moonbattery logo

Mar 08 2012

Breitbart Strikes From Beyond the Grave

As posthumously confirmed by Andrew Breitbart, Barack Hussein Obama hasn’t only spent his life associating with malevolent radicals — he has advocated them. Here Harvard’s racialist Professor Charles Ogletree crows with delight that voters were kept in the dark about Obama urging people to “open your hearts and open your minds” to the toxic poison of another race-obsessed radical, Professor Derrick Bell:

Some background on Professor Bell, who was hired by Harvard despite his obvious lack of qualifications specifically because of his race:

Derrick Bell may be considered the founder, or at least the godfather, of “Critical Race Theory,” an academic tradition in which race plays the same role as class plays in the Marxist paradigm. …

Since Bell viewed racial minorities as a permanently oppressed caste — and he saw racism as a normal, permanent aspect of American life — he reasoned that equality before the law was unfair to blacks, whose moral claims were superior to those of whites. Bell endorsed a journal called Race Traitor, which is dedicated to the “abolition of whiteness,” and whose motto is “Treason to the white race is loyalty to humanity.”

Turn over any rock in the Ivy League and insects like Bell and Ogletree will scurry right up your leg, having been imbedded deep in academia as a result of Affirmative Action and the eagerness of educrats to show off their radical chic. But no one in their right mind would want the president of the USA to be the kind of kook who would endorse their pernicious views.

On tips from J, Nobody, and Bob Roberts.

Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on Google+Pin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on Twitter


  • rrrick1000

    Andrew Rocks!!! He started something great, maybe truth will come back to journalism because of his spark. Thomas Sowell compared Bell to Hitler. I am not surprisedAbout Obama, I have known from day one that he is a radical from his past , friends and actions and words. Quite simple, but for those who didn’t notice here you go, and this is just the first of many, more info out soon.

  • Son of Taz

    Some regulars in today’s open thread stated the video wasn’t all that much, and indeed, out of context, they’d be right. What it shows is the early days of the communist living at 1600 Penn Ave, but more importantly, the conspiracy to hide this information from the American public. It simply proves what many of us have known all along – we have a communist traitor in the White House.

    It should also be noted that WGBH, the Boston PBS station, would not permit the video to be seen or copied. Breitbart managed to obtain a copy, but there’s more they haven’t been able to get their hands on.

    Make no mistake, this is a conspiracy of the left to overtake the US. Those of us who read MB and other blogs know this, but now we have to convince other citizens how close we are to becoming the new soviet union.

    God help us.

  • kiplingsburdens

    At this point video could surface of Obama snorting lines in the Oval Office while posing for pictures with Louis Farrakhan, Hugo Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Al Sharpton and giving each of them a suitcase with $100 Million in cash AND NOTHING WOULD COME OF IT.

    Forget Radical, he is a treasonous Communist- There isn’t even a word yet for what he is.

    Nonetheless, the darkies, Libs, Media, academics, illiterati, crony capitalists, welfare cheats, Illegal Democrats, Radicals, Communists, anarchists, “environmentalists,” black nationalists, La Raza, Upper Eastside Jews, Hollywood and anyone else that would spit on the Constitution and regards anyone who works for their possessions with utter disdain and outright hatred – LOVE HIM.

    Who do the Republicans run against him? Romney or Santorum… May as well have had Neville Chamberlain leading the Battle of Britain.

  • X

    Son of Taz– we have a communist traitor in the White House.

    If this is true, and I think it is, how would our CIA treat a known communist agent found in their midst and most importantly….how would they treat him if he was our…President?

  • SR

    Play the race card….CNN beclowns itself painting Breitbart editor-in-chief as racist

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/08/video-cnn-beclowns-itself-painting-breitbart-editor-in-chief-as-racist/

  • IslandLifer

    I agree Kiplings. With PROOF laid out right in front of them of many impeachable crimes our congress does nothing to stop this criminal. This tells me they share the guilt, with the exception of maybe a few. So we are no longer represented but rather controlled and must deal with every illegal legislation they cram down our throats until, as Taz pointed out, people are made aware and we fix this at the ballots. With so many numbskulls this seems like an impossible task. When I inform people I find a few receptive but the majority act like the helpless sheep they really are. This is why I prepare.

  • StanInTexas

    X, all we need do is look back at the McCarthy era to see how Democrats coddle and support known Communist agents in our Government.

    Democrats can always be counted on to take whatever side is bad for or totally against America.

    Always have, and always will!

  • Beef

    Thanks for putting this into context, but I don’t think evidence of Obama’s radical and/or shady ties will make one bit of difference, especialy at this point.

    In 2008, a video of (esteemed) civil rights icon Percy Sutton emerged, wherein he explained that he had been approached by Khalid al Mansour, an adviser for Saudi Prince Al-Walid bin Talal (the guy whose post 9-11 donation Giuliani sent back), to write a letter to help Barack Obama get into Harvard.

    Why was a radical muslim guy who worked for a Saudi billionaire working to get Obama into Harvard?

