ICYMI: Chris Matthews … defends the Tea Party?

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly
Chris Matthews

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews

So, yeah. Like this kinda sorta happened last week in the aftermath of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s stunning GOP primary loss. Other sites caught onto it quickly but yours truly did not – better late than never:

Transcript, via Politico’s Dylan Byers:

This looking down our noses at tea party people has got to stop. They have a message. They’re as American as any liberal is. And they’re really angry about the failure of our system. I was over covering Eastern Europe when the wall came down. You know what people didn’t like? It wasn’t the philosophy of communism they didn’t like — it was the complete corruption of it, the failure of it to deliver to working people. That’s what this system is doing right now: We can’t control the deficit, we can’t control the debt, we can’t control the border. What good is government good at?”

Yeah, this is the same guy who, along with his fellow MSNBC talk show hosts, has … well, looked down his nose at the Tea Party for years, even at some points disgustingly comparing them to the Nazis. Has he had a change of heart? Seen the light? Turned over a new leaf? Who knows, but the softening towards the Tea Party apparently rubbed off on Matthews’ MSNBC colleague Chuck Todd, too:

Chuck Todd, NBC’s political director also took notice and said, “It is going to be difficult to pass amnesty legislation when the economy is leaving many American workers behind. American workers who are not insulated from the economic downturn are not going to want a flood of cheap labor pouring into the country who are going to compete with them for the few jobs that are available and lower their wages.”

Tony Lee of Breibart said in reference to Matthews and Todd’s comments, “It took Messrs, Matthews, and Todd five years to understand the disconnect between American workers and a permanent political class far removed from their economic troubles and a mainstream media that helps insulate those in “Boomtown” or “This Town.”

And my guess is that Matthews, Todd, and other liberal elites at MSNBC will get back to their usual Tea Party bashfest in short order, and that it’ll take them another five years to acknowledge anything else positive about the Tea Party. It’s just the way they roll. After all, they’ve got at least 10 viewers who they want to keep happy …

Race-hustler Al Sharpton: #IRS scandal proves “white supremacy” in GOP (VIDEO)

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

A red-faced, positively outraged!!!-at-the-GOP-for-daring-to-hold-this-admin-accountable Chris Matthews throws the perfect pitch, and Sharpton, of course, hits the race card out of the ball park (via Greg Hengler):

You know how it is …

Raaacism

Raaaacism!

The above card says it all. Conservatives must be silenced by any means necessary, according to the left. Need I say more?

#MSDNC’s Tingles Matthews compares #Inaug2013 speech to … Gettysburg Address

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

This about sum’s up the nauseating tone of the fawning MSM coverage of our celebrity President’s second (and thank goodness – LAST) inaugural address today (via Eliana Johnson at NRO):

Barack Obama is perhaps the only modern president who has had the burden of swatting away comparisons between his own soaring rhetoric and that of our 16th president. You may recall that, in the wake of the Newtown massacre, Pulitzer Prize–winning reporter David Maraniss gushed over the president’s remarks, writing, “People will long remember what Barack Obama said in Newtown,” and calling the speech “[Obama’s] Gettysburg address.”

Today, thanks to MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, it took less than five minutes for the comparison to be drawn between President Obama’s second inaugural address and, well, all manner of things Lincoln. “It reminds me of another second inaugural, Lincoln’s, so much of Lincoln in that speech, from the Gettysburg Address to the second inaugural itself,” Matthews said. “He talked about the government that we want, which is infrastructure, education, regulation, all the good things, and then recognizing that government can’t solve all the problems.”

Watch the video clip below:

Oh, did I mention it might be a good idea to have a barf bag handy before watching it? Oops.

Our so-called “unifying” “healing” President was anything but today, and for those of you who didn’t watch (I’m with you) you’ll understand just how much the “middle of the road” mask is off when you read gush-fests from popular liberal sites that talked about how Obama laid out his “progressive vision” for America.

