The irrational host asked Richard Wolffe — another leftist masquerading as a journalist — a question about Michael Steele, the chairman of the Republican National Committee. What followed was Erroneousness 101:
The poor guy has got no leash — it’s not even a short leash. And to get to the race question you have to understand the party’s calculation in putting him there in the first place. It was a simplistic and crude equation they made: that to cover themselves against any accusations of racism — and, boy, it’s not that hard to find them — they needed to have a black figure going up against an African-American president and they didn’t have many people to choose from with this token gesture and so they had to choose someone that plainly wasn’t ready for prime time.
Is that what the Republicans did? How would Wolffe know? Was he there during those closeted sessions which eventually became the protocols of the elders of the elephant? Of course not; Wolffe is clueless.
Further, based on his last book, he knows very little about Republicans. As opposed to confessing ignorance, he chose to attribute the hiring of Michael Steele to evil intent. Wolffe deems the right wicked … so our every action must then be.
Along the same lines were Janeane Garofalo’s bizarre comments on HBO during an episode of Real Time with Bill Maher. Everyone recalls her racist outburst earlier in the year concerning the tea parties and she compounded her original incoherence with the following drivel for Maher:
It’s obvious I think to anybody who has eyes in this country that tea-baggers, the 9-12ers, these separatist groups that pretend that it’s about policy. They are clearly white identity movements; they are clearly white power movements. What they don’t like about the president is that he’s black or half black. … What also is shocking is that people keep pretending that that’s not really the case with these people. … They are no different than any other white identity movement that’s part of our history.
Is it obvious? Is it clear? No, she was lying. Ms. Garafalo’s made it up. People like me took to the streets in April not for conspiratorial reasons, but to combat excessive government expenditure, reckless debt, and the threats posed to our liberty.
What we do know for absolute certainty is that our protests did not involve race or racism. That these absurd charges of bigotry failed to stick is a product of their being mindless assertions devoid of substance.
They continue to be made for pragmatic reasons as everyone in America is repulsed by racism, so the left disperses their mustard gas in the hopes of alienating independents who are too busy to take an interest.
The resentment wonk addressed health care but was not content to merely suggest that the GOP is evil. He stated it explicitly:
The Republicans lie! They want to see you dead! They’d rather make money off your dead corpse! They kind of like it when that woman has cancer and they don’t have anything for her.
Does anyone know any Republicans who possess such wishes? I don’t. I’m sure Schultz doesn’t either. His statement was vile hogwash, though he is probably aware that if our side is not depicted as loathsome then folks might give our ideas a listen … and who knows where that could lead.
In the final analysis, striking a sanctimonious pose is cherished more than truth by the left. Yet the country would benefit from their focusing on what conservatives actually say rather than fixating upon apocryphal antagonists.
The left’s habitual lying and “fear-mongering” alienates the citizenry and convinces the ignorant that the United States is a country not worth defending.
All their pyrotechnics and histrionics make many conservatives reluctant to openly proclaim their views. Like a fictional king, they wonder: “What can men do against such reckless hate?”
There is but one answer. You must fight them with your voice, your written word, your ballot, and your presence. At this point, only emphatic action will ensure that America remains the land of the free.