    The video has been on You Tube for almost four years now, and has garnered all of 132,000 hits:

    http://youtu.be/4EcC0QAd0Ug

    I think someone could produce a video of Barack Obama at flight school with Muhammed Atta discussing how he helped Timothy McVeigh blow up the building in OKC, poisoned Mother Teresa, and detailing his future plans to take over America, bankrupt the country, ban baseball, and exterminate white Christians, and 90% of people would ignore it.

  • SR
  • Jock

    BAWAWHAHAHA

    A hug? That’s it? That’s what Obama had Breitbart snuffed for?

    Obama hugs the former dean of the University of Oregon School of Law and a professor of Law at Harvard, and this is somehow an issue. Yes, it’s Hug-gate!

    Hey did you notice, Obama was wearing white pants. White pants! I ask you isn’t that all the proof you need he’s a racist?

    Moonbattery chickens just don’t get how ridiculous they are.

    Squawk, Racist! Squawk, commie! Squawk, Hug! Squawk, traitor!

  • SR
  • Jock

    Obama’s radical and/or shady ties will make one bit of difference, especialy at this point.
    Did you notice – he wasn’t wearing a tie. That proves how much he doesn’t want anyone to see his ties. We demand Obama release his ties for all to see! I bet some of them are commie red as well as radical

  • Lao in Space

    Jock (Gunther) says:
    Squawk, Racist! Squawk, commie! Squawk, Hug! Squawk, traitor!

    IT’S JUST A HUG LIKE HE PARROTS, ER SAYS! SQUAAAAAAAAAWK! YOU WEE SILLY PARROTS CANNOT FATHOM THE NUANCE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND ITS COMPLETE UNLIKENESS TO CLASSIC SOCIALISM!

    IT WILL WORK THIS TIME!

    SQUAAAAAAAAAAAWK!

  • Lao in Space

    WHITE PANTS, PRETTY BIRD, WHITE PANTS! SQUAAAAAAAAWK!

  • J

    Video: CNN beclowns itself painting Breitbart editor-in-chief as racist

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/08/video-cnn-beclowns-itself-painting-breitbart-editor-in-chief-as-racist/

  • IslandLifer

    Jock…the perfect example of anoxic brain damage from having his head so far up his ass. Yes Jockstraps, the sphincter will cut off the circulation. Somebody should have warned you as now it is too late, the damage is done

  • J

    Obama’s Radical Professor Derrick Bell’s Sci-Fi Film Portrays Ronald Reagan As Alien Slave Trader…

    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/03/08/obamas-radical-professor-derrick-bells-sci-fi-film-portrays-ronald-reagan-as-alien-slave-trader/

  • J

    Yeah, jock. That’s why Obama’s comrades hid the tape during the 2008 election. Because there isn’t anything to see.

    Just curious, are you trying to convince everyone else of this, or just yourself?

  • J
  • J

    Obama Forced His Students to Read Bell at University of Chicago Law School

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/08/obama-made-bell-required-reading-chicago

  • J

    Thomas Sowell Hammers ‘Despicable’ Derrick Bell; Compares To Hitler

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/07/Sowell%20On%20Bell

  • Jock

    Somebody should have warned you as now it is too late, the damage is done

    I admit it.

    Too many hugs as a child turned me into a commie. I ate a racist Oreo cookie once too.

  • Pingback: Breitbart Is Everywhere | Sad Hill News

  • Winston Smith

    Bell is a loon who wrote a fictional story where whites would sell blacks to aliens as slaves and HBO apparently made craptastic movie based on it featuring Ronal Reagan.

    http://quitenormal.wordpress.com/2012/03/08/breitbart-reveals-obama-hero-derrick-bells-hbo-sci-fi-film-and-its-slave-trading-alien-ronald-reagan/

    What a nut job.

  • Hail The Amberlamps!

    THE BREITBART VIDEO IS HUGS AND COOKIES! RACIST KOOKY PARROTS! IT’S NOTHING!

    SQUAAAAAAAAWK!

  • lao

    Firstly, let’s address the supposed “cover-up”.

    The Story Behind the Obama Law School Speech Video

    But there’s nothing new about the clip or Obama’s role in the controversy at Harvard Law School. In 2008, as a part of our quadrennial election special The Choice 2008, FRONTLINE ran the same footage of the speech as a part of an exploration of Obama’s time at Harvard Law School, where he graduated in 1991. It’s been online at our site and on YouTube since then.

    In light of today’s controversy, and Breitbart.com editors’ claims that the footage had been edited, we pulled the full archived tape. It includes not just Obama’s speech, but other footage from the rally and portions of Derrick Bell’s speech. You can watch it in full (at the link).

    While BuzzFeed did not publish all of the available footage of the event — a manager here noted that they were paying for each second of footage — they did post the entirety of what was available of Obama’s speech. While other cameras could have shot additional material from the event, no other footage of the event exists at WGBH.

    And while there does appear to be editing in the footage available, that was almost certainly done in 1990. The Ten O’Clock News practice was to store completed segments as aired along with any relevant additional footage that might be useful in the future.

  • StanInTexas

    Lao, good job, keep it up.

    Keep pretending that any and every piece of news about Obama and his past is nothing, or old news, or insignificant. And make sure to throw in a few things that Rush Limbaugh said yesterday. Because we all know the words of a political pundit are MUCH more important than telling the truth about an elected official.

