said, and said very well.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 1:52 pmelissa made a good point: new converts to the Obama caucus are pretty much limited to liberal college students that were too young to vote in 2008. How many independents that voted for McCain last time are planning to vote for Obama this time? Any?
Icy (76598a) — 3/8/2012 @ 1:53 pmI know not one single person who didn’t vote for Obama in 2008 now saying they wish they had done so and that they now plan to vote for him in 2012
That is a major encouraging point.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/8/2012 @ 1:57 pm“You, and others, have said, basically, that you enjoy reading stuff which confirms and further “informs” your existing beliefs about Obama.”
Beldar – I think this is an unfair characterization of what I wrote above. I agree with you that the election is about votes and persuading people, but your belief that past events have already been discussed and add nothing to the discussion and we have enough material to work with to defeat Obama based on his poor current performance instead of dredging up the past is misguided. I did my research prior to the 2008 election and knew Obama was going to be a disaster, but most voters did not.
Remember that only a small portion of the population is as informed as the people who frequent political blogs. Neither Obama’s past nor his present is being vetted honestly by the vast majority of the media.
As an example, take your citation of Jodi Kantor’s January 2007 piece for the NY Times where she describes Obama comparing Derrick Bell to Rosa Parks. Bell was the first tenured black professor at Harvard law, but what the protest was about was Bell’s demand that Harvard Law hire a professor of color, because of their color. It wasn’t a demand for equality, it was a demand for a quota, hardly Rosa Parks type behavior. So no, I don’t think the NY Times covered it adequately.
During the 2008 campaign, the NY Times and other media spiked stories about Obama’s relationship with ACORN over the years.
Have the networks, NY Times or WaPo explained Obama’s relationship with Franklin Marshall Davis in any detail and who Davis was? Did they report on Obama’s support of infanticide bills in Illinois, gun control or bills to statistically govern police stops based on the racial composition of communities?
Has the MSM reported on Solyndra, the Black Panther Case, Fast & Furious (CBS has), the EPA’s social justice campaign, the DOJ’s resistance to fair elections, etc., etc.?
No, they have not for the most part. Threads can be traced from Obama’s community organizing days, through law school, through the Illinois Senate to the Oval Office and the MSM has tried to suppress or avoid those threads. That’s why you see the over the top reaction from the CNN clip the Colonel linked above illustrating their fear.
At CPAC Breitbart mentioned videos in the plural use of the word, so I do not think we’re done and said we would vet Obama this time around. I firmly believe it was not done by the bulk of the media last time and you have had occasional confessions of that fact.
The more sunlight the better.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 2:37 pm“Mitt does have the advantage of being Obamalite”
Plus he’s got that VAT everybody is waiting for.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 2:39 pm@ daleyrocks (#177 — 3/8/2012 @ 12:49 pm): You wrote:
I do not believe that. I’ve never said that. Rather, what I said in this very thread (#79 — 3/7/2012 @ 9:10 pm) was:
I suggest that before you make stuff up and attribute it to me as one of my “beliefs,” you read what I’ve actually written. When you falsely attribute views to me, it diminishes my considerable existing respect for you; it makes me quite cross; and it makes me despair of the possibility of further civil conversation with you on this topic. If you keep this up, eventually you’ll persuade me that we can’t converse civilly on any topic, and that would make me sad as well as cross.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/8/2012 @ 2:45 pmAnd I didn’t say the NYT covered Obama’s time at Harvard adequately. Rather, I described that article as “carefully spun.” Sheesh! Enough dishonesty. Quote me or paraphrase me accurately, or expect me to ignore you in the future.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/8/2012 @ 2:49 pm“I suggest that before you make stuff up and attribute it to me as one of my “beliefs,” you read what I’ve actually written. When you falsely attribute views to me, it diminishes my considerable existing respect for you; it makes me quite cross; and it makes me despair of the possibility of further civil conversation with you on this topic.”
Beldar – Do you getting cross like suggesting to me all I am doing is preaching to my own choir?
Let’s take it one step at a time.
“There isn’t anyone who will be convinced by this who wasn’t already convinced by the Ayers/Wright/Rekzo connections that were already obvious in 2008 to anyone who could penetrate the MSM information embargo.”
If there’s a media embargo, how would anybody know they have to penetrate it? That’s the crux of the problem. Your reasoning is circular. The media, to the extent they say anything says about Ayers/Wright/Rezko nothing to see here. Potential voter says Okey Doke. MSM and Obama declare victory. Game over.
Here is a link to Christian Adams describing why the Derrick Bell story is important.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 2:54 pmDo you mean getting cross
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 2:56 pmI’ve always found this as the Rosetta to understanding him;
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/08/obama-made-bell-required-reading-chicago
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:03 pmI’m not cross with those who insist on preaching to their own choir. I’m pointing out that it’s ineffective in winning elections.
I’m cross with you attributing beliefs to me that I do not hold, and that indeed are contrary to what I do believe, and to what I’ve already written here.
