Has the question ever crossed your mind why so-called “liberal” TV news shows typically feature more Republican guests than they do Democrats? Shouldn't the idea for a liberal news show be to offer refuge from Republican rhetoric and hate speech?
Recently on Current TV, in the “War Room” as it were, the hostess asked her guest, a California Republican, to weigh in on the news of the day, the investigation of the Trayvon Martin murder case. I don't know who’s idea it was to assign such a sensitive news item to a Republican, but it was obviously a bad pairing and waste of time. This garden variety Republican had no interest in the Martin case and could not have cared less about it.
Instead of responding to the question, he resulted to a Sarah Palin-type spiel, which is more a filibuster than coherent response, and promptly played the Race Card, claiming he didn't see what the big deal was over the murder of this Black youth. Reframing the question, he suggested they instead take a closer look at “Black-on-Black crime” because, according to him, more Black people are killed by other Blacks than by white people.
Instead of the War Room hostess taking ownership of her question from this holier-than-thou GOP numb nut and emphasize she was referring to the BLOTCHED police investigation, she found it easier to roll over and agree with his racist implications before proceeding to her next topic.
Since there are more white adults who molest white children than there are Black people who kill other Blacks, what if a Black elected official had been asked about a high-profile child abduction investigation, where some unfortunate white kid had been kidnapped, raped and murdered, and the Black politician had responded in the same insensitive manner as the numb-nut by playing the Race Card and saying he didn't see what the big deal was all about, since child molestation is the biggest white-on-white crime in America?
What if this Black politician was so full of himself as to suggest that a pregnant teen-aged incest or rape victim should not only be made to bear and raise the rapist’s offspring, but love and treat it as a "gift from God" as well?
He could have buttressed his position by arguing that both front-running GOP presidential candidates have a long standing affiliation with religious organizations who’s tradition includes an immoral record regarding pedophilia. The Black office holder could categorize the differences between the two candidates religious affiliations by suggesting that members of one group have been known to engage in same-sex pedophilia, which is generally characterized by brief, promiscuous encounters, while members of the other group support opposite-sex pedophilia and believe in marrying their victims.
While race-bating hatred expressed by the white politician was perfectly acceptable to this hostess, would it had been equally acceptable if my fictional Black elected official had given such a response in the context and manner I described?
Source: InnerGnat.com http://wp.me/pCuKg-a0
Recently on Current TV, in the “War Room” as it were, the hostess asked her guest, a California Republican, to weigh in on the news of the day, the investigation of the Trayvon Martin murder case. I don't know who’s idea it was to assign such a sensitive news item to a Republican, but it was obviously a bad pairing and waste of time. This garden variety Republican had no interest in the Martin case and could not have cared less about it.
Instead of responding to the question, he resulted to a Sarah Palin-type spiel, which is more a filibuster than coherent response, and promptly played the Race Card, claiming he didn't see what the big deal was over the murder of this Black youth. Reframing the question, he suggested they instead take a closer look at “Black-on-Black crime” because, according to him, more Black people are killed by other Blacks than by white people.
Instead of the War Room hostess taking ownership of her question from this holier-than-thou GOP numb nut and emphasize she was referring to the BLOTCHED police investigation, she found it easier to roll over and agree with his racist implications before proceeding to her next topic.
Since there are more white adults who molest white children than there are Black people who kill other Blacks, what if a Black elected official had been asked about a high-profile child abduction investigation, where some unfortunate white kid had been kidnapped, raped and murdered, and the Black politician had responded in the same insensitive manner as the numb-nut by playing the Race Card and saying he didn't see what the big deal was all about, since child molestation is the biggest white-on-white crime in America?
What if this Black politician was so full of himself as to suggest that a pregnant teen-aged incest or rape victim should not only be made to bear and raise the rapist’s offspring, but love and treat it as a "gift from God" as well?
He could have buttressed his position by arguing that both front-running GOP presidential candidates have a long standing affiliation with religious organizations who’s tradition includes an immoral record regarding pedophilia. The Black office holder could categorize the differences between the two candidates religious affiliations by suggesting that members of one group have been known to engage in same-sex pedophilia, which is generally characterized by brief, promiscuous encounters, while members of the other group support opposite-sex pedophilia and believe in marrying their victims.
While race-bating hatred expressed by the white politician was perfectly acceptable to this hostess, would it had been equally acceptable if my fictional Black elected official had given such a response in the context and manner I described?
Source: InnerGnat.com http://wp.me/pCuKg-a0