    Well, a Democrat anyway!

  • Bob Roberts

    Bob Roberts says: March 8, 2012 at 12:13 pm

    FACT CHECKING our local pest lao:

    He claims people are laughing at the video over at GATEWAY PUNDIT – I wonder what nonsense he posts there and what name he uses – I’m betting it’s likely “Big Wayne”. That’s the only person really “laughing” at the video I’ve seen yet and he’s using the same exact words and phrases lao typically uses here.

    Of course he fails to give a link.

    So here it is, along with some of the alleged “laughing”:

    You know what really irks me? Libs watch this and have absolutely no idea how it could possibly be controversial. Unreal.
    ————-
    On the other hand, Rick Perry is obviously a racist because of a rock they found in Texas.
    ————-
    If this is not controversial, it’s because we have lost and must emphatically regain the narrative that leftist radicalism is anathema to our very way of life. The reality confronts us daily, but large segments of the population take in this radicalism and these people don’t begin to connect the dots about just how poisonous it is to all of us.
    ————-
    I wonder what would happen if Romney or Santorum was caught on video speaking up for a White supremacist – how do you think the media would react?
    ————-
    Sean asked a good Q about how will this get through to the public when the Jer. Wright stuff didn’t knock sense into the people. Most people are wondering, who the hell is this prof? How can it be so bad for O to speak on his behalf? Look at all the students, white, black, etc., at the gathering. Then they’re all radical? Some might say it’s the typical lefty stuff at uni’s…but we know O never moved beyond that ideology.
    ————-
    We need the words on tape to come out of O’s own mouth. It is true as another commenter said, the Dems/left are not impressed. That O spoke at a stage production memorializing Alinksy is a so-what. This is going to be too. I hope the tapes do get progressively more damning so that the weight of them over time this year sinks in to the voters and paints a clear picture of this anti-American radical.
    ————-
    Here is video of Bell saying racism will always exist and that white people have a sense of entitlement.

    http://bluecollarphilosophy.com/2012/03/obamas-derrick-bell-believes-white-people-have-a-sense-of-entitlement-video/

    Obama got his academic version of Jeremiah Wright in Bell.
    ————-
    Author James Traub voiced this opinion in his 1993 piece on the professor:

    “That’s Derek Bell’s bottom line: if it comforts whites, it’s bad; if it comforts blacks–i.e., Farrakhan–it’s good. Bell, along with Farrakhan and so many others, offers victimization as a consolation.”
    ————-
    Brietbart worked with original footage not reruns from PBS…This is how the Soviets handled dissidents. Kill them and have state indoctrinated artists rewrite their political works.

  • TED
  • Bob Roberts

    One point – you can tell who are the paid Obama shills by the frequency, urgency and utter nonsensical nature of their posts in which they attempt to distract and discredit. Here we see lao (and others) going berserk trying to change the subject to ANYTHING other than THE FACTS contained in the piece.

    Unfortunately that works among the slow-witted, easily swayed who make up Obama’s base.

    Fortunately it’s going to take a lot more than that to re-elect him.

  • lao

    I see I need to keep things simple for bobby and stanwee.

    Did PBS broadcast this tape in 2008?

  • TED
  • Bob Roberts

    Also the commenter at Gateway who calls himself “Skygazer” uses the exact same words and phrases as a lib-tard who used to go under the name SkyHUNTER, almost certain he’s the same loser with a new name.

    Still checking the comments there – don’t see conservatives “laughing” at the video. A few have suggested that the intended version was possibly taken in conjunction with Breitbart’s sudden death and this is a lesser version, perhaps incomplete. Others have expressed mild disappointment that they expected more. But those comments are few and far between.

    A couple of obvious lao-type sock puppets are laughing at it, but they’ve clearly identified themselves as the typical liberal stooge/scum/trolls who frequent conservative sites, probably as part of that paid initiative by the Obama administration.

  • TED

    lao is a FAKE! NO ONE can be THAT STUPID.

  • TED
  • Bob Roberts

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 12:26 pm
    ————-
    Irrelevant and immaterial. PBS is a well known leftist front that sugar coats everything with an extreme liberal bias. You’re trying to distract and disrupt again. Try, please, FOR ONCE, to stay on point, lao.

    The issue is not when or even if or by whom this was ever broadcasted, THE ISSUE IS WHAT IS IN IT, WHO OBAMA ASSOCIATED WITH, THE RIDICULOUS RADICAL IDEAS HE PICKED UP WHEN DOING SO and all that.

    So you can go ahead and try to do damage control and disinformation. I’ve already caught you in one blatant lie. If you want to go for more, who am I to stop you?

  • Bob Roberts

    By the way lao, it’s been real (not fun, but real) watching you make a fool of yourself. But I’m going to go have REAL FUN now as I’m looking down to the beach and, since it’s a totally FABULOUS beach day here the wild bikinis are out and I’m going to go join them. Having fun talking to yourself from your parents’ basement? KEEP IT UP. I’ll be down on the beach with real people having real fun laughing at you from time to time and will see what nonsense you posted some time later tonight.