That ends my discussion with you, sir, for today and on this topic. If you’d like to convert this into a full scale grudge, then all you need do is continue to misrepresent what I’ve written, and you will succeed.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:05 pmHey, look!
There’s another straw over there!
Grasp for it!
Blockbuster?
Not even a Snap Pop thrown on the pavement.
It does, however, produce a loud echo in this little room.
Enjoy it.
[note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]
Larry Reilly (6e899d) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:15 pm“That ends my discussion with you, sir, for today and on this topic. If you’d like to convert this into a full scale grudge, then all you need do is continue to misrepresent what I’ve written, and you will succeed.”
Beldar – I’m not looking for any kind of grudge. My comments stand on their own. I believe you have misrepresented what I said earlier and I believe your own reasoning is circular.
Good day.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:16 pmGreat link, Narciso. I had never fully understood the context of that photo.
Now I understand how Obama was indoctrinating students. It’s disturbing to take that thought and consider his spending and his bowing to our enemies.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:17 pmHis actions in office, are in service to that very twisted world view that Bell and Ogletree tought him, and as I’ve pointed out at least one of his proteges, are now in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, although Adams may have flagged that first
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:22 pmdaleyrocks:
I think I was reasonably well informed about Obama and I worried he could be anything from a Marxist/socialist to a Bill Clinton-type politician. I think he won in part because he was so vague and nebulous that people could project their own beliefs, desires and expectations onto him.
I don’t think it’s a terrible thing that Americans hoped for the best in Obama, especially young people. We’re an optimistic nation and sometimes that means we get a rude awakening. My hope is that more Americans have learned the importance of being both hopeful and skeptical.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:24 pmI respectfully disagree, Beldar.
I believe that mudslinging wins elections. It’s a shame. Your focus on Obama’s actual performance in the past few years is so much more intelligent than a series of articles proving what a radical kook obama is, or at least how far he’ll go to placate radical kooks.
I believe, however, that the latter will prove very important to winning in 2012. Low info voters can accept that Obama is crazy and kooky. They may not be so prone to accept that he’s governing all that differently from how a centrist Republican would.
On foreign policy, I can point to Iran and the apology tour, but Obama wins the fight by mentioning his gutsy call. Unfair, but true. On the economy, I can point to the deficit, but Obama can point to an obstructionist GOP (this is ridiculous, I realize).
What Obama will have a hard time spinning away is if we isolate him and attack him repeatedly, drip drip drip fashion, with truth about how he wasn’t vetted for his radical ties.
As many like MD have mentioned, this gives an ‘out’ to those who invested in Obama and want to save face in admitting the sea levels kept rising… so to speak.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:25 pmI actually thought Obama would be a lot worse than he turned out to be. Particularly on foreign policy. He hasn’t been very good, but he’s been more like what I expected Hillary would be (perhaps she’s the reason).
Character attacks work. More than that, Obama’s campaign will be offering tons of it, so that opens the door.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:26 pmAfter seeing Joel Pollack on CNN with Soledad O’brien I am starting to rethink this whole roll out by Breitbart.
I think they know exactly what they are doing. Not that I doubted that, I was just underwhelmed at first (which I now think was intentional).
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:33 pmHe handled Soledad very, very well, though Noodles.
I get where you’re coming from, though. I think we’re going to see a long series of videos like this, but not on this one topic.
There probably will be something more powerful at some point, but I think the thrust will be a drawn out look at various aspects of this man’s past, and how the MSM goes nuts (as Soledad did) to cover his ass.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:36 pmI really like Joel Pollack. I think he’s going to be a star!
Soledad just depresses me. She gets paid for this? Really? I hate the MFM.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:43 pmAt CPAC Breitbart mentioned videos in the plural use of the word, so I do not think we’re done and said we would vet Obama this time around. I firmly believe it was not done by the bulk of the media last time and you have had occasional confessions of that fact.
I don’t know anyone who voted for Obama the first time and are so disappointed by him that they won’t vote for him this time around. Anecdotal, but my co-workers who voted for him did so, proudly, because of color. They have no plans to do any different but are just as thrilled to have the opportunity to cast their vote for him again.
In reality, I think the release of Breitbart’s videos about Obama will have little impact to the greater population. I just don’t think the desire to know more is there, nor the openness or curiosity to find out more.
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:49 pm“My hope is that more Americans have learned the importance of being both hopeful and skeptical.”
DRJ – I agree. Since I live in a very liberal area I had too many friends believe his hype, that he is a pragmatic, post-racial, centrist candidate and not the most liberal Senator who campaigned to the left of Hillary in the primaries and had all this strange stuff in his past. He took a lot of wishy washy Republican votes from my area.
Just think about most readers of the NY Times, they have no idea there is another truth out there, because they automatically believe what the NY Times feeds them even if it is completely full of crap. If the NY Times said Ayers, Wright and Rezko were not problems for Obama, trying to convince a Times reader there might be more to the story was like arguing with a brick wall. Hear no evil/See no evil.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:49 pm“I really like Joel Pollack. I think he’s going to be a star!”
