#StupidityWatch: Liberals claim GOP talking about “urban vote” = “raaacism”

Posted by: ST on November 15, 2012 at 9:42 am

This gets so bleeping tiresome.  And is a point loudly echoed by liberal icon/hero Chris Matthews of MSDNC infamy – via Newsbusters’ Noel Sheppard:

The list of words MSNBC’s Chris Matthews believes are racist if uttered by a conservative got longer on Wednesday.

You can now add “urban” which offended Matthews when Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) said it during an interview Monday, but didn’t bother the Hardball host in the slightest when Salon’s Joan Walsh said it on his own program two days later (video follows with transcribed highlights and commentary):

“There’s more of this dog whistle crap going on,” said Matthews before he introduced guests Walsh and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Cynthia Tucker. “Here’s Paul Ryan expressing his surprise at the pro-Obama turnout in an interview Monday.”

In the video clip, Ryan said, “I think the surprise was some of the turnout, some of the turnout in urban areas which definitely gave President Obama the big margin to win this race.”

Pretty innocuous, wouldn’t you say?

Not for Matthews who thinks everything uttered by a Republican is racist.

“This guy Paul Ryan, who I still don’t think is right for primetime yet by any means, talking about the urban vote,” fumed Matthews. “No, they won the other side because they got the most, because they won fair and square which is the first thing Ryan said.”

“Why did he have to go step on his own headline ‘They won fair and square’ by saying, ‘Oh it was the black vote?’” Matthews preposterously asked. “Basically, that’s what he was saying.”

Really? So if a conservative talks about urban, suburban, and ex-urban voters just like anyone else might, he or she is being racist?

But of course!

I spent a good bit of the evening on Twitter last night countering Matthews’ and his fellow race-baiters, pointing out how the mainstream media itself has used variations of the term “urban voter” for quite some time now.  They, of course, have never been called out about on any “racism” nonsense. But Paul Ryan does and all of a sudden it’s raaaacism? Let’s also not forget how often we have been reminded over the years by concern troll Democrat “analysts” and “strategists” of the GOP’s disadvantages with … the so-called “urban vote.”  Yet don’t let a GOPer get caught talking about the same thing or, well, you know what will happen.

By the same token, there is this, which I posed to Twitter and Facebook friends last night also: If we are to automatically infer racism when the GOP says “urban”,  should we also assume the left are bigoted against country folk when they say the word “rural”?

I mean, really – isn’t this supposed to work both ways?

Oh, wait. I forgot. This is the media and the far left (but I repeat myself). Consistency is sure as heck not exactly their hallmark.

Lastly, since when did “urban vote” automatically mean “black vote”? Sheppard wonders as well:

Do only blacks live in cities in America? There are no whites in Manhattan, Boston, or Philadelphia?

Facts are very, very stubborn things.

So, let’s see – I guess Urban Outfitters should change their name, Keith Urban should start referring to himself as “Keith Kidman”, etc …….

RSS feed for comments on this post.

5 Responses to “#StupidityWatch: Liberals claim GOP talking about “urban vote” = “raaacism””

Comments

  1. Robin says:

    Soooo… Someone might explain to Matthews that all those dark blue thingies on the map means there is a high concentration of Democrat voters in that area. They are usually in densely populated cities, otherwise known as “urban” areas. I wouldn’t be surprised if one day, in his outrage and righteous indignation, that he might actually drown in his own spittle.

  2. Carlos says:

    And, in another week or so, a conservative (or even a tepid independent) who utters the words “Chris Matthews” will be accused of being a raaaciiiist, too, because, Lord knows, he’s the one leading the charge to clean this great nation of any raaaciiiists.

    “Raaaciiiist,” BTW, is defined as anyone who disagrees with Chrissy Tingles on any matter, because Chrissy Tingles doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to see beyond the color of one’s skin. It never occurs to liberals, especially idiot liberals, that one could actually disagree with liberal ideology for reasons that have nothing to do with race.

    Chrissy does leave me wondering, though: Should I be upset, laugh or just be bored whenever he opens his pie-hole?

  3. Drew the Infidel says:

    Matthews seems to come from where the population is fairly dense, from the neck up.

  4. Kate says:

    LOL…it would be interesting to lay siege to all those little blue areas..cut them off from the red world…where all of their daily needs come from such as food, gasoline and cut their power lines! They wouldn’t last a week or two without riots.

    Back to reality..this is really getting boring, I have to agree with you Carlos. This is what we can expect from Chrissy boy. When will he develop a brain….send him to Oz. (and not the doctor).

  5. Carlos says:

    He’s already in Oz, Kate – he’s the one behind the curtain no one is supposed to pay attention to (which, obviously, 50% of the actual and purported voters in this last election were following to a “T”.)