  • rrrick1000

    For the Knucklehead up there saying it was just a hug, this close relationship ended just a year ago by Bells death, he remained very close to Obummer and kept writting and defending him. Do some research before you write genius.

  • AC

    Who is Andrew Breitbart?

  • http://andy42302.bravejournal.com/ andy42302

    So,uh, that’s it? The smoking gun? The bombshell? That’s the “toxic poison” we’ve been waiting for?
    Obama once hugged a fellow Harvard scholar of his own race?
    All you have, at the bottom of your barrel, is some unhinge attempt to mislead what the Critical Race Theory is and/or its intentions. It’s the same crap as claiming health reform intended to kill grandma or euthanize kids with down syndrome.
    Your toxic poison is weak tea.

  • Bob Roberts

    @AC:

    John Gault?

    (assuming you’re asking rhetorically, if not, google him)

  • AC

    I am Andrew Breitbart. You are Andrew Breitbart. We are Andrew Breitbart.

  • son of a preacher man

    I seem to remember leftist being all in a tiff when there was footage of President Bush holding hands with a Saudi Prince as they walked along a path. That was all the proof they needed to know GW was in bed with the Saudis.

  • lao

    bobby sez: One point – you can tell who are the paid Obama shills by the frequency, urgency and utter nonsensical nature of their posts in which they attempt to distract and discredit. Here we see lao (and others) going berserk trying to change the subject to ANYTHING other than THE FACTS contained in the piece.

    If ONLY bobby could restrain himself to just one point, but we all know the answer to that one.

    What’s hilarious about that claim is that it describes bobby’s own tactics quite accurately. For example, notice how bobby embraces the trivial (comments on Gateway Pundit) in multiple longwinded posts thinking he’s proving something.

    For anyone interested there are contrary GP comments posted to the open thread. Needless to say, bobby dismisses those as being liberals and rants about lies etc.

    Bobby dismisses the PBS facts as “irrelevant and immaterial”.

    blount disagrees: Here Harvard’s racialist Professor Charles Ogletree crows with delight that voters were kept in the dark about Obama urging people to “open your hearts and open your minds” to the toxic poison of another race-obsessed radical, Professor Derrick Bell

    As already demonstrated by the link to PBS, NOBODY was “kept in the dark”. The video was broadcast in 2008 and available on YouTube. The provides the entire footage available. If anyone thinks they have different footage, provide a link.

    bobby finally tries to define things: THE ISSUE IS WHAT IS IN IT, WHO OBAMA ASSOCIATED WITH, THE RIDICULOUS RADICAL IDEAS HE PICKED UP WHEN DOING SO and all that.

    Well let’s see. What IS in the raw footage released by PBS?

    Who was Obama associated with? Obviously, like every other student there, he associated with other Harvard students and his professors.

    Does the video demonstrate any “RIDICULOUS RADICAL IDEAS” from Obama?

    I see Obama giving a very nice extemporaneous and humorous introduction. He’s surrounded by students, most, but not all of whom, are white. Here’s a transcript of what he said:

    ….and I remember that the black law students had organized an orientation for the first year students. And one of the persons who spoke at that orientation was Professor Bell. And I remember him sauntering up to the front and not giving us a lecture but engaging us in a conversation and speaking the truth and telling us that he envied to learn at this place that I carried with me ever since.

    Now how did this one man do all this? How did he accomplish all this? He hasn’t done it simply by his good looks and easy charm. Although he has both in ample measure. He hasn’t done it simply because of the excellence of his scholarship. Although his scholarship has opened up new vistas and new horizons and changed the standards of what legal writing is about. Open up your hearts and your minds to the words of Professor Derrick Bell.

    After this speech which is greeted with sustained applause, Obama hugs Bell and that’s that. So much for hug-gate.

  • son of a preacher man

    “For example, notice how bobby embraces the trivial (comments on Gateway Pundit) in multiple longwinded posts thinking he’s proving something.

    For anyone interested there are contrary GP comments posted to the open thread. Needless to say, bobby dismisses those as being liberals and rants about lies etc.”

    Let me get this straight Bob comments on the comments from GP and that is irrelevent to the topic at hand and then you refer us to look at what was posted by you about the GP comments in the open thread and some how that makes your point.

    Do you really feel you are in the right because X amount of comments on another blog express a similiar sentiment relative to your own? Why does this line of reasoning always work in your favor but never for anyone else?

  • lao

    PK, Here’s my remark on the Open Thread.

    Too funny bobby. Brietbart’s Big Government posthumous tape expose of Obama’s college days is getting laughed at, even in the comments from right wingers on websites like Gateway Pundit.

    If you have a substantive link or something important to add to this non-story, as opposed to your usual whining, you are invited to produce it.

    Notice that in two separate threads, bobby decided that multiple posts about my throwaway line about GP comments was the issue NOT providing a substantive link or something important to add to this non-story,

  • J

    Obama Professor Derrick Bell: They Only Give Tenure To “White Boys”…

    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/03/08/obama-professor-derrick-bell-they-only-give-tenure-to-white-boys/

  • J
  • J

    From 1992: Obama’s Professor, Derrick Bell, on the Permanence of White Racism (Video)

    http://www.verumserum.com/?p=38989

  • son of a preacher man

    Reiterating what you have already said does not answer my question.

