Category Archives: Racism

CNN’s Activist-Anchor Don Lemon: Stupid And Sanctimonious

Affirmative Action, Crime, Criminal Injustice, Intelligence, Journalism, Propaganda, Race, Racism

I am not sure what is worse about Don Lemon, CNN’s deeply stupid host, who held the fort (or the funny farm) during the weekend of George Zimmerman’s acquittal; his racial agenda or his retardation.

Below is an example of a Don-Lemon conducted exchange. Lemon is not working with much (he cautions against drawing a “false equivalent” …), but, like “Judge Glenda Hatchett,” who doesn’t know what constitutes an aggravated assault, Lemon retains his plumb position as activist-anchor.

On July 14, Lemon told a commiserating co-anchor that, and I paraphrase, “People accuse you of having an agenda when in fact you are a journalist, trying to make them see certain things beyond their biases.”

The job of a journalist is to report the facts, not to nudge viewers into the politically pleasing opinions that are held by the cognoscenti at CNN.

But there is something way worse than Lemon’s blatant, aggrieved black-man schtick; Lemon’s stupidity is worse than his sanctimony.

In the transcript below, Lemon doesn’t challenge the guest with whom he agrees; he cheers her on with giggles. David Webb in the opposition is only half the man he is on Fox News, which is a shame:

“So let’s bring in our panel now. I have a feeling that we’re going to have to separate all of these guys. Attorney and TV host Mo Ivory joins us from Atlanta, along with diversity and inclusion expert Buck Davis. In New York, we have radio host and New York City Tea Party co-founder David Webb.

So, Mo, I’m going to start with you first. How does President Obama’s statement affect the fallout from the Zimmerman verdict, if at all?”

MO IVORY, ATTORNEY/TV HOST: Sure, Don. I think the statement gives us a little bit of comfort, and he is the president of the United States and we want to hear from him. We need to hear from him. It’s especially comforting after saying that Trayvon could have been his son. He would have looked like him. I wanted to hear him say something. So it brought me some comfort, but just a little bit because I’m still angry, I’m still upset. I’m trying to process this verdict and figure out where we go from here. So it’s a wonderful thing that he did that but —

LEMON: What are you angry about, Mo? Mo, mo, mo.

(CROSSTALK)

IVORY: — that a murderer got away with murder? No, David, what am I angry about? That you’re asking me that question.

LEMON: No, it’s Don! It’s Don. It’s Don.

IVORY: Ok, Don, I’m angry because a murderer got away with murder. I’m angry because in our system, George Zimmerman’s brother Robert just said that Trayvon had plans for George Zimmerman, and that that rhetoric is going on. A boy was walking to the store and he was getting a snack and he got murdered. And a murderer got away with it yesterday. That’s what I’m mad about.

LEMON: Do you have to be mad about it? Because, listen. People don’t like verdicts all the time. And do you think it’s productive to be angry? I mean, maybe it’s not the right emotion that you’re — I don’t know —

IVORY: No, Don. It’s the right emotion. No, it’s the right emotion. I’m angry about it. I’m angry that we live in the society where this kind of thing can still happen. And that we’re having this conversation like, oh my gosh, I don’t even understand why people are pulling a race card.

You don’t have to pull the race card. It’s out. We live with it everyday. We wake up and it’s out. We go to work and it’s out. We get in our cars and it’s out. We go to trials, and the race card is out. Nobody has to pull it because it lives outside in America every day. That’s why I’m angry. And I think everybody, not just African- Americans, everybody should be angry a 17-year-old boy was murdered in cold blood and the murderer is free.

LEMON: Okay. All right. Mo, let’s get in – Buck, I promise you’re going to get to talk this time. Mo, why are you shaking your head in disagreement here? David? David?

DAVID WEBB, NYC TEA PARTY CO-FOUNDER: Well, look. I understand outrage over not getting the verdict you want. If Mo would actually reach back to the legal premise that exists here which is Skittles is not a crime, walking is not a crime, a hoodie is not a crime. Again, this is a terrible tragedy. But the incident that happened happened —

IVORY: No, shooting somebody in their chest.

WEBB: However, let me finish.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: Let him finish. Let him finish.

WEBB: Because a young black man was just murdered in Chicago for refusing to join a gang.

LEMON: Wait. Hold on. David, David, David, David, David, David, David, David, David.

(CROSSTALK)

IVORY: What kind of a comparison is that?

LEMON: Stop both of you. Mo! Mo! Stop. David, stop. David, do not do that false equivalent. That is not —

WEBB: No, I’m not trying to equivocate. But the outrage —

LEMON: Yes but listen.

WEBB: I’m not comparing —

LEMON: Crime happens all the time, and because a crime happens, it does not mean that you should shift the focus from what happened here. Let’s stick to this particular plan.

WEBB: Okay. On this issue —

LEMON: We’re talking about this case.

IVORY: Thank you.

WEBB: On this issue, then, the system played out. Again, we needed to see due process, not outside agitation. He was tried. The jury was picked. They were selected. They had a jury that made a decision on second-degree manslaughter – on second-degree murder. On the manslaughter charges, they acquitted him. The system worked.

