MSNBC just brought on a far-left sports reporter who I’ve seen before. His claim to fame is that he hates Tim Tebow, well just because. Anyway, they brought this guy on to discuss the Tebow trade to the NYJ.
He said that Tebow wants to set “LGBT” people back 30 years…even though Tebow has never stated his opinion on g@y issues.
He said that bashing Tebow for being anti-g@y, etc. is okay because Tebow said that politics is something that he definitely sees in his future. Except that Tebow hasn’t ever said that. When asked about a politcal future, he said “I don’t know — it could be something in my future,” “If it’s something I care about, possibly.”
This is MSNBC in a nut shell. These are easily verified falsehoods that received no pushback. It’s okay to call someone a bigot on MSNBC because they have scripture on their eye black.
I bet Sean Payton wishes his name was Chad Knaus.
Joe will get the joke.
@LS: That was inane. I like Tebow but I despise the Jets. I wish he went to Jacksonville but I’m heartbroken again. #LifeOfAJagsFan Welcome to 2-14.
That’s amazing! WTG for Goodell, taking player’s health seriously. But wow, that could really impact the league this year.
As for Tebow… the “outrage” surrounding him is insane. Is he the first religious sports star or entertainer there’s ever been? I guess it’s my faulty memory, for remembering plenty of other athletes point to the sky after a great play, taking a knee now and then, or thanking “God” in an acceptance speech. What makes Tebow different?
lonestar, the guy’s name is Dave Zirin and he absolutely hates Tebow. I’ve read some of his writings and he apparently doesn’t approve of the mild anti-abortion commercial Tebow did for an organization that doesn’t condone homosexuality. It’s all Zirin’s way of getting away with saying that he hates white Christians. I don’t remember Zirin, or any sports writer, complaining when Hispanic ball players make the Sign of the Cross. And ESPN opened their Tebow story today by calling him “polarizing.’ Polarizing to whom?
I knew there was somebody out there who was disappointed by Olbermann’s firing…Al Qaeda!
Interesting read but I don’t know why Ignatius threw this in at the end: “The al-Qaeda spinmeister didn’t like Fox News (“let her die in her anger”), but it’s hard to understand why. Surely Rupert Murdoch’s network, with its saturation coverage of the war on terror, did more to elevate bin Laden’s profile than any other news outlet.”
I thought he was headed for JAX all along. We’ll see.
“As for Tebow… the “outrage” surrounding him is insane. Is he the first religious sports star or entertainer there’s ever been? I guess it’s my faulty memory, for remembering plenty of other athletes point to the sky after a great play, taking a knee now and then, or thanking “God” in an acceptance speech. What makes Tebow different?”
Sincerity and color.
Much like Santorum… it’s one thing to be religious, it’s another to be that confident in your religion.
AND it’s a third thing to be WHITE, and like that. The same folks who attack Tebow mercilessly for his religious views and praying, would never say the same about a Black athlete or artist. And anyone who did, would be told they don’t understand Black Christians, and are probably racist.
I blame his fans, 99% seem to comprise my circle of friends.
They are of the opinion that being a “good guy” automatically translates into being a “good QB”. Me, I tend to hold on to silly and outdated notions like “being able to hit a receiver in motion 15 yards down the field” makes you a good QB. But hey, that’s just me.
If my team needs a chaplain, Tebow’s my first and only choice. But if I need a QB, I’d rank Tebow about 80th (behind almost every backup QB in the league and a few end-around-pass-throwing WRs)
I think that’s fair. Tebow (IMO) has potential, but he’s not the superstar he was in college for sure.
But he’s also not this awful guy that so many others seem to want to believe he is. He seems like a nice guy, who’s a “meh” NFL quarterback.
Except we’re not talking about criticisms of his accuracy or throwing motion, it’s the never ending criticism of him as a person. The guest on MSNBC today called him a bigot. I guess because he builds hospitals in the Phillipines or something.
Trayvon Martin’s mother is on Politics Nation. This is heartbreaking.
Well her son is dead, of course it’s heartbreaking. What do people want to happen next? A federal grand jury has taken up the investigation. That’s about all I know going on right now.
let liberals work themselves up with outrage and before you can say Special Prosecuter, you get bad law
@LS: Jacksonville won’t pay the money. I’m sure people are lining up outside EverBank for their Chad Henne jerseys now #sarcasm Gene Smith sucks.