  • J
  • lao

    It seems the far right seriously thinks Derrick Bell’s influence on Obama has some importance.

    Obama directly addressed racial issues in his “More Perfect Union” speech given during the campaign of 2008. Does Bell’s so-called “toxic poison” show up in that speech?

    Barack Obama: ‘A More Perfect Union’ (Full Speech – Both Text and Video)

  • http://www.henrypbabcock.com Henry

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 3:52 pm

    Yes, please keep defending the black racists; we’re all getting to see prog idiocy in full bloom.

  • Festivus

    lol, campaign speeches are always truthful.

    (wipes away tears from laughter)

    Anyway, that PBS show was rather innocuous in that Derrick Bell could have been just about anyone. The narrator says, “…championing the cause of a black faculty member, Derrick Bell.”

    That’s it. No context whatsoever.

  • lao

    PK, use your noggin. I post on moonbattery where hardly ANY comments support my position. That doesn’t make my position wrong…unless your side can provide direct contradictory evidence otherwise.

    When I make a mistake, I acknowledge it but, generally speaking, attempts to prove me wrong fail miserably.

    That’s why you see so many distractions, straw man arguments, sock puppets, personal attacks, unfounded accusations and deliberate lies from people attempting to respond to me who realize reality is not on their side.

    Look at blount’s opening paragraph whining about a cover up that the video clip supposedly demonstrates.

    I blew that claim out of the water with my 12:06 post.

    Disagree with that? Make your case.

  • lao

    Feel free to highlight the lies festus.

  • Festivus

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 4:13 pm

    Feel free to highlight the lies festus.

    Oh, I’m sorry, when did campaign speeches become anything less than self-serving dissertations aimed at putting the best spin on yourself. Too funny. That’s your evidence, huh? lol

    You are aware, no doubt, that Breitbart is also reporting that a person named Derrick A. Bell visited the WH twice in 2010. There doesn’t appear to be any compelling newsworthy reason behind the visit.

  • lao

    festus, Obama’s speech received widespread, and even bi-partisan, praise.

    A response that amounts to “he’s lying” is no response at all. You are welcome to your opinion but, needless to say, it’s not evidence of anything other than your own ignorance.

    A professor twice visited a former student who became President? I’m sure that was a pleasant time for both of them. It’s no surprise there was no compelling newsworthy reason behind the visit.

    The desperation of the right to salvage SOMETHING out of this Big Government fiasco is certainly entertaining.

    I’m not sure Breitbart is even IN his grave yet, but if he is, he’s turning rapidly thanks to this inept attempt by his subordinates and those attempting some valiant, but hopeless spin.

  • Bob Roberts

    andy42302 says: March 8, 2012 at 1:47 pm
    ————-
    So I noted “andy” is back, yet another lao sock puppet? In any case since I was busy, I asked a buddy to check out his blog. Here is the gist of his report:

    His last post was made March 3 in the evening and actually had 1 comment – from an AD BOT! It was the left’s talking points about the GOP’s mythical “war on women” with the usual propaganda points made up out of whole cloth by the Democrats om a blatant attempt to prove that women are still essentially dumb blondes because they’ll fall for such tripe. Fortunately we independents and the GOP know women in general aren’t that stupid. After all, we’re not the ones urging them to rip their children out of their wombs and flush them down the toilet.

    His last post before that goes all the way back to Jan 5 a bit before noon and it actually had one comment too – ANOTHER AD BOT!

    It was the usual leftist propaganda about how taking measures to ensure the left doesn’t win another election through their proven voter fraud attempts are really a form of racism and discrimination. While they do make the point that some of their own voters are too dumb to follow simple instructions (remember the butterfly ballot, created by ONE OF THEIR OWN, then used as an example of how the GOP was trying to prevent legitimate votes?) and this of course begs the question “then what are they doing voting in the first place” (playing right into their hands by mentioning it, but hey, seriously, if you can’t properly apply for a free ID using a simple form what ARE you doing voting?) – and in fact I suspect if you look into the cases mentioned you’ll probably find they were engaging in some form of voter fraud and were stopped from doing it and this was called “preventing them from voting because of a technicality” – the technicality being they already voted three times at other polling places and four times using absentee ballots!

    But the big surprise was Andy’s December 4th post, which actually got 5 comments. Oops, sorry, no – ALL AD BOTS.

    It seems that we who don’t like Obama might have something to fear after all.

    Obama has the ad bot vote all sewn up!

  • son of preacher man

    So posters on another blog agree with you that proves your point. I ask you why that is so and you come back with posters on this blog don’t generally agree with you so that proves your point.

    “That doesn’t make my position wrong…”

    It does not make it right either which was the point of my inquiry.

  • lao

    Ah…bobby has kicked off the sand flies. Time to go shopping so he can get four or five comments out of the way.

  • Festivus

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 4:36 pm

    festus, Obama’s speech received widespread, and even bi-partisan, praise.

    A response that amounts to “he’s lying” is no response at all. You are welcome to your opinion but, needless to say, it’s not evidence of anything other than your own ignorance.