Now, if you don’t like the verdict, I can understand that. But to take it beyond that into the continued hyperbole of it’s race – in the dark, rainy night with a hoodie on walking away from him and with a 911 call to back it up, he couldn’t even identify him clearly. So he wasn’t racially profiling him. This is a tragedy, and a travesty is when you get to the point where race becomes the overwhelming issue rather than the justice system.

BUCK DAVIS, DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION EXPERT: David —

IVORY: The justice system is broken.

LEMON: OK, all right, hold on, guys. You have to let me lead this conversation. So, you have two people of color. I assume you’re both African-American. Excuse me for assuming that.

IVORY: I am. I’m not sure about David.

WEBB: I’m a black man. I’m an American. That’s what it is.

IVORY: Oh, okay. Keep with that.

LEMON: Okay. So – (LAUGHTER) girl, you are crazy. So, you have two people —

Apoplectic Over Legal Reversals On Race

Constitution, Law, Race, Racism, States' Rights, The State

Any weakening of laws that privilege protected groups will be decried by … the groups the law protects and others vested in “advancement through affirmative action, quotas, contract set-asides based on race” and race-based redistricting. The latter is “the intentional formation of majority–minority districts (districts in which voters of color constitute a majority of eligible voters).

Supreme Court setbacks to the racial spoils-system run by federal and state enforces is bound to annoy the system’s beneficiaries and supporters. In this, The National Law Journal stands firmly with “Attorney General Eric Holder Jr.” The former called a Tuesday decision over “a key provision of the Voting Rights Act by the U.S. Supreme Court” a “gutting” of the law. The latter decried this legal reprieve as “a serious and unnecessary setback,” promising that “the department will press on in the enforcement of voting rights laws.”

Basically the South was declared to no longer pose a danger to blacks. Read The National Law Journal’s laughable lamentations:

A divided U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday dealt a crippling blow to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by striking down the formula devised by Congress to determine which states are covered by the act.
“In 1965, the States could be divided into two groups: those with a recent history of voting tests and low voter registration and turnout, and those without those characteristics,” Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. “Congress based its coverage formula on that distinction. Today the Nation is no longer divided along those lines, yet the Voting Rights Act continues to treat it as if it were.”
By invalidating the coverage formula in Section 4(b) of the act, the court, in effect, rendered Section 5—the heart of the act—useless. Section 5 requires covered jurisdictions—those with a history of voting discrimination—to submit any changes in their voting practices for preclearance by the Department of Justice or the federal district court in Washington. …

MORE.

‘Liberal American City Charged With Apartheid’

America, Race, Racism, South-Africa

From the fact that African-Americans lag behind Anglo-Americans in academic achievements and socio-economic status, in New Haven, Conn., the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) has inferred, post haste and post hoc, the prevalence of deep-seated racism and segregation (“Urban Apartheid”), in the place WND’s John Bennett describes as “one of the most liberal cities in the country.”

Mr. Bennett, whose article has been well received, was kind enough to ask for my comments. These are interspersed in “Liberal American city charged with apartheid”:

Ilana Mercer, a WND columnist and author of “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa,” left South Africa in 1995. She is highly critical of the NAACP’s “promiscuous use of the apartheid pejorative,” telling WND, “It is as ignorant as it is glib.”
“Like antibiotics that lose their potency through over dosage – yelling ‘apartheid’ at people just because they are richer and more educated than you makes you look ridiculous,” Mercer added. …

At least it ought to make you look ridiculous.

MORE.

Join the conversation on my Facebook Page.

‘Mad Men’ Go Mad Over MLK

History, Hollywood, Media, Propaganda, Pseudo-history, Race, Racism

I was under the impression that “Mad Men” was intended as a period drama. Last night, however, the Madison Avenue advertising team, generally true-to-the-times, enacted today’s racial scripts. “Mad Men” is set in the 1960s.

(A period drama is where “elaborate costumes, sets and properties are featured in order to capture the ambiance of a particular era.”)

The backdrop to this politically correct revisionism was the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Struck by political correctness, one “Mad Man” even berates a colleague for not grieving appropriately. The annoying Megan Draper, who has begun to sound very 2013, drags the Draper kids to a nighttime vigil, as rioters rage around them. Don Draper suddenly finds love in his heart for one of his neglected waifs, when the child directs a syrupy word to a black man.

Really? A little too forced and didactic, if you ask me.

Jacqueline Kennedy, as revealed from audio recordings of her historic 1964 conversations with historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr., held a low opinion of Martin Luther King. America’s most engaging first lady called Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. “terrible,” “tricky” and “a phony.”

“His associations with communists” is why Jacky’s husband ordered the wiretaps on King. Mrs. Kennedy’s brother-in-law, Robert Kennedy—recounts Patrick J. Buchanan in “Suicide of a Superpower”—”saw to it that the FBI carried out the order.”

I guess our Madison Avenue advertising wizards could have been to the left of Jacqueline Kennedy, but it strains credulity.