Joel ran against my Congress Loon, Jan Schakowsky, but lost, in 2010.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:51 pmShe’s a Harvard grad, although she didn’t get around to finishing her degree for 12 years,
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:52 pmFor anyone who may not already know– Joel Pollack is a pretty brave and gutsy guy in his own right. In 2010 he ran as the R opponent to the execrable Representative Jan Schakowsky in the Illinois 9th district. No one expected him to beat her–and he didn’t–but he ran an intelligent and professional and effective campaign which got noticed and caused Schakowsky to get off her butt, get out on the hustings, and actually work for votes for a change. Joel received a lot more votes than people expected and he showed Jan and the machine democrats that when the truth is out there and she is challenged, she is much more vulnerable and less “beloved” by the constituents than she thought.
elissa (b47460) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:52 pmOn foreign policy, I can point to Iran and the apology tour, but Obama wins the fight by mentioning his gutsy call. Unfair, but true.
Not true. There was nothing gutsy about that, as anyone with more than one cell would have made the same decision. It was no more of a foreign policy triumph than finishing 7th in a Coral Gables neighborhood pinochle tournament.
JD (516dcc) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:52 pmJD – On foreign policy, don’t forget about Obama raping Honduras right out of the box.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 3:57 pmdaleyrocks, maybe you should move just a few miles north and escape from the Peoples Republic of Schakowsky. But before suggesting that I guess we’d better hope that the new redistricting didn’t permenently muck up the 10th, too.
elissa (b47460) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:01 pmNothing like propping up a wannabe dlcktater.
JD (516dcc) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:02 pmI realize it’s BS, JD.
What’s true is that for many out there Obama can refute foreign policy criticism with that gutsy call BS and it’ll work with a lot of people who haven’t been paying attention.
Honduras is one of many great examples of how Obama was on the wrong side of many issues. But a lot of people will be thinking about the Gutsy Call (that I agree was a no brainer). In fact, it’s worse than you say, as Obama hemmed and hawed before making the call.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:04 pmRemember Hollywood has his back, as does the MSM. I expect quite a show.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:05 pmIran – he sat on the sidelines. Syria – sat on the sidelines. In both, he watched civilians gt slaughtered. In Libya, after watching a slaughter, he entered into a non kinetic military action and gave the finger to the Constitution. In Afghanistan, he is running away declaring victory in retreat. He cornholed the peole of Honduras. Epic failure. I hope he tries out the gutsy call nonsense. It will be insulting to anyone that does not drop to their knees for Teh Won.
JD (516dcc) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:08 pmHad it been a part of a broad and comprehensive media coverage in 2008, seeing Obama in action in that setting would not have surprised me. It would have been just one more dot to connect. (Like many people here I already knew that there were plenty of sound reasons that Obama should not be elected president, so seeing the tape would not have altered my vote.) But it was not part of broad media coverage was it?
Do you believe that if it had been released and he had been properly vetted, it would have swayed anyone? Most here had indeed already seen other red flags, but to those who were ardent supporters from the get-go, how would a more timely release of the video during the campaign have even mattered? Does it not seem that more voters were less focused on his policies and instead were casting their vote for his image?
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:16 pm“daleyrocks, maybe you should move just a few miles north and escape from the Peoples Republic of Schakowsky.”
elissa – I got coeds in my district. Can you say the same?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:17 pmIsn’t Jan’s husband a convicted felon?
JD (516dcc) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:28 pmComment by elissa — 3/8/2012 @ 1:41 pm
The most frustrating thing of all was seeing those quite a few people step in front of that mac truck coming up the hill.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:32 pmYes, but he did for the cause, to fund progressive enterprises, well that’s his story, and he’s sticking to it,
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:35 pmOne if my best friends is an uber lib, but not the kind that hates conservatives for having their beliefs.
When Sarah Palin came out as VP he called the move “cynical”. His blinders were on so tight he could not see how this word could be applied to the Dems nominating Obama.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:39 pmNoodles – calling opponents cynical is one of Barcky’s go-to rhetorical tics.
JD (516dcc) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:42 pmABC The Note about the video: (by Jake Tapper, March 7 2:27 pm)
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/video-emerges-of-obama-in-1991-rallying-for-diversity-at-harvard-law-school/
Jake Tapper says part of the video was in a frontline report in 2008.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/choice2008/view/ (about 29:30 minutes into the report)
Of course the thing is, lots of things can appear a little, but not get noticed. Jake Tapper in fact also noted today that he asked Barack Obama a question about Joseph Kony late last year.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/president-obama-talks-about-joseph-kony/?=id2
I found in my e-mail: 5 Best Columns from The Atlantic Wire Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:14 AM
referring to this column: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-worthy-mission-to-get-joseph-kony/2011/10/17/gIQAny5YsL_story.html
Michael Gerson on Obama’s African intervention Republican presidential candidates quickly denounced Obama’s decision to deploy 100 U.S. military advisers to pursue Joseph Kony and the Lord’s Resistance Army in central Africa last week. Both Michele Bachmann and Rush Limbaugh at once criticized it and admitted they needed to know more about the LRA. Had they done their research, they would have found that “the LRA is a brutal rebel group headed by a messianic madman. Its victims — captured boys turned into soldiers, captured girls forced into sexual slavery, villagers put to the machete — have been the focus of activism by Christian organizations and human rights groups for decades,” writes Michael Gerson in The Washington Post. The leader, Kony, operates in an “ungoverned border region” so we hear of the atrocities through rumors, not emotion-stirring photos. “When I was there in 2006, I talked to a boy forced by LRA rebels to execute his neighbors in order to break his ties with the past and to deaden his sympathy.” Obama is sending advisers only to “help coordinate the efforts of regional governments… this is not an American humanitarian intervention. It is American aid for an African humanitarian intervention.” There are challenges, but because the LRA is led by one, single charismatic leader, they are vulnerable to dissolution upon that leader’s death. “If a humanitarian military operation is ever justified, it is justified in this case. The risk to American troops is small, the goal is realistic and the moral stakes are high,” Gerson says.