    Too much. lol Who gives a shit and where did I say he was lying? What has that to do with anything? What in that speech is suggestive that Obama’s views are inconsistent with Derrick Bell’s beliefs? Do you think race relations in the US are better or worse today than they were in 2007? Do you think Eric Holder is uniting the races or dividing them?

    That speech was nothing more than self-serving CYA. And if you believe any of it, you’re even a bigger fool than I took you for.

    I suppose next you’ll cite his campaign speech where he said that he wouldn’t hire any lobbyists as evidence he has no lobbyists in his Administration.

    Or maybe, he’s actually four years younger because the Selma march made his parents feel safe enough to have a mixed race child.

    What a douche bag. lol

  • Festivus

    Bob, andy was pretty much devastated and demoralized by the whole democratic crash and burn in Wisconsin.

  • J
  • lao

    And the significance of that is what exactly?

  • AC

    How would you feel if David Duke visited a Republican White House?

  • lao

    LOL!!

    AC you are supposed to be smart.

    Was David Duke a Republican candidate’s Professor at Harvard Law School?

  • lao

    festus asks: … where did I say he was lying?

    Here, because I understand sarcasm when I see it:

    Festivus says: March 8, 2012 at 4:11 pm
    lol, campaign speeches are always truthful. (wipes away tears from laughter)

  • Festivus

    What in that speach leads you to believe Obama does not share the views of Bell?

  • lao

    Perhaps you could provide three or four “views of Bell” so I understand exactly what you are talking about.

  • Festivus

    You used the 2008 speech as evidence BO doesn’t share the views of Bell and now you are admitting you don’t really know. I thought your reasoning smacked of pilfered juvenile talking points from Kos/MM/Huffpo.

  • lao

    festus, I had never heard of Derrick Bell until this silly tape was brought up and trumpeted by Breitbart’s Big Government as a “bombshell”.

    blount calls Bell’s work a “toxic poison”. The entire substance, if any, of these claims is that Obama has been influenced by Bell.

    Prove it.

    The onus is not on me, the onus is on you.

    I asked: Obama directly addressed racial issues in his “More Perfect Union” speech given during the campaign of 2008. Does Bell’s so-called “toxic poison” show up in that speech?

  • Festivus

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 6:33 pm

    festus, I had never heard of Derrick Bell until this silly tape was brought up and trumpeted by Breitbart’s Big Government as a “bombshell”.

    blount calls Bell’s work a “toxic poison”. The entire substance, if any, of these claims is that Obama has been influenced by Bell.

    Prove it.

    The onus is not on me, the onus is on you.

    YOU MADE THE ASSERTION – YOU BACK IT UP.

    I made no assertion whatsoever. I simply laughed at your now admittedly absurd charge that BO’s 2008 campaign speech was evidence that BO doesn’t hold the same views as Bell.

  • lao

    Screaming doesn’t make more sense.

    Quote the assertion I supposedly made.

    As expected, you’ve got nothing except your own pilfered juvenile talking points.

    It’s easy to make claims when you don’t justify them.

  • AC

    Was David Duke a Republican candidate’s Professor at Harvard Law School?

    No, but both men have devoted their life’s work toward creating inter-race animosity and promoting systems of race-based privileges and punishments.

    I detest racism in all forms and for all reasons, and so do a majority of Americans. Racial axe grinders don’t deserve to be dignified through official White House visits or any other official connection. Whether Democrat or Republican, white or black, the presidential thing to do would be to sever all ties with such a toxic person.

    People of conscience need to demand these racists depart from their presence, never to return.

    Maybe I picked the wrong example white supremacist.

    Suppose Don Black attended a meeting of the Palm Beach County Republican Party. Would you have a problem with that? Would you have denounced a Moonbattery commenter who sat by idly while Black pushed his agenda there?

  • lao

    Don Black? Never heard of him.

    Sorry AC, but, as I pointed out before, there’s nothing nefarious about a Professor visiting a former student if that student happens to become president.

    I am quite sure that, like me, you had no idea of Derrick Bell’s existence until these bogus claims surfaced.

    Absurd hyperbole like calling Bell’s work “toxic poison”, just makes your side look ridiculous, particularly since, the entire point of bringing up Bell is because we are supposed to presume Obama’s views are the same.

  • AC

    You parrot Media Matters talking points and you’ve never heard of the founder/head of Stormfront? I find that hard to believe.

  • Festivus

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 6:44 pm

    Quote the assertion I supposedly made.

    As expected, you’ve got nothing except your own pilfered juvenile talking points.

    It’s easy to make claims when you don’t justify them.

    What a weasel.

    One last time (I know it’s an exercise in futility since you are incapable of acknowledging an error):

    The point of the post is that BO associates with and advocates for (“open your hearts and minds”) people with “toxic” suggesting that BO shares those views.

    You attempted to refute that logic by citing a 2008 campaign speech made by “teh one” that contained no toxic opinions on race as if that campaign speech contents were the sum total of his views on the subject. You asserted that BO did not share Bell’s views because he expressed his views in the campaign speech.