The transcript of his speech is here.

Expect more disturbing attempts at “fundamentally transforming America” from our far leftist President over the next four long years. And be prepared to push back twice as hard as we did during his first term. As I said last year, him being re-elected means he is not accountable to anyone outside of his base anymore because he doesn’t have to worry about getting re-elected. And he doesn’t care if he takes down other “progressives” in the process of completely shedding his “compromiser in chief” mask. In fact, as long as he wraps his socialistic proposals in a pretty red bow “for the children”, he might not need to concern himself with down-ticket political fallout, because – as the last two Presidential election cycles have shown us – the American people, unfortunately, aren’t always so discerning when it comes to hollow, meaningless political rhetoric about “hope, change, and unity”, especially when it comes from a President who, alongside his staunchest supporters inside the media industrial complex and out, makes himself out to be the “Second Coming.”

#MSDNC president: Chris Matthews “is a statesman”, a “model figure”

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

Got your barf bag handy? The AP did an (unsurprisingly) glowing puff piece on MSDNC’s chief angry man Chris Matthews – I’ll save you the trouble of reading the whole thing by providing you with the most mind-blowingly hilarious (but on the other hand, infuriating) excerpts (bolded emphasis added by me):

The veteran MSNBC host raised his profile as much as any member of the television commentariat during the presidential campaign. His 5 p.m. “Hardball” show has seen viewership jump by 24 percent this year from 2011, 17 percent for the rerun two hours later.

Matthews symbolized MSNBC’s growing comfort in being a liberal alternative to Fox News Channel. He engaged in an uncomfortable on-air confrontation with Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, seemed nearly apoplectic when President Barack Obama flubbed his first debate and had to apologize for appearing grateful that Hurricane Sandy might have helped Obama’s re-election effort.

With Keith Olbermann out of sight, Matthews essentially replaced him as the commentator that most annoyed conservative viewers.

[…]

He’s as good as he’s ever been,” said Phil Griffin, MSNBC president. “He’s at a place in his life where he’s really comfortable in his own skin. He’s a statesman. He has so much knowledge and I think he understands it better. He’s always been great, but I really think he’s been at the peak of his game.”

Iraq turned Matthews against Bush. He said war and peace, and civil rights, are the issues that drive him most and explain his enthusiasm for Obama.

Matthews seemed personally offended by efforts in individual states to tighten voter registration and identification laws. Republicans called it an attempt to curb voter fraud; Matthews said it was to suppress voters friendly to Obama. He said Republicans would use welfare and other issues to subtly appeal to white voters still uncomfortable with a black president.

“The number of African-Americans who have come up to me in the last three to six months has been unbelievable,” Matthews said in a recent interview. “They come up, six inches from my face, and say `thank you.’ A lot of the times they say we can’t do this like you do it. It’s harder for them because it sounds like complaining.” He’s disappointed that more whites didn’t express gratitude, too.

His repeated attention to the issue “irritates some people, because they can’t stand being called bigoted. It drives them crazy. And I agree, it would drive me crazy.”

[…]

Matthews said “Hardball” has gotten a sharper focus. The editorial opinion has moved to the front of the show. Saying what he thinks isn’t hard; Matthews’ flirtation with running for the Senate ended in part because the need to adhere to party orthodoxy wouldn’t mix with a man comfortable with voicing a dozen opinions per minute.

“I never want to do what everybody else is doing,” he said. “I don’t want to be part of the chorus.”

[…]

“He is sort of the model figure for who we are,” Griffin said. “He doesn’t stick out loving politics and being passionate about politics. It comes across in everything we do … And that’s Chris.”

I love Weasel Zippers’ short, sweet, and to the point response to Griffin’s remarks:

A shameless Obama worshipper who plays the race card as easy as he breathes is MSNBC’s “model,” . . . sounds about right.

Yep.

“Leg tingles available on Aisle 5!”