It’s very tiring to hear people trying to blame extreme acts on political rhetoric.
Media outlets worldwide have been trying to link French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s attempts to win the far-right/white supremacist vote with the shootings. Now we find out the shooter is actually a man of Algerian descent and trained in Afghanistan with al-Qaeda. Many journalists need to be more careful in trying to blame someone for tragedies. In this case, most seem to blur the lines between causation and an unpopular president responding to a growing problem.
The knee-jerk reaction is to link an incident to a cause. Then emotion rules, and unintended consequences run rampant as agendas are played out. Tawana Brawley, Duke lacrosse Players, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg…
I just saw a segment on O’Reilly about the shootings of 49 people on the south side of Chicago this past St. Patty’s Day weekend. There were 10 fatalities, including a 6-year-old girl caught in the crossfire. Why is this story not making news? I don’t think anyone was arrested (but I could be wrong). When is the Rev. Sharpton going to march in Chicago to protest the senseless deaths of young black and Hispanic youth?
It’s called the Stand Your Ground law not the Hunt Down And Kill Black People law.
Tamron’s Lean Forward spot is driving me nuts. I am unaware of people using “the troops as pawns in political debates”, and don’t recall them being called un-American.
-It’s called the Stand Your Ground law not the Hunt Down And Kill…-
Yeah. Maybe I’m missing a crucial detail to the story because it sure looks as though the authorities down there are grossly inept. That law reads fairly clear to me and I don’t see how a prosecutor would have much trouble getting at least a manslaughter conviction – and that’s even if the kid did become an aggressor and giving the shooter the benefit of doubt.
He called the cops; they told him they were on the way; they told him to stop following the kid. That racist f*** murdered that boy because he wanted to.
They held his body for 3 days without using his cell phone to tell his parents he was dead.
How many more weeks is Hannity going to whine about Bill Maher using Maher’s comments on HBO as an excuse for the comments Rush Limbaugh made?
Plus “the real OBAMA.” Vetting of The President segment is so lame.
His show was 100% better when it was Fair and Balanced with a liberal co host.
I just can’t understand why anyone would bother to watch him when it’s the same thing every show.
Hannity has the same problem with Obama that Rush does: He still can’t except that the man actually became President. GET OVER IT.
So the ineptness is confirmed.
I have the same problem with Hannity that I have with virtually all of MSNBC for the exact reasons icemannyr lays out. So I watch neither. Fox & Friends falls in there also.
This whole “Vetting of the President” concept is annoying beyond words. Let’s just turn back the clock with our magical powers while we’re at it. He’s President now, his resume is complete. No matter how much you bleat, no one cares what he did or who he hung out with in college.
Is Tamara Holder utterly brainless, or is it my imagination?
-Hannity & Hannity-
Why does anyone have Tamara Holder on their show? I know she didn’t mean what she said the way it came out, but she does that all the time.
The black murder rate is jacked up by the trade in illegal drugs. You have gangs fighting over the same territory for lucrative drug money so the killings, like the gang killings during Prohibition, are pretty much to be expected.
Likewise the solution seems obvious just as it was with Prohibition. Decriminalize and regulate the drugs that are currently illegal.
After all the death and all the years of “War on Drugs” failure, it is just nuts not to.
Junkies are going to get their drugs anyway. At least put them in a position where they have a chance for redemption.
- Holder –
When you depend on Hannity to bail you out, there’s a problem.
“That racist f*** murdered that boy because he wanted to.”
Oh, to be so certain 3000 miles away. Those long distance Vulcan mind-melds are fantastic tools. Might as well disband the grand jury and throw Zimmerman to the mob.
Listen to the tapes and the witnesses, then give me some more BS about “mind-melds”.
The way the police department keeps saying they sympathize with the shooter and relate to him… it IS a race thing whether anyone wants to admit it or not. Why do they relate to the shooter? Because he’s white? Why?
I sympathize with the family who has to bury their son instead of watching him get his diploma, go to prom or go to college.
– Zimmerman —
No one says that he