    I quite appropriately laughed at your absurd “logic.” As it turns out, you admit it was absurd because you had never heard of Bell before this episode and you know nothing of his views. Therefore, you are unable to substantiate your assertion that BO does not share the views of Bell.

    Now you are trying to weasel your way back from an assertion that could not have been more clear.

    Here’s the quote:

    “lao says: March 8, 2012 at 3:52 pm

    It seems the far right seriously thinks Derrick Bell’s influence on Obama has some importance.

    Obama directly addressed racial issues in his “More Perfect Union” speech given during the campaign of 2008. Does Bell’s so-called “toxic poison” show up in that speech?”

    Your post clearly attempts to assert that Bell’s influence has no importance because of the 2008 speech.

    Try to weasel your way out all you want. The absurdity of your post couldn’t be more clear.

  • lao

    Too funny. The only weasels around here are the ones making accusations against Obama that they can’t back up.

    festus, you quite clearly don’t know what you are talking about. Thanks for quoting my words to prove it.

    You said (rather incoherently) The point of the post is that BO associates with and advocates for (“open your hearts and minds”) people with “toxic” suggesting that BO shares those views.

    So, when Obama was a law student at Harvard, he associated with Bell who was a law professor there.

    I agree with that.

    It is asserted that Bell’s views are “toxic poison” and that Obama shares those views.

    You seem to regard that as gospel. I said prove it.

    You whine: Your post clearly attempts to assert that Bell’s influence has no importance because of the 2008 speech.

    I said nothing of the sort, I put the onus of proof on your side where it belongs. You are the ones making the accusations around here.

    I said: Does Bell’s so-called “toxic poison” show up in that speech?

    If the “toxic poison” (whatever the heck THAT is) shows up ANYWHERE, so that you can pin it on Obama, prove it.

  • Festivus

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 7:50 pm
    It is asserted that Bell’s views are “toxic poison” and that Obama shares those views.

    You seem to regard that as gospel. I said prove it.

    I NEVER said that douche bag. I never agreed with or asserted anything other than your assertion was absurd and you have admitted as much.

    You whine: Your post clearly attempts to assert that Bell’s influence has no importance because of the 2008 speech.

    I said nothing of the sort, I put the onus of proof on your side where it belongs. You are the ones making the accusations around here.

    Too funny. I suppose we are to believe those two paragraphs, one after the other, were just random sentences that wound up in the same post. lol

    If the “toxic poison” (whatever the heck THAT is) shows up ANYWHERE, so that you can pin it on Obama, prove it.

    Again, dip shit, I NEVER said that. I never made any assertion, nor did I expressly agree with anyone. I simply mocked your hilarious assertion was absurd which you admit to.

    Give it up crosshairs boy.

  • Bob Roberts

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 4:36 pm
    A response that amounts to “he’s lying” is no response at all.
    ————
    Now on the one hand lao accuses me of being long winded (one of the few honest things lao ever said here) and on the other when Festivus gives a succinct summary of Obama’s speech, “HE’S LYING”, which is perhaps the best & most honest thing posted on this sub-thread of MOONBATTERY today, lao responds with “that’s no response at all”.

    Yes, lao, it’s the truth. Expressed concisely and profoundly. The best response one could give.

    Because…

    HE’S LYING!

  • lao

    (rolls eyes)

    The far right claims Bell has influenced Obama. See the thread header.

    I say: Prove it.

  • lao

    That’s a silly opinion bobby which you will be utterly unable to back up.

    I’ll ignore it.

  • Festivus

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 8:26 pm

    (rolls eyes)

    The far right claims Bell has influenced Obama. See the thread header.

    I say: Prove it.

    You’re just making an ass out of yourself, crosshairs boy.

    I never asserted anything, nor did I agree with anything anyone said in the thread. I don’t have anything to prove. Ask Dave or Bob to prove it if you like. I have nothing to prove. I’ve asserted nothing other than the absurdity of your post which you have essentially acknowledged.

    Just admit you made an asinine post and move on, crosshairs boy. That is if you want to salvage any sliver of respect that anyone might have for you.

    Give it up crosshairs boy. Seriously, you’re making an ass of yourself.

  • Bob Roberts

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 2:13 pm
    ————-
    I’m not sure when lao forgot it was the rest of us who have him dancing like a puppet on a string, when he’s not doing exactly that for the leftists, and began to have delusions of grandeur that led him to believe he could dictate to me or anyone here how many points we would make – or made him think he had any right to criticize us for making multiple points whenever we felt like it. He is grasping at straws. I start a sentence with “One point” and he starts riffing as if he’s decreed that’s all I’m allowed to make, one point, and I just have to accept that.

    Wrong again, as usual.

    So I’m going to make MULTIPLE POINTS, perhaps one, perhaps more, per each of his posts I care to visit:

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 7:50 pm
    ————
    Poor lao – the FACT he is so deep in denial does not negate the FACT Festivus and others have pegged Obama straight up.

    Denial is more than just a river in Egypt, as lao’s posts prove.

    OH, and there he goes with that fake “onus of proof” argument. Only his problem is THE TRUTH IS SELF-EVIDENT AND NEEDS NO FURTHER PROVING. Self-evident to anyone who’s not got their head so far up their A$$ that they’re tongue is tickling their tonsils, anyway.