In fact, I remember reading this.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:44 pmCongrats, Sammy.
JD (516dcc) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:46 pmDustin:
Maybe the point isn’t the content Breitbart.com releases — although that’s an important element — but the media response it generates.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 4:51 pmDRJ,
Do you anticipate the media’s response to be anything different than what it already has been re Obama? And, if so, why?
It would seem their response is already set in stone…just the timing and how to couch it would seem the unknowns, but the heart of it, already done. Or perhaps they decide to collectively ignore it.
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:01 pmDRJ, that may well be the case. Intended or not, the media response by CNN was both amazing and pathetic. 4:1 interview with Soledad getting wikipedia tips over her earpiece? Incredible hostility? Why not just put the info out there, if it’s so harmless?
I hope you’re right. I think we’re going to see that movie and many displays regarding ‘a look back and Obama’s triumph’ compared to whichever candidate we put forward’s lack of foreign policy experience. There’s no doubt in my mind they hope to exploit that experience for politics. Will Guantanamo’s prison still be in use? In many ways, I have to admit Obama flip flopped the right way. I expected a pullout and a shut down and some disasters.
Don’t get me wrong: Foreign policy is one way I think Romney, Santorum, and Newt all trump Obama hands down, but then again, the 52% picked Obama over Mccain.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:02 pmCNN/Soledad, notwithstanding… (NYT? LAT? WaPo?)
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:05 pmYes, he let the Seals, ‘air raid villages’ although Abbotabad is more of a city, then again he helped delivered Egypt and Libya to AQ,
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:09 pm==Do you believe that if it had been released and he had been properly vetted, it would have swayed anyone?==
Obviously I don’t know. None of us ever will. But regardless of “sway”, vetting of a potential POTUS was the only proper thing to do. And in his case it never happened and still isn’t being done by the MSM. My sense is that he was probably going to win once he got the nomination. People voted on a vapor, voted for a dream, not for a real man. There were just too many “wonderful” aspects to his life story that the media had created out of whole cloth and presented and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated. (Smartest man to run for the presidency evah. Constitutional Scholar. Greatest orator since Lincoln. Deep and serious thinker.)
And then, heck, who was *not* impressed by his 2004 convention speech (There is no blue America and no red America–there is the United States of America. Good stuff that everyone wanted to hear.) That’s what continued to resonate in many people’s brains four years later because few of his very real warts were ever allowed to be shown and developed into mainstream narrative. Relevant info on his family background and about his meaningful relationships, other than what HE chose to release or publish, was non-existent for most voters who primarily rely on the networks and TIME Magazine for their news. Finally, there were just too many folks who could not see McCain in the role as President. Face it, that 2008 election– start to finish– was one of the biggest clusterf@@ks of all time.
But had proper and basic vetting of political newcomer Obama occurred during the primaries and continued apace through the election how could it not have made at least some difference to some voters? And had vetting proceeded wouldn’t his eventual election at least have seemed more like a conscious and genuine choice by the American voting public, rather than a massive bamboozle upon them?
elissa (b47460) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:25 pmYes, and he gave that speech, because he had his man, Axelrod dispatch his two strongest primary and party rivals, Hull and Ryan,
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:33 pm==I got coeds in my district. Can you say the same?==
Careful there, dude. Sandy Fluke has kinda given the image of “coeds” a new look.
elissa (b47460) — 3/8/2012 @ 5:36 pmelissa, you wrote (#185 — 3/8/2012 @ 1:41 pm):
My respectful and non-rhetorical question to you is this:
Of those repenting Obama voters, and of all the different reasons for their changes of heart, did a single one name something which Obama did before he became president? Did a single one name something which Obama did in the 1990s, but about which they’ve just now become aware?
Or are they citing a variety of reasons which have, as a common thread, that they relate to Obama’s job performance or something that’s happened since he became president?
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:28 pmDana:
No, I don’t. The media is very predictable, but my point is the story may be both Obama’s vetting and the predictable liberal elite and media response — not only now but especially during the Presidential campaign.