Matthews, Clyburn: Susan Rice is black, a lightweight who should be left alone

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

When last we left you on this issue President Obama, in a feeble attempt to come off as a heroic Alpha Male, went to the mat for Ambassador Susan Rice by essentially telling her critics (who he insinuated were all misogynistic males) to stop viewing her as an “easy target” and to come after him if they had issues with her Benghazi statements. It was a symbolic setback for real women’s rights, as the President in his insultingly paternalistic way more or less was saying, “Susan Rice is timid, sheltered woman and you need to leave her alone.” Yes, that’s exactly how he came across when talking about a key figure in his administration who many are suggesting may be nominated for the very important position of Secretary of State – a position that demands a strong backbone.

Not to be outdone, MSDNC’s Chris Matthews – fresh off of suggesting that the word “urban” equates to the GOP engaging in raaacism – spoke with Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC) on a multitude of issues, including Rice, and needless to say, Clyburn trotted out the race card, and Matthews didn’t question him on it. What WAS interesting about the way Chris Matthews talked about her was that he strongly implied that Rice – again, who may be nominated to replace Hillary Clinton at State, was a lightweight:

REP. JAMES CLYBURN (D), SOUTH CAROLINA: […] But let me say,  Chris — thank you so much for having me. And may I say something about Susan Rice?

MATTHEWS: Sure.

CLYBURN: I have a real, real problem with my senior senator trying to make her a scapegoat in this. Susan Rice`s roots are in Florence, South Carolina, that I got the opportunity to serve for almost 20 years in the Congress. Her father, who — Emmett (ph), who was born there in Florence, didn`t leave there until he was 16 years old — I have been a close friend
of his over the years. I`m a close friend with Susan Rice.

I think it`s absolutely a shame for this young lady, whose roots are deep in South Carolina soil, to get sullied like this by my senior senator, who I consider to be a good friend. Susan…

MATTHEWS: Well, let`s talk about motive here because, you know, it does seem when a person makes — even if you think a person made a mistake, they were given the wrong brief and they offered up the brief — they don`t think she — they haven`t said she made it up.

I mean, why is there this hostility to this young public servant, who isn`t really much of a — isn`t a politician even? She serves in the foreign affairs capacity. She`s not in the arena with you guys. Why are they treating her like she`s somebody to punch?

CLYBURN: That`s exactly right. This is a young African-American woman, I`m going to say.

MATTHEWS: OK.

CLYBURN: And this is the kind of stuff that happened to Colin Powell. Colin Powell was given information. He went to the United Nations with information that we found out later was flawed. It was not his fault then…

Honestly, the way Obama, Clyburn, Matthews and others have almost literally freaked out over the so-called “hostile treatment” of US AMBASSADOR TO THE UN Susan Rice by the political opposition, you’d think she was a shrinking violet who can barely stand on her own two feet!  This is supposed to be the “Forward” the Team Obama campaigned on?  It’s insulting to both black people and women EVERYWHERE that Clyburn, Matthews, Obama and others have reduced this woman  – who is the face of the  United States at the United Nations, who is more than just a “figurehead” in this administration –  to little more than a sweet little Southern flower who should be sitting on her front porch sipping lemonade and enjoying cool breezes rather than take questions from McCain, Graham, Ayotte and others on the serious issue of the DEADLY Benghazi terror attack which saw four American citizens – including a US Ambasssador and two Navy SEALs – brutally murdered in what was clearly a premeditated strike on the anniversary of 9-11.

This line of “defense” by the left serves NO purpose other than to stonewall and attempt to push the issue to the side when in reality the American people deserve answers on who knew what and when, and what exactly happened.  And the way liberals are going about this, as if someone who is black and/or a woman shouldn’t be subjected to tough criticism and questions  … no matter her high rank within the admin … does NOTHING to advance women and black people in America.  Women, black or not, who are in positions of influence and power, should be held to the SAME accountability standards men, black or not, should be. THAT is REAL “equality”, Mr. President, Rep. Clyburn, Chris Matthews.  You’d understand that if you weren’t so busy routinely playing the race and sexism cards in cheap attempts at having people on your side avoid responsibility for their words and/or actions.

Furthermore, Republicans haven’t just lowered the boom on “a black woman” (Rice) regarding Benghazi, but they’ve also been hammering Holder, Hillary Clinton, Obama, the FBI, Jay Carney, and many others. Because they want the truth and they know d*mn well this administration will do everything they can in their power to keep  it from getting out.

By any means necessary, and all that.  Even if it includes treating women as meek subjects in need of a male to speak on their behalf, and even if it includes baselessly insinuating that the attack is based on race rather than substance .

Disgusting.

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

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

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 …….

FAIL: Atlantic, NYT go full scale stupid in accusing Romney of welfare racism

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

Romney’s playing the raaaaaaaaaaaaace card!!!!” is the theme of the day as MSDNC dunce Chris Matthews and other pro-Obama “journalists” have latched on to what they see as the Romney campaign’s attempt at trying to win more white voters by making cracks about Obama’s birth certificate and “lying” about Obama’s recent move on welfare-to-work requirements.  In the above link, Matthews does what he does best by yelling and spitting about the Michigan birth certificate joke that Mitt Romney made this past weekend, insinuating that underneath Romney’s innocent enough joke about the birth certificate issue – an issue the Obama campaign itself has used to its advantage in the form of mugs and yoga pants merchandise on its website – Romney’s trying to remind voters of Obama’s Kenyan roots. This in spite of the fact that Romney repeatedly pushed back against the so-called “birther” movement long ago, and in spite of the fact that Chris Matthews himself has pushed the Obama-Kenya angle on his own program, and his was actually directed to and about Obama, unlike Mitt Romney’s joke.

While Matthews went ape-sh*t over the birth certificate comments, the core of the “racism” argument against Romney by certain “journalists” seems to be his attacks on Obama and welfare reform.  The New York Times link I posted above is silly enough, but the Atlantic Wire takes the cake:

Mitt Romney says that Obama allowed a waiver for the work requirement for welfare — if states have a better way of getting recipients into jobs — so that the President could “shore up his base.” Romney probably didn’t mean the Republican governors who asked for the waivers but, fitting with his campaign’s recent message, poor black people who take white people’s money.

[…]

Romney’s advisers believe Romney “needs a more combative footing against President Obama in order to appeal to white, working-class voters and to persuade them that he is the best answer to their economic frustrations,” The New York Times‘ Jeff Zeleny and Jim Rutenberg reported. And as we pointed out on Friday, if Romney gets 61 percent of the white vote, he wins. If you have any doubt that Romney is playing the race card, check out his YouTube page. There are five ads falsely accusing Obama of gutting welfare reform. The Republican National Committee has put out its own welfare ad. And another three Romney ads say Obama is raiding Medicare to pay for Obamacare. The latter ads show white faces and say “you paid in” but now health care is going to somebody else.

Let’s look at some of the visuals in these ads. I’ve turned them into GIF form to show the most race-y parts so you don’t have to sit through a whole video. This is from the RNC’s ad “Never Happened“:

Please, please please – when you get a moment, go to the Atlantic Wire link and look at the alleged “visual evidence” that Romney and the RNC’s ads are blatant attempts at discounting black voters.  The crux of the argument seems to be that the ads are using white actors as the ones being “screwed” because of welfare to work waivers and because of that – and the accusation that Obama is trying to appeal to his “base” – Romney is playing to race.  Oh, and one ad apparently showed a “darker” version of Obama than the original video clip used in the segment. Apparently only darker images of public figures can be used if they are of white conservatives. *insert eyeroll here*

AllahPundit quips:

Thomas Edsall unfurled his piece bright and early this morning — coinciding with day one of the GOP convention, conveniently enough — and then the Atlantic followed suit later, replete with a photographic analysis accusing the RNC’s ad team of darkening Obama’s skin. (Obama supporters leveled that charge at Hillary’s ad team during the 2008 primaries too, back when she was a horrible racist and not a wonderful post-partisan feminist icon and diplomat.) My hunch is that there’s only one man in America who could get away with criticizing liberal welfare policies from the center-right without drawing a racism charge, but when I stop to think about that, I remember that that guy was also accused of racism repeatedly for opposing Obama in 2007 and early 2008. So, my hunch is wrong. This argument simply can’t be made. Oh well.

Yes, we are back to this bullsh*t accusation again.  What the writers (Reeve at the Atlantic and Edsall at the NYT) fail to acknowledge  in their “reporting” is that Obama’s “base voters” (mentioned in Reeve’s piece above) are bleeding heart liberals of all shapes, sizes, colors, etc who support limitless government “help” for whoever needs it for however long they “need” it, regardless of whether or not they actually need it.  So, yes, Obama changing welfare to work requirements would appeal to exactly that “base of supporters.”  The Republican base believes that there should be a limit on how much and how long the government funds the poor, while the Democrat base believes there shouldn’t be.

HOW POSITIVELY SINISTER to have that difference in opinion.

But seriously, is any of this really that hard to figure out?

Furthermore, Edsall and Reeve simply assume Romney is trying to appeal to whites over black people by very mention of the word “welfare”, as well as the use of an elderly white actor.  What does it say about Edsall and Reeve that the people they think of first when they hear the word “welfare” are black people, and that the first thing they think of when they see a white actor in an ad about welfare reform is “no black people used … raaacism!!”? Also, what does it say about the both of them that they zero in on “black people” being the “base” of Obama’s support when even journalists who are wet behind the ears understand Obama’s base of support consists of a lot more types of people than just black people?

Exactly.

The bottom line is that liberals are obsessed with race, especially in the Obama era where any legitimate criticisms of The One are automatically and reflexively met with cries of “raaacism! He’s motivated by nothing more than raacism!”  There can’t be any valid points of contention. It all goes back to racism.  And trust me when I say if any GOP or Romney welfare ad had used an elderly black male actor as the one who was getting “screwed by the government” on welfare issues, Reeve and Edsall would have been the first ones jumping on the “token black man” bandwagon.  You can’t win with race-obsessed leftists. They see racism around every corner, even when most of the time it’s not there.  A white Republican and a black Democrats cannot possibly disagree without racism being the underlying reason for the white Republican. Race-absorbed lefts can’t possibly fathom that a majority of Americans just might disagree with this President based on the policies he has pursued, not the color of his skin.

This is especially true in an election year where their messiah-like figure is on the ropes in a desperate bid to hold on to the White House.   Supporters of such candidates have and will pull out all the stops, and I do mean ALL, to keep their guy in office.

And just to show you how bad Reeve has it when it comes to race, Duane Lester at All American Blogger caught her in an outright lie  over comments House Speaker John Boehner made about voters and the upcoming election. She wrote a post titled “Boehner Says Out Loud He Hopes Blacks and Latinos ‘Won’t Show Up’ This Election” – provocative, no?  Well all Lester had to do was click on the link she referenced to find out her headline was a sensationalistic fabrication:

So I clicked the link and this post opened. It’s an article written by Elspeth Reeve. You can find it here also.

It reads:

House Speaker John Boehner is the most prominent Republican to admit, out loud, that his party’s strategy for winning in November doesn’t suppose that the GOP can win over some black and Latino voters, but hoping they won’t vote at all.

Yikes. Ok, she’s paraphrasing here. What exactly did Boehner say?

This:

“This election is about economics… These groups have been hit the hardest. They may not show up and vote for our candidate but I’d suggest to you they won’t show up and vote for the president either.”

Whoa. That’s outrageo…wait, what?

That’s it?

Check the source. She was referencing the left wing Talking Points Memo. Maybe they have where Boehner says he hopes blacks and latinos stay home:

What about those Latino and African American voters that polls show voting against the GOP by record margins? Republican have found a great way to “recruit” more of them than usual — or at least keep them away from the polls. It’s called the economy.

“This election is about economics,” Boehner said. “These groups have been hit the hardest. They may not show up and vote for our candidate but I’d suggest to you they won’t show up and vote for the president either.”

So, he didn’t say anything about hoping minorities stay home. He just said he expected they would.

Meaning, the headline and the first line are complete fabrications.

Really.  If the racism “epidemic” in the GOP was as bad as the left loves to claim it is, they wouldn’t have to make stuff like this up.  In Reeve’s case, I think she should quickly and quietly retire her overused “Spot the Racism” detector.  The only person it has embarrassed so far is not any one of her select GOP targets, but instead … herself.

So much for “post-racial”, hmm?

Related: Via BuzzFeed –  Newt Gingrich Asks Chris Matthews If He Is A Racist

An #MSDNC smear so bad Chris Matthews apologizes for it on their behalf

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

While Romney is not my candidate of choice, I will not sit idly by while he gets falsely painted as a “racist” by the race-baiters at MSDNC. Via Newsbusters’ Scott Whitlock:

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews on Wednesday apologized for his network’s “appalling lack of judgment” in comparing a Mitt Romney campaign slogan to the Ku Klux Klan. The Hardball host conceded, “It was irresponsible and incendiary of us to do this, and it showed an appalling lack of judgment. We apologize, we really do, to the Romney campaign.” [See video below. MP3 audio here.]

In the 11am hour of MSNBC, anchor Thomas Roberts smeared, “…So you might not hear Mitt Romney say ‘keep America American’ anymore. That’s because it was a central theme of the KKK in the 1920s. It was a rallying cry for the group’s campaign of violence and intimidation against blacks, gays and Jews. The progressive blog America blog was the first to catch onto that.”

Here’s the video clip of Chris Matthews apologizing on behalf of MSNBC:

Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher, also in defense of Romney, has a link to the Americablog post in question, which I won’t post here. I will post some of the text of the AB post, though, just to show you the lame “justification” used by the blogger:

He’s said it repeatedly for over a year now.  Here is Romney a year ago, using the Klan slogan in a campaign ad.

Romney said it again four days ago.

In an era in which it’s apparently okay for Republicans to accuse President Obama of being a socialist, I guess we now need to ask if Mitt Romney is a Ku Klux Klansman.  Not whether Romney inadvertently is using the KKK’s number one slogan from the 1920s on the stump, no, the Republicans would say, if this were a Democrat, that clearly the candidate was a closet member of the KKK.  So, is Mitt Romney a closet member of the KKK?  Keep in mind, that even Romney is now claiming, between the lines, that President Obama is a socialist.  So why shouldnt’ America be asking if Mitt Romney is a Klansman?

Why do some liberals have to be so bleeping stupid sometimes? Let me break this down in little pieces so the clueless wonders on the left – including certain MSDNC daytime “anchors” – can digest it: There is no link between Romney and the KKK. There is no link between Romney and any alleged “racist” past, “secret” or otherwise. There is no trail to trace back to on any supposed “racist roots of Romney” because, as far as we know, there aren’t any. Because of that, it is a shameless, gutter-type smear and one MSNBC rightly apologized for. On the other hand, President Obama’s socialist tendencies are well-known and well-documented, so it’s perfectly reasonable to call him a socialist – even though the definition of word is varies depending on who you are talking to (liberals, in repeated attempts to fool people, typically don’t define socialism as what it actually is).

Get it now, liberals? Probably not, but at least I tried.

As far as Matthews’ apologizing for the smear, it’s good that he did that, but I’m not jumping over the moon about it. Both he and his “network” – an admitted favorite of the Obama administration – have a long, deeply disturbing history of falsely painting Republicans as racists, most notoriously so via selectively edited videos like this one and this one. In my opinion, this “news outlet” should self-censor and not do one more blasted piece on any alleged “racism” within the GOP until they understand that in order to push the charge, they must do it without editing/cropping photos/videos/quotes to make it look like a Republican said something they didn’t. And any editor who pulled the same stunt going forward should be fired. I won’t hold my breath on this happening, though, because the brass at NBC apparently give more a damn about ratings and controversy (not to mention catering to Obama) than they do the actual facts.

Not only that, but they should know better than to rely on left wing bloggers as the sole source for a claim about anything. Unfortunately, they’re not the first liberal news organization to do this and they won’t be the last. Then again, we really can’t expect much more in an industry that is dominated by left-wingers.

Sigh …

VIDEO: Chris Matthews inadvertently speaks the truth

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

Noel Sheppard at Newsbusters caught this clip from a weekend “Chris Matthews Show” segment in which Matthews mistakenly called President Obama President Carter (via Doug Powers):

CHRIS MATTHEWS: If the Republicans get a real opportunity next year because President Carter, President – there’s a mistake – President uh, uh, Obama doesn’t seem to have a grip on it, he doesn’t seem to be able to pull the economy back. He’s not, it’s not working. Who would be the best to exploit that situation? Because that’s the person who would win.

Here’s the full show transcript here.

Comedy gold, my dear readers. Comedy gold.

The truth shall set you free, Chris. The truth shall set you free.

Can I get an “amen”?

Should black people feel “uncomfortable” on majority white NBDNC/MSDNC, too?

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

This has absolutely got to be the video of the week:

Here’s the recap, via Brent Baker at the MRC:

“There aren’t a lot of African-American men at these events,” NBC News reporter Kelly O’Donnell, a white woman, told Darryl Postell, a black man at a Tea Party rally held Thursday in Washington, DC, pressing him, in an exchange she chose to include in her NBC Nightly News story, to address her prejudiced assumptions: “Have you ever felt uncomfortable?” Postell rejected her loaded premise that race must divide Americans: “No, no, these are my people, Americans.”

O’Donnell’s story noted “skepticism over how the Tea Party is judged and labeled,” letting an attendee assert: “We’re not racists, we’re not any of the above that people claim us to be. We’re ordinary citizens that love our country, and we’re fighting for it.” O’Donnell soon wondered if it all may peter out, asking a man in the crowd: “Do you think this has enough energy to really last to November and to make a difference?”

Over on ABC, Jonathan Karl highlighted how “many of them blamed us, the news media.” A woman demanded: “We want honesty from you. We want fair time from you. We want you, the media, to represent all the people, not just a certain portion of the people.”

Of course, this isn’t the first time that the Obama administration’s preferred network NBDNC/MSDNC has played the race card against Obama opponents. Remember the cheap shot cropped video they ran about alleged white wannabe presidential “assasins” bringing guns to ObamaCare town halls, where they cropped out of the video the head of the black man carrying the gun to prove their “point”? And then there was this November Hardball w/ Chris Matthews segment:

The attacks on former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin took an interesting turn Wednesday when MSNBC’s Chris Matthews suggested that racism is at the heart of her support.

Much like mainstream media coverage of this year’s Tea Parties, Matthews and “Hardball” guests Norah O’Donnell and Salon’s Joan Walsh made an issue of how “white” the crowd was at a Palin book signing event in Michigan.

“This is a largely white — almost no minorities in this crowd,” reported MSNBC’s O’Donnell live from the scene.

Matthews reiterated, “Well, they look like a white crowd to me,” later claiming, “I think there is a tribal aspect to this thing, in other words, white vs. other people.”

Er, yeah. Sort of like the gang at … MSDNC.

I swear, sometimes the race-baiting “white folks” at NBDNC/MSDNC just make it too easy.

Cross-posted to Right Wing News.