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 7:19 pm
    ————–
    Nobody is asking anybody to assume anything.

    We have the precise words of his former professor.

    We have the precise words where Obama said WE should all … how did he put it? You know, I’m not even going to bother because even an exact quote straight out of Obama’s mouth is not enough to get lao to admit he’s lost in denial.

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 6:44 pm
    ————
    Too funny, but I do have A POINT OR TWO to make.

    For lao is actually distracting us with a bunch of JUVENILE, DISINGENUOUS TALKING POINTS and he’s, in a way, succeeding to a small measure in that he’s keeping us from really having an adult discussion of the nuances of this additional radical lunatic mentor of Obama.

    We’ve kicked him around enough. I think I’ll ignore him for a bit. Anyone care to join me?

  • lao

    Here’s what you asserted and it was a fabrication:

    Festivus says: March 8, 2012 at 6:17 pm
    You used the 2008 speech as evidence BO doesn’t share the views of Bell

    No I didn’t. I asked you to demonstrate that it did. You failed.

  • Festivus

    lol

    Then why’d you bring up that speech at all?

    Give it up crosshairs boy?

  • lao

    The contention of Big Government is that the university association between Bell and Obama means Obama holds Bell’s views.

    In blount’s words: But no one in their right mind would want the president of the USA to be the kind of kook who would endorse their pernicious views.

    I have simply said, prove Obama endorses their views.

    So far, the moonbattery brain trust has FAILED.

  • Festivus

    Why’d you bring up that speech, crosshairs boy?

  • Bob Roberts

    I just could not resist:

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 4:48 pm
    Ah…bobby has kicked off the sand flies. Time to go shopping so he can get four or five comments out of the way.

    —————-

    EIGHT COMMENTS BY lao LATER, I actually did comment.

    So, lao, what were you saying about going shopping so I could make a bunch of comments?

    You’re such a fungi!

  • Bob Roberts

    Again I assert that lao has this idea that he gets to frame the debate and if we refuse to let him, somehow he takes that as a win.

    Why don’t you take your toys and go home, lao. Nobody wants to play with a homosexual pedophile like you anyway.

  • J

    OBAMA ASSIGNED READING: BELL SAYS WHITES MIGHT ENSLAVE BLACKS

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/08/Obama-Bell-Assigned-Reading

  • Bath House Barry

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 8:26 pm- “The far right claims Bell has influenced Obama. See the thread header. I say: Prove it.”

    Yeah. I only say, “kill whitey” in front of my homies. In front of any honkey comrades it’s just, “screw whitey”.

  • Bath House Barry

    Bob Roberts says: March 8, 2012 at 9:23 pm- “…Why don’t you take your toys and go home, lao. Nobody wants to play with a homosexual pedophile like you anyway.”

    Au contraire. I dig Lao and I really like his “toys”. Especially the big black rubber one.

  • Festivus

    Bob Roberts says: March 8, 2012 at 9:23 pm

    Again I assert that lao has this idea that he gets to frame the debate and if we refuse to let him, somehow he takes that as a win.

    He knows he didn’t win jack. He’s just going to slink away like the low life snake he is.

    This thread should amply prove to anyone that he’s a liar and most likely an operative of some sort.

  • lao

    Too funny.

    As we can see by the trash bobby has posted here and in the open thread, you flakes have got nothing.

    That’s why you see so many distractions, straw man arguments, sock puppets, personal attacks, unfounded accusations and deliberate lies from people attempting to respond to me who realize reality is not on their side.

    bobby nails them all and bath house is probably his sock puppet.

    In blount’s words: But no one in their right mind would want the president of the USA to be the kind of kook who would endorse their pernicious views.

    I have simply said, prove Obama endorses their views.

    So far, the moonbattery brain trust has FAILED.

  • Festivus

    Crosshairs boy, why’d you bring up that speech?

  • Festivus

    lao says: March 8, 2012 at 9:51 pm

    That’s why you see so many distractions, straw man arguments, sock puppets, personal attacks, unfounded accusations and deliberate lies from people attempting to respond to me who realize reality is not on their side.

    Geez, want some cheese to go with that whine?

    You brought up the speech – why’d you do that, by the way? Was it a case of Tourette’s, crosshairs boy?

  • J
  • J
  • J
  • J
  • octa bright

    It would seem that we can take Mr. Bell’s ideas two ways. We can take the attitude thet because we are unredeamable racist at heart we might as well make the best of things and “Wup them lazy slaves’ asses” or simply conclude that Mr. Bell is quite smart and a complete fool. I far prefer considering him a fool to be ignored.

  • J

    Revealed: The Radical Racial Ideas of the Prof. Obama Raves About in New Harvard Video

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/revealed-the-radical-racial-ideas-of-the-prof-obama-raves-about-in-new-harvard-video/

  • J

    Obama’s Professor Derrick Bell Praises Farrakhan As “A Great Hero For The People”…

    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/03/09/obamas-professor-derrick-bell-praises-farrakhan-as-a-great-hero-for-the-people/

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy