Brietbart vetting Obama

[JohnStOnge]

Btw, this video shows nothing. So he hugged a guy.

I don't think it'll have much effect because most people, including me, never heard of the guy he hugged. But he did more than hug him. He made statements indicating that he endorsed the guy's outlook. So far I haven't done any research on details of what the guy's outlook is. But the claim is that it's very disturbing.

That's the point. Like if somebody said "open your mind" to what, say, Louis Farrakhan had to say that would hurt them because they would be endorsing Louis Farrakhan's world view and a lot of people are familiar with Farrakhan. Like I said, though, this is a case where however disturbing the guy's views and statements may be one would have to first educate people with respect to what his views are and what his statements have been.

What we see on that video could indeed be very significant and offer a lot of insight into who Obama is. He clearly had a positive outlook and sense of admiration for the guy. But it's going to fall flat because few people know who the other guy is.

[JohnStOnge]

Here's another illustration:

Suppose a video of a Republican politican surfaced in which that politician, in his law school days, issued a similarly glowing endorsement during his introduction of David Duke. His political career would essentially be over and no one would say him doing that was "nothing." It would be considered as saying a whole lot about him.

[SeattleGriz]

Btw, this video shows nothing. So he hugged a guy.

I don't think it'll have much effect because most people, including me, never heard of the guy he hugged. But he did more than hug him. He made statements indicating that he endorsed the guy's outlook. So far I haven't done any research on details of what the guy's outlook is. But the claim is that it's very disturbing.

That's the point. Like if somebody said "open your mind" to what, say, Louis Farrakhan had to say that would hurt them because they would be endorsing Louis Farrakhan's world view and a lot of people are familiar with Farrakhan. Like I said, though, this is a case where however disturbing the guy's views and statements may be one would have to first educate people with respect to what his views are and what his statements have been.

What we see on that video could indeed be very significant and offer a lot of insight into who Obama is. He clearly had a positive outlook and sense of admiration for the guy. But it's going to fall flat because few people know who the other guy is.

Watch this video with Thomas Sowell back in 1990. He gives you a little insight into Bell.

http://www.therightscoop.com/1990-thoma ... rick-bell/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[JoltinJoe]

Whatever your opinions ... Soledad O'Brien has no understanding what critical race theory is all about and looked foolish.

[kalm]

The right has had six years to vet this guy and nothing has stuck. I'm sure it's a conspiracy.

[dbackjon]

The right has had six years to vet this guy and nothing has stuck. I'm sure it's a conspiracy.

No kidding.

Plus the Clinton machine as well in 2008


I love how the conks are blaming "MSM" for not vetting Obama. They did, found nothing.

Billionaire attack dogs like the Koches and McClatchey spent millions trying to dig up dirt - this is the best they can do?

[SeattleGriz]

Absolutely pathetic. As usual, the Left is scrambling to rewrite history. Wikipedia's definition of Critical Race Theory, the one O'Brien quoted, has been updated 26 times in the last 24 hours with "white supremacy" removed.

I see the racist Derrick Bell's Wikipedia page has been updated multiple times.



Can't win the argument, so they change the game.

[dbackjon]

RushLimbaugh.com Removes Offensive Attacks On Sandra Fluke From Transcript Archives


For days, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh personally attacked Georgetown Law student and women’s health advocate Sandra Fluke, smearing her at least 70 times. Now, he’d like to pretend that some of the things he said never actually happened.

The Atlantic Wire points out that his website has scrubbed a few offensive comments. While the “slut” comments still show up in other rants by Limbaugh, his site has removed his sex tapes comment from March 1. “The pages were clearly working a few days ago — several sites linked to them,” Elspeth Reeve reports. “The pages don’t show up on the February 29 and March 1 archives, either, though links to them still exist on other transcripts related to the controversy.”
http://thinkprogress.org/media/2012/03/ ... ke-attack/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Baldy]

RushLimbaugh.com Removes Offensive Attacks On Sandra Fluke From Transcript Archives


For days, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh personally attacked Georgetown Law student and women’s health advocate Sandra Fluke, smearing her at least 70 times. Now, he’d like to pretend that some of the things he said never actually happened.

