You’d think by now the idea that Rush Limbaugh is an offensive, racist, homophobic, bigot would be pretty uncontroversial. Apparently, that’s not the case with many of his conservative fans.
While it may not be possible to get a scientific consensus on this, there is a good chance that, at least in terms of offensive idea per sentence spoken out loud, Rush Limbaugh is the most offensive human being on Earth. Nobody has had a longer, more shameless career of spewing vile hate-mongering than he has. It’s made Rush extremely wealthy and, for reasons that may be hard to fathom, extremely popular with a certain segment of the population who respond to his unique brand of hatred.
So it was that when writer and comedian John Fugelsang composed a tweet which lampooned the way that Limbaugh interweaves casual racism with a seething hatred of the Obama administration, Rush’s fans went into full-on defensive mode.
Eric Holder resigns; or as Rush Limbaugh puts it, 'black guy doesn't want to work.'
It’s a good joke in the “funny because it’s true” kind of way, but conservatives weren’t laughing. Instead, to the amazement of anyone who has ever happened to listen to Limbaugh talk, they said that Limbaugh wasn’t the racist and John Fugelsang was the real racist for thinking up that joke.
Twitchy, a conservative website with nine full-time staffers with jobs exclusively devoted to getting pretend-offended by liberals and reposting unfunny, sarcastic tweets by conservatives who also happen to be pretending to be offended by liberals, ran with the story.
@JohnFugelsang Nice of you to put your racism on full display.
In which white liberal wants to make racist joke so says it's a joke someone else would say https://t.co/AyJ60yTctp
@JohnFugelsang you're quite literally one the stupidest individuals in existence today. Keep reaching for the top spot though, John!
@JohnFugelsang For 25 yrs I've seen people like you take Rush out of context. He is no more racist than you are.
But here’s the thing: Rush Limbaugh is a racist and, while he hasn’t said that exact quote (hint: that’s the joke), he has said many, many things that are much, much worse. There is no amount of context that can help Limbaugh pretend he isn’t fundamentally bigoted in ways that make it shocking to think he still has advertisers willing to put up with him.
After marveling at the backlash he had gotten for his tweet, Fugelsang went to work exposing how silly it was to claim Limbaugh wasn’t a racist in the most effective way possible: Limbaugh’s actual words.
I told a joke abt Limbaugh; was subsequently accused of lying & fabricating a Rush quote. So I shared some actual Rush quotes.
"Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?" - Rush Limbaugh
“The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies.”- Rush Limbaugh
[To an African American female caller]: “Take that bone out of your nose and call me back.” - Rush Limbaugh
“Let the unskilled jobs that take absolutely no knowledge whatsoever to do — let stupid and unskilled Mexicans do that work.” -Rush Limbaugh
"Holocaust?" Ninety million Indians? Only four million left? They all have casinos — what's to complain about?" - Rush Limbaugh
KYle Kulinski, exposes the stupidity of “Snerdley,”
Fox News Finally Loses It: Uses ‘Success’ of Japanese Internment Camps to Advocate Profiling Muslims (Video)
So Fox’s business analysis program Cashin’ In with Eric Bolling decided to discuss if Muslims should be profiled. What the fuck this has to do with “business analysis”, I’m not sure. Anyway guess how they came down on the issue?
Co-panelist Jonathan Hoenig agreed that we should profile Muslims in America, elaborating even further by saying:
We should have been profiling on September 12, 2001. Let’s take a trip down memory lane here: The last war this country won, we put Japanese-Americans in internment camps, we dropped nuclear bombs on residential city centers. So, yes, profiling would be at least a good start
Hoenig is the guy who, you might remember, in the wake of Mike Brown’s shooting and the protests in Ferguson, said only racists talk about race. And now this supposed “libertarian” wants the government to start throwing people in interment camps. Because when he says “libertarian” he really means “greedy asshole”.
Jon Phillips takes on Nicholas Wade’s claims, and proves once again that so called “scientific” racism is little more than a pseudoscience. This was originally posted in September 2014 edition of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Report, ( Under the Title, Troublesome Sources ) and than cross posted at Alternet.
Nicholas Wade’s new book, A Troublesome Inheritance, is only the latest in a long line of works arguing that humans can be divided into discrete races, and that between those races, there are differences in behavior, temperament, intelligence, and even political and economic structures. Although the specifics of the arguments change, what remains constant is the idea that white people of European descent are inherently smarter, better, more “civilized” than members of other races, especially black Africans and their descendants. Wade’s work is no exception.
This book’s failure as a work of popular science has been well documented by biologists and anthropologists. This review will focus on another problem with Wade’s book, one just as damning as its scientific errors: its uncritical reliance on and legitimization of fringe racist theories masquerading as mainstream biology.
Wade, a former science writer for The New York Times, attempts to fabricate a sense of scientific credibility for his outlandish theories with the division of his book into two very different sections. The first half is intended as a survey of the history and science of research into human evolution, race, and genetics, and Wade supports most of his claims with citations to scientific literature.
In the second, more “speculative” half of the book, Wade’s claims about human genetics and evolution continue, but the scientific sources disappear. It is in this part of the book, for example, that Wade explains modern history through the claim that “European populations” have a genetic predisposition to “open societies and the rule of law to autocracies,” while the Chinese are inherently “drawn to a system of family obligations, political hierarchy, and conformity.” He posits that white Europeans and East Asians are innately more intelligent than Papuans or members of other “Stone Age societies” because “intelligence can be more highly rewarded in modern societies because it is in far greater demand.” Although he acknowledges at the outset that these portions of the book are intended to be speculative, in the text he presents these racist, hackneyed ideas as though they are simple facts, uncontroversial and incontrovertible.
I am so ashamed of myself for once having any respect for this guy.
It was almost certain that nothing this summer would top the absurdity of the Ku Klux Klan trying to recruit African Americans to its cause through anti-immigrant sentiments.
But then the David Horowitz Freedom Center (DHFC) launched its latest project, “Change the Game.” And similar to the KKK’s campaign, DHFC’s intentions are equal parts ludcrious, perplexing, and bigoted.
“Change the Game” is the group’s attempt to coax the Black community into supporting its brand of far-Right rhetoric. The problem is, David Horowitz, the group’s founder (pictured right), has previously authored and made his racist statements against those he’s now trying to attract.
A deeper look into the project’s website reveals that DHFC plans to use “Hip Hop culture” to promote its conspiracy theories. The site features various articles and videos framing progressive policies as innately racist and responsible for further perpetuating poverty in inner cities. The project’s leaders also attempt to argue that the answer to the destructive policies of the Left is good old fashioned “American Capitalism.”
A few days ago, Charisma, a Christian magazine, published an article titled “Why I Am Absolutely Islamophobic,” by Gary Cass. The article opens with:
My fear is not an irrational fear based on uniformed prejudice; rather it’s an historic, clear eyed, informed, rational fear. ISIS is doing to American journalists what every true follower of Muhammad wants to do to you and yours—subjugate or murder you. They believe they have been given a mandate by Allah (Satan) to dominate the world.
He goes on to ponder the best way to deal with this menace. Should we convert the heathens? No!
1. Conversion. Wouldn’t it be wonderful to see Muslims turn from Satan (Allah) to Christ? But, I agree with Phil Robertson: This is not biblically doable. Why? God has a plan and he revealed it at the birth of Ishmael, the father of the Arabs.
Well, perhaps if we let them have their own corner of the world, we can work something out? Nope:
2) D.A.M.N. (Deport All Muslims Now). Deport them like Spain was forced to do when they deported the Muslim Moors. Muslims in America are procreating at twice the rate of other groups. So either we force them all to get sterilized, or we wait for the “Army of Islam” to arise in our midst and do what Muslims always do, resort to violence.
So, what’s left, Mr. Cass?
3. Violence. The only thing that is biblical and that 1,400 years of history has shown to work is overwhelming Christian just war and overwhelming self defense. Christian Generals Charles Martel in 732 and Jon Sobieski in 1672 defeated Islamic Turks and their attempts to take the West. Who will God raise up to save us this time? Will God even intervene or turn us over to the Muslims for turning against Him?
Either way, we must be prepared for the increase of terror at home and abroad. This is not irrational, but the loving thing we must do for our children and neighbors. First trust in God, then obtain a gun(s), learn to shoot, teach your kids the Christian doctrines of just war and self defense, create small cells of family and friends that you can rely on if some thing catastrophic happens and civil society suddenly melts down.
ISIS has done us all a favor. The true face of Islam is on full display even as Muhammad is burning in hell. We will have to face the harsh truth that radical Islam has no place in civilized society. Militant Muslims cannot live in a society based on Christian ideals of equality and liberty. They will always seek to harm us.
You can find the original article here, because the editors at Charisma had an attack of intelligence and have taken the article down. They haven’t apologized or anything, but they have taken it down.
But it doesn’t matter, does it? The fact that no one in this prominent conservative Christian magazine saw nothing wrong with publishing this article says a lot about the Religious Right.
I originally found this article through Fred Clark, who posts for the Slacktivist blog: Charismanews.com goes full-on Hutu radio. Fred Clark has since posted an article on the author Gary Cass: So who is this Gary Cass guy?
Leah Nelson exposes the genocidal “Christian Anti-Defamation Commission.”
As news of the ultra-violent Islamic State in Iraq and Syria’s (ISIS) repugnant activities has filtered into America’s consciousness, right-wing politicians and media outlets have made the group the latest cause célèbre in their endless rhetorical war against the twin evils of Islam and immigration.
An extremist group too radical for even Al Qaeda to stomach, ISIS has horrified the world with the recent beheading of two American journalists and its brutal massacres of Iraqi religious minorities. Though there is no evidence that ISIS has operatives in America, ultraconservative Texas Gov. Rick Perry has suggested that the group has sent combatants over the U.S.-Mexico border, while WorldNetDaily, a far-right conspiracist online tabloid, claims that ISIS is working with Mexican drug cartels to infiltrate this country.
The LGBT- and Muslim-bashing hate group Christian Anti-Defamation Commission (CADC), takes it one step further than that.
In an unsigned Sept. 4 blog post apparently written by CADC head Gary Cass (Cass is known to write most of the posts on the CADC site), the group seems convinced that ISIS is already here - and it thinks American Christians must prepare to fight back with “overwhelming Christian just war.” In the post, titled “I’m Islamophobic, Are You?,” CADC says “every true follower of Mohammed wants to … subjugate and murder you. They believe they have been given a mandate by Allah (Satan) to dominate the world.”
The mask is off, here is the ugly face of TCOT for all to see.
Note the popular technique of quoting “their” Blacks like Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder, Mychal Massie, to get away with outright racism.
Excellent commentary by Paula J. Giddings on the continuing problem racial violence, and blacks getting killed by police because they’re assumed to be thugs. She also touches on the issue of sexism, and how black men and women are treated today.
Although African-Americans have made unprecedented progress in terms of politics, business and access to elite institutions, other developments suggest that something else is going on. Voting rights are being curtailed, communities are deteriorating, and incarcerations for minor and even fabricated criminal charges are on the rise. Most troubling is the news of cold-blooded murders committed against them in the public square, too often with impunity.
It sounds as though I’m describing our current landscape, but in fact this is an apt description of the late nineteenth century, when African-Americans occupied political offices, accumulated wealth and held administrative positions that would not have been dreamed of a generation before. But this was also the era of the literacy test, congealing segregation and the convict-lease system, which provided the black labor forfeited by emancipation. By the 1890s, newspapers disseminated the details of two, three, sometimes four lynchings each week to a national audience.
As is true with the current generation, nineteenth-century black activists struggled against the complacency of those who believed that the progress of the few would trickle down to the many—not through agitation, but by the mere acquisition of education, wealth and middle-class values. When criticized by earlier generations, they—like Mychal Denzel Smith in his essay—pointed to the important and inspiring youth work that was being done, and touted their generation’s more progressive views of women, who were making gains in education, community “uplift” work and newly formed women’s organizations.
But it was also true that black women, who had wielded significant influence during Reconstruction, were losing political ground to men, who attempted to marginalize them in the separate sphere of women’s work.