“C Note” Hypocrisy

Sometimes you almost have to laugh at the blatant partisan bias and hypocrisy of President Obama’s followers, especially the ones who work for his and the Liberals’ pet media / propaganda outlets like MSNBC.


MSNBC’s Carlos Watson says Socialist means Nigger – but Birther’s OK

This is how Obama, his Liberals and their media shills operate. They reach and reach and reach – or just invent something out of whole cloth – in order to inject Race into any opposition to President Obama, The First African-American President, or dissent against his and his Liberals’ agenda.

While this video is utterly appalling, it is also ironically humorous since Carlos Watson so casually referenced those Americans who want to see irrefutable legal proof President Obama’s birth on American soil – generally considered a requirement for holding the Presidency – as “Birthers.” Since the Liberals have spent a vast effort to paint these people, along with the Tea Party protesters and anyone who opposes them, as racist, using the pejorative diminutive of “Birther” is tantamount – especially in the context of the video – to calling them racists.

To watch Watson complain that Socialist is a codeword for Nigger in the same screed in which he apparently uses Birther as a codeword for Racist is just amazing. My only question is whether Watson is too stupid to know what he did or whether he and MSNBC believe that their audience is too stupid to know what he did.

Now I can just about agree that there should be some limits to the rhetoric of political debate and argument; past a certain shifting point language can impede rather than foster such debate. It’s just very obvious that Americans cannot and must not allow the Liberals to decide what those limits shall be – but then, I’m obviously a racist. 😉

Tags: | | | | | | | | |

4 Responses to ““C Note” Hypocrisy”

  1. zhann Says:

    While I see the point you are trying to make, this pales in comparison the the garbage coming out of Fox News 😉

    As for socialist, personally, I wish Obama was more of a socialist. Personally, I feel that the next “socialist” program should be public transportation.

    Also, its funny how the term ‘socialist’ has been so demonized. Don’t people understand that fact that many of the societal benefits people couldn’t imagine living without are socialist programs? Public Schools, Unemployment, Social Security … even Police and Fire Departments (these two can be argued, of course) … it is strange that there is such a stigma against socialism. Communist Russia collapsed 20 years ago, yet this is the picture in most people’s minds.

  2. jonolan Says:

    We’ll have to agree to disagree on the comparative evils or risks associated with the various infotainment outlets’ rhetoric.

    I have to ask you this though:
    Isn’t calling or “doq-whistling” those who dissent against Obama’s agenda little more than a call for minorities – especially Blacks – to use violence against them?

    The Liberals, in their ethno-guiltism, keep talking about the Blacks’ “understandable angst and bitterness” due to the “context of their history.” If these Liberals truly believe that, then isn’t it, at the very least, irresponsible to paint these protesters as racists, the logical target of violence from Black followers of a Black President?

    As for Socialism – sorry, zhann; you’re arguments are old and widely rebuffed, mostly because in American common parlance “Socialism” is defined as the Statist Socialism of the defunct USSR, not the purer dictionary definition you’re citing.

  3. zhann Says:

    As for liberals, I think you are generalizing all liberals together again. Personally, I have no bitterness due to history 😉 There will always be those with different agendas.

    Regarding Socialism, what is the problem then? Why is the word “Socialism” such a villainized word? If you feel that it has nothing to do with the USSR, than why is it suddenly so devilish? Historically, it only attained its current stigma around the 1960’s … peak conflict time.

  4. jonolan Says:

    I think we’ve failed to communicate.

    I keep hearing from Liberals how we have to understand the bitterness and angst of Blacks due to context of the Blacks’ history. It a case of making allowances for them do to their past.

    So…If the Blacks’ anger, resentment, and bitterness is supposed to be “understandable,” isn’t it very irresponsible to keep calling dissenters to “The First African-American President” racist? Isn’t that just “asking for” for the Blacks to “go over the line” or provoke someone else into doing so? I think we know how that could turn out.

    Regarding Socialism, what is NOT the problem? BTW, you’re inaccurate about the start of the issues with Socialism; it’s been a problem since the late 1800s and one that has caused violence in the US in the past – especially during the early labor movements.

Leave a Reply