The Atlantic Wire points out that his website has scrubbed a few offensive comments. While the “slut” comments still show up in other rants by Limbaugh, his site has removed his sex tapes comment from March 1. “The pages were clearly working a few days ago — several sites linked to them,” Elspeth Reeve reports. “The pages don’t show up on the February 29 and March 1 archives, either, though links to them still exist on other transcripts related to the controversy.”
http://thinkprogress.org/media/2012/03/ ... ke-attack/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[JoltinJoe]

Absolutely pathetic. As usual, the Left is scrambling to rewrite history. Wikipedia's definition of Critical Race Theory, the one O'Brien quoted, has been updated 26 times in the last 24 hours with "white supremacy" removed.

I see the racist Derrick Bell's Wikipedia page has been updated multiple times.



Can't win the argument, so they change the game.

Watching O'Brien, as she's reaching to explain critical race theory, her halting delivery suggests that a producer is whispering into her ear-piece as she is speaking.

I'm not sure that Pres. Obama's relationship with Derek Bell is that startling, since he was a minority student at Harvard and Bell was a leading minority law professor at Harvard at that time. Like many, Pres. Obama may have been more radical 20 years ago than now. Candidly, if I had been a law student at Harvard at tha time, I would have no doubt taken a course with Bell, even if I didn't agree with his overall outlook. Bell was on the front-line of a major legal discussion, and I would have been interested in hearing his opinions directly from him (and considered it a privilege too).

However, let's be truthful about this. Pollak is accurately describing Bell's beliefs, and O'Brien is not prepared to discuss this.

[SeattleGriz]

Absolutely pathetic. As usual, the Left is scrambling to rewrite history. Wikipedia's definition of Critical Race Theory, the one O'Brien quoted, has been updated 26 times in the last 24 hours with "white supremacy" removed.

I see the racist Derrick Bell's Wikipedia page has been updated multiple times.



Can't win the argument, so they change the game.

Watching O'Brien, as she's reaching to explain critical race theory, her halting delivery suggests that a producer is whispering into her ear-piece as she is speaking.

I'm not sure that Pres. Obama's relationship with Derek Bell is that startling, since he was a minority student at Harvard and Bell was a leading minority law professor at Harvard at that time. Like many, Pres. Obama may have been more radical 20 years ago than now. Candidly, if I had been a law student at Harvard at tha time, I would have no doubt taken a course with Bell, even if I didn't agree with his overall outlook. Bell was on the front-line of a major legal discussion, and I would have been interested in hearing his opinions directly from him (and considered it a privilege too).

However, let's be truthful about this. Pollak is accurately describing Bell's beliefs, and O'Brien is not prepared to discuss this.

You are correct. Read an article from David French in which he stated that was the norm for Harvard during the years Obama attended. For him not to attend, would have been odd.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/29 ... vid-french" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But what does all this mean now? In 2012? There’s little doubt that law student Obama was a political radical by any conventional, society-wide measure of the term. But that’s not the end of the story. At Harvard at least, radical was mainstream and conservative was radical. In fact, the radical view was so mainstream that one couldn’t help but think that even the loudest students would graduate, go to law firms, and fit in just as seamlessly to the new mainstream of their legal professions. And, in fact, most did. They weren’t intellectual leaders; they were followers.

My reading of Barack Obama’s political biography is pretty simple: He’s not so much a liberal radical as a member of the liberal mainstream of whatever community he inhabits. In that video, he was doing no more and no less than what most politically engaged leftist law students were doing — supporting the radical race and gender politics that dominated campus. When he went to Chicago and met Bill Ayers, he was fitting within a second, and slightly different, liberal culture. He shifted again in Washington and then again in the White House. But radical, “conviction” politicians don’t decry Gitmo then keep it open, promise to end the wars then reinforce the troops, express outrage at Bush war tactics then maintain rendition and triple the number of drone strikes.

But as we have all pointed out. Both O'Brien and Thomas not only tried to carry Obama's water, they both spoke out their asses in doing such. Exactly what Breitbart charged they would do.

[Cap'n Cat]

Breitbart: Deader 'n fuck.
Limbaugh: Deader 'n fuck.
Obama: Four more years in White House.

Conk house of cards collapsed in 2008.

[Cap'n Cat]

The right has had six years to vet this guy and nothing has stuck. I'm sure it's a conspiracy.

No kidding.

Plus the Clinton machine as well in 2008


I love how the conks are blaming "MSM" for not vetting Obama. They did, found nothing.

Billionaire attack dogs like the Koches and McClatchey spent millions trying to dig up dirt - this is the best they can do?

Conks have no answer. Cute!

[FargoBison]

CNN's Soledad O'Brien gets owned by Breitbart's Pollak....

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2 ... ll%20Video" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;