I think we got a hint of it with Breitbart.com’s initial release that included Ogletree’s admission they hid Obama’s role/actions. That is the biggest part of this story to me, at least so far. Now we have proof Obama’s supporters intentionally hid information about him. That may not be a touchdown but it’s a good start to me.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:32 pmBeldar,
I think you’re underestimating the degree to which some voters make decisions based on feelings instead of logic, so even old stories can resonate with them if it hits them emotionally. In addition, I think you’re overestimating the degree to which some voters know about Obama’s radical background, especially those who aren’t into cable news or political websites.
IMO the thing Breitbart did best was find ways to make the mainstream media publish subjects they tried very hard to minimize or not publish at all.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 6:54 pmComment by Dustin — 3/8/2012 @ 3:25 pm
I can point to Iran and the apology tour, but Obama wins the fight by mentioning his gutsy call. Unfair, but true.
Comment by JD — 3/8/2012 @ 3:52 pm
Not true. There was nothing gutsy about that, as anyone with more than one cell would have made the same decision.
John McCain might not have (because he didn’t want to invade Pakistan.)
In fact, I think, Barack Obama was maybe the only candidate running for president in 2008 who said he would go into Pakistan, without the consent of its government, to get Osama bin Laden.
The Democratic debate in New Hampshire on ABC, Saturday night, January 5, 2008.
MR. GIBSON: ….Osama bin Laden, as he pointed out, has said it is his duty to try to get nuclear weapons….it was you who said in your foreign policy speech that you would go into western Pakistan if you had actionable intelligence to go after him whether or not the Pakistani government agreed. Do you stand by that?
SEN. OBAMA: I absolutely do stand by it, Charlie….
….MR. GIBSON: I’m going to go to the others in a moment, but what you just outlined is essentially the Bush doctrine: we can attack if we want to, no matter the sovereignty of the Pakistanis.
SEN. OBAMA: No, that — that is not the same thing because here we have a situation where al Qaeda, a sworn enemy of the United States that killed 3,000 Americans and is currently plotting to do the same, is in the territory of Pakistan. We know that. And you know, this is not speculation. This is not a situation where we anticipate a possible threat in the future. And my job as commander in chief will be to make sure that we strike anybody who would do America harm when we have actionable intelligence to do so.
Notice that here, unlike the case later with Sarah Palin, Charlie Gibson defined the “Bush doctrine”, which existed mainly in his own head or that of some person ABC consulted. He defined it for everyone that day.
First Presidential debate between McCain and Obama,moderated by Jim Lehrer of the Newshour on PBS Friday, September 26, 2008
OBAMA: …..Number three, we’ve got to deal with Pakistan, because Al Qaida and the Taliban have safe havens in Pakistan, across the border in the northwest regions, and although, you know, under George Bush, with the support of Senator McCain, we’ve been giving them $10 billion over the last seven years, they have not done what needs to be done to get rid of those safe havens.
And until we do, Americans here at home are not going to be safe……
MCCAIN: …..Now, on this issue of aiding Pakistan, if you’re going to aim a gun at somebody, George Shultz, our great secretary of state, told me once, you’d better be prepared to pull the trigger.
I’m not prepared at this time to cut off aid to Pakistan. So I’m not prepared to threaten it, as Senator Obama apparently wants to do, as he has said that he would announce military strikes into Pakistan.
We’ve got to get the support of the people of — of Pakistan. He said that he would launch military strikes into Pakistan.
Now, you don’t do that. You don’t say that out loud. If you have to do things, you have to do things, and you work with the Pakistani government…….
Sammy Finkelman (0f573e) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:01 pmIn spite of that, I still voted for McCain. There were broader considerations.
Sammy Finkelman (0f573e) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:04 pmxoxo, Leviticus
MayBee (081489) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:07 pmDRJ, how do you explain Ogletree’s statement that he doesn’t care if “they” (referring to Obama’s political enemies) get this video now?
If this was indeed a meaningful “admission,” what accounts for him volunteering it on video in front of a large audience? Temporary insanity?
I do not believe this is a meaningful “admission.” I think any argument to that effect will be met with laughter and derision by everyone on the left and most people in the center, just as Ogletree was already laughing as he made the “admission.” I believe even calling it an “admission” — without at least noting such contextual facts as his own laughter, and without noting that it was something he was broadcasting to an audience (rather than trying to conceal) — is unwise and unfair.
Ogletree’s line wasn’t an admission, it was an exaggeration (in part an exaggeration of his own continuing relevance to Obama, I suspect), delivered as a boast, a weak punchline offered to get a chuckle from a friendly audience.
Of course they didn’t want this sort of video to become a matter of close public scrutiny, no more than they wanted the Rev. Wright videos to be closely scrutinized or imputed to Obama. Of course they minimize these inconvenient truths, explain them away, spin them like crazy, change the subject, engage in flagrant double standards, et cetera, et cetera. Of course the mainstream media does all of this on a daily basis as willing, eager sell-outs to the Cult of Obama.
But to claim that this video was “hidden” before the 2008 election? I don’t see a factual basis for that, regardless of Ogletree’s so-called “admission.” The actual facts seem quite the contrary — and to my knowledge, no one has yet articulated any contrary factual theory for how Ogletree, alone or with others, could could have successfully “hidden” this video until after the 2008 election.
So if we’re factual, we’re back to “Mainstream media tends to ignore facts that might reflect badly on Obama.” Well, great. Man bites dog, water is still wet. And while we’ve been having this discussion about something that happened on the Harvard campus in 1992, the national debt has grown by how many billions? How many more micrograms of weapons-grade fissile material have the Iranians put aside?
Hell, if we’re going to double-down on the “cover-up” angle, we should be picketing the Los Angeles Times, which actually has suppressed video.
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:08 pm(Meant “dog bites man,” but that’s probably obvious to most.)
Beldar (bdfdef) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:16 pmIt’s kind of tricky, considering what happened with the raid on Bajaur in 2006, where Zawahiri was supposedly staying, (actually he had been there for a time) and the backlash that arose,
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:21 pmYou may be right about Ogletree but I think liberals hide stories they don’t want told by keeping them out of the mainstream media. They laugh because they know they can get away with it, and they are so sure of their control of the media and the narrative that they even boast about doing it.
As for the really important issues, I wish every American voter were preoccupied with the national debt and the Iranian weapons program — because if they were then Republicans would almost always win elections. But some of them aren’t and Republicans probably need some of those voters in order to win.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:26 pmBarack Obama, in 2008, had an absolutely horrible political background. In fact, I think many people maybe can’t imagine how horrible it was. I mean he represented some of the “high crime” area of Chicago, and everything he did was to keep the social pathology going – all kinds of social pathology.
He played along with all kinds of extreme false demagoguery. There was nothing anybody could say that would shock, that would revolt, that would repel, Barack Obama.
He kept his reservations mostly to himself. You could maybe notice reservations only by the fact he didn’t repeat things himself. But you’d have to be paying quite close attention.
For instance, even, what he didn’t say about the Iraq war.
If people believed things, he didn’t argue. He didn’t try to disabuse anybody of anything – at least anybody whom it would be inconvenient for him to disagree with.
But all this did not deeply affect him. As he rose in public life, he dropped a lot of things. Not all. Some remain.
Sammy Finkelman (0f573e) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:34 pmNo he went along with most every indictment of the Iraq war, at least after 2006, including the libel
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:41 pmof Haditha, he opposed the Iraq War, back in 2002,
but curiously he supported the conflict after he got into the Senate, as usual that wasn’t about principle, more the interests of some associates
of his benefactor Rezko,
==Of those repenting Obama voters, and of all the different reasons for their changes of heart, did a single one name something which Obama did before he became president? Did a single one name something which Obama did in the 1990s, but about which they’ve just now become aware?
Or are they citing a variety of reasons which have, as a common thread, that they relate to Obama’s job performance or something that’s happened since he became president?==
Beldar–a good and fair question but one that I don’t think is possible to neatly parse into “before election facts” and “after election facts”. That is because so much of how one views his performance relates to what you thought you knew about the candidate’s goals and values and what you were expecting to occur beforehand. And that returns us to the thorny issue of many voters clearly not knowing who the candidate really was when they elected him because he was protected rather than vetted.
Bear in mind that these people I referenced are for the most part not my nearest and dearest relatives and friends, but are business associates, business owners, and/or good neighbors with whom we deal, work closely, break bread, and travel occasionally. They range from moderate Democrats (not rabid progressives) to left-leaning independents. They are educated and relatively wealthy. I would say that the three biggest issues for the (as you call them) “repenters”, although not always explained in exactly the same way are: 1.– vastly under- anticipated the brutality and depth of forced government invasiveness (regulations of business and energy/Obamacare, accompanied by a questionable Justice Dept.) 2. economy–the debt–(the almost immediate ill conceived stimulus which included bizarre waste, subsidies and bailing out mostly the wrong people, and 3. the whole foreign policy lack of leadership thing where America looks weak and ineffectual, is still in wars he promised to end and has added some new ones, the Syria-Iran- Israel mess. (Quite a few of these folks are Jews who are genuinely astounded at how anti-Israel his administration is.)
elissa (b47460) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:43 pmpeople understand that bin laden would’ve been caught no matter who was president so when president rapey acts like a big bad terrorist killer he just looks silly
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:47 pmI think Sammy pretty much has Obama right.
The guy is nearly a nihilist and won’t disabuse any supporters of whatever they have decided Obama is.
That is a great way to say Obama is a terrible leader. These past few years have seen many failures. One reason is that our president doesn’t run a tight ship. That he is blissfully supporting tax cuts for 98% or critical race theory or cutting the deficit in half or bombing Pakistan or shutting down Gitmo… he’s really just trying to con people into supporting him. His instincts are liberal, but he is a very weak leader.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:47 pm115. Comment by daleyrocks — 3/8/2012 @ 12:11 am
Sammy hasn’t watched the Hannity clip yet, but he’ll opine on it anyway.
It’s not such a terrible handicap.
In his 1991 speech at Harvard, does he repeat the things other people have said? (We’d need that video too)
Or does he say, other, more acceptable things – even if they are really lies or very questionable half truths?
Do you get from Barack Obama’s little speech, any idea of what the things were that Professor Derrick Bell usually said??
Sammy Finkelman (0f573e) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:52 pm“It’s not such a terrible handicap.”
Sammy – If it’s not a handicap, you should be able to answer your own questions and also tell me what was in the clip since it was obviously much longer than just the protest video.
Go.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 7:59 pmProposed summary:
1) The video that was released was not as powerful as people expected, unclear if more is to come which will meet our expectations/hopeful/wishful thinking
2) Some people, such as Beldar, doubt this line of argument will be effective (is this simply because “the past is passed” no matter what is found, or that Beldar doesn’t think anything new very dramatic will be found??)
3) Others, not knowing for sure what will be effective and that people aren’t always rational, are for showing old stuff, new stuff, any stuff and hope something gets enough attention to cause people to change their vote
4) not explicitly mentioned that I recall (though it may have been) is the concern that too many complaints just turns into a background hum that people start to ignore, hence the argument to choose carefully what battle lines to draw
5) most of us have not spent the last 40 years learning to hate the America that is and subvert current society
6) most of us probably like what King said about looking forward to the descendants of slaves and descendants of slave owners living together in community, rather than what Holder said about expecting atonement for past sin to persist until eternity, or longer.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:04 pmmost of us have not spent the last 40 years learning to hate the America that is and subvert current society
a lot of us have racked up a good almost-four-years though
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:07 pmI think the best is putting conflicting comments in immediate juxtaposition. comments about a new kind of washington, then statements on one side of an issue before and another side later.
Perhaps some video of the ocean lapping against the shoreline, shoreline then, shoreline now, no appreciable change.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:08 pmExcept the likes of Obama, savaged us when attacks moved into Pakistani territory ‘air raiding villages’ demagogued against the TSP and Gitmo that were used to piece together, the leads that led to Abbotabad. Back during the Civil War, they would called him a Copperhead.
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:25 pmMD:
Subtle but clever.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:29 pmThe only point i ever try to make with repenters is this. Make sure you cast a vote in November for the good guys. Do not sit this one out in a fit of pique because “voting is hard.” Make amends for your stupidity.
Gazzer (4bb621) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:43 pmComment by happyfeet — 3/8/2012 @ 7:47 pm
people understand that bin laden would’ve been caught no matter who was president so when president rapey acts like a big bad terrorist killer he just looks silly
No, it was not inevitable. Somebody could have decided to tell the Pakistanis, and that would have been the end of it, and he would have escaped. Now, of course, you’d have to be pretty foolish to do that but it was possible.
And I think also they missed detecting him before.
In this connection, it should be mentioned that President Obama has destroyed the terrorist interrogation system. We no longer intertrogate captured terrorists. In fact we no longer really try to capture them.
At least we got documents hat were in that house in Abbotabad, which has just been finally demolished by the Pakistani government. Evidently they were afraid there might still be some secrets hidden in the walls. I’m speaking about their rogue intelligence agency.
Obama sided with, I think, Gen. David Petraeus against Def Sect Gates, about not doing an air strike, but doing a raid instead, although that was more because he wanted to be able to be sure bin Laden was there then it was about gathering intelligence.
Actually, killing bin Laden, or setting up the raid in such a way that he was highly likely to be killed, was a mistake. If he surrendered, there would, from that fact alone, be a very good chance he would talk.
If they would have taken bin Laden alive, they might have found out who his sponsors and protectors were. And I don’t mean by torturing him. You just could make it in his interest maybe to talk, or inadvertantly reveal something. Even a 25% chance is worth taking.
Sammy Finkelman (0f573e) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:48 pmDerrick Bell, who President Obama compared to Rosa Parks, is instead yet another radical racist Jooooo hater in Obama’s circle of influence.
Nothing to see here.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:49 pmi still don’t see what difference rapey made Mr. Sammy – if Meghan’s coward daddy had been in the White House I think it would have gone pretty much the same… he didn’t have the balls to interrogate prisoners either
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:53 pmWell there was nowhere we could really take him, much of the evidence was invalidated by the revelation we knew it was there, Yes I disliked that part about McCain, that’s why I was for Guiliani.
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:57 pmin future we should just let the military do its job, and let military intelligence do its job and tell they CIA not to trouble its pretty little head and they can just watch gay porn and order some tasty thai from that place what has the luscious delivery boys they like
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/8/2012 @ 8:59 pm250, 251
115. Comment by daleyrocks — 3/8/2012 @ 12:11 am
Sammy hasn’t watched the Hannity clip yet, but he’ll opine on it anyway.
250. Comment by Sammy Finkelman — 3/8/2012 @ 7:52 pm
SF: It’s not such a terrible handicap.
SF: In his 1991 speech at Harvard, does he repeat the things other people have said? (We’d need that video too)
SF: Or does he say, other, more acceptable things – even if they are really lies or very questionable half truths?
SF: Do you get from Barack Obama’s little speech, any idea of what the things were that Professor Derrick Bell usually said??
251. Comment by daleyrocks — 3/8/2012 @ 7:59 pm
“It’s not such a terrible handicap.”
Sammy – If it’s not a handicap, you should be able to answer your own questions and also tell me what was in the clip since it was obviously much longer than just the protest video.
Go.
Asking the question is itself very good.
I think the answers are No, Yes and No, but I’d like to know a little bit more.
http://www.nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/03/obama-hannity-harvard-race-video-yawn.html?imw=Y says:
Pollak, Shapiro, and Hannity then chastised the media, or Buzzfeed, which scooped the Breitbart story, for not including in the clip (1) a shot of Obama hugging Derrick Bell and (2) not also releasing a video of Charles Ogletree, “Barack Obama’s mentor” according to Breitbart, saying of the video at a conference, “Of course we hid this throughout the 2008 campaign. I don’t care if they find this now.”
This article, by the way, contains the claim that Breitbart! sat on it for four years.
Sammy Finkelman (0f573e) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:07 pmAh New York Magazine, reiterates every meme we’ve debunked in two days, Journalism is not simply dead, it’s gone zombie.
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:12 pmThis is probably the most sober assessment of what we face with him,
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/293014/re-obama-crits-andrew-c-mccarthy
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:18 pm261. Comment by narciso — 3/8/2012 @ 8:57 pm
Well there was nowhere we could really take him,
They were going to keep him on board a ship, transferring him from ship to ship as necessary, like the man without a country.
http://www.bartleby.com/310/6/1.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Without_a_Country
There was a plan actually for imprisoning Osama bin Laden – what there wasn’t was a realistic plan for capturing him. The burial they did was basically the plan for burying him if he did aboard a ship and it was done from the ship to which he was to be taken.
much of the evidence was invalidated by the revelation we knew it was there,
You mean the value was diminished by the fact it became known we knew?? I’m not exactly sure what you are talking about.
Yes I disliked that part about McCain, that’s why I was for Guiliani.
Giuliani wasn’t what he was some years before..
And then he staked all on Florida. By the time Florida voted, he was no longer a top candidate.
Sammy Finkelman (0f573e) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:24 pmThat’s both a very good and terrifying read. Thanks for the link narciso.
elissa (b47460) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:24 pmWhy bother with this sort of stuff?
If all you’ve got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
If you’ve got this hitherto obscure tape, it must be something very effective.
Breitbart was a big believer in video, and there’s not too much video of Obama’s association with radicals. You heard about Wright, Ayers and Khalidi etc, but you didn’t see them together with Obama..
Sammy Finkelman (0f573e) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:39 pmThis is just the beachhead, the first wave, more will arise, Smiley, the newest member of the Journolist, sort of a Kramerica intern at NY Mag,
narciso (87e966) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:42 pmis just learning the template.
Perhaps some video of the ocean lapping against the shoreline, shoreline then, shoreline now, no appreciable change.
Or showing maybe that the beach had eroded. A house is closer to the shore now than before.
Sammy Finkelman (0f573e) — 3/8/2012 @ 9:44 pmComment by daleyrocks — 3/8/2012 @ 8:49 pm
Derrick Bell, who President Obama compared to Rosa Parks, is instead yet another radical racist Jooooo hater in Obama’s circle of influence.
Nothing to see here
Not the way it is. (probably)
It needs to be packaged together with tape of Derrick Bell, or (obviously old) tape of people discussing Derrick Bell’s and his ideas.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/derrickbell
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/34630-1
Faces at the Bottom of the Well
Sep 24, 1992
C-SPAN
Professor Bell discussed his book, Faces at the Bottom of the Well, published by Basic Books, which addressed the problem of racism in America and the class differences involved in discrimination against minorities. In the book, he discusses the civil rights movement in American society, and concludes that racism is permanent, and will always be part of society.
Maybe there’s something there.
And this. I think Derrick Bell was on this program (or he wouldn’t have turned up in a search) and it’s very contemporaneous with Barack Obama’s speechlet.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/15626-1
The State of Black America Report
Jan 8, 1991
National Urban League
Mr. Jacob gave the sixteenth annual State of Black America address, in which he characterized black Americans as being in a “permanent recession,” and urged the U.S. government to stimulate the economy to promote economic growth among minorities. Blacks, who Mr. Jacob said will fare the worst from a poor economy, need the Bush Administration and Congress’ aid in helping the economy, or else class and racial divisions will widen further in American society. Mr. Jacob also urged Congress pass civil rights legislation introduced the previous week, and said that the burden of fighting a war in the Persian Gulf would fall on blacks, Hispanics and women, as nearly half of the members of the armed forces are in these categories. Panel members gave brief remarks following Mr. Jacob’s speech.
1 hour, 27 minutes |
Sammy Finkelman (0f573e) — 3/8/2012 @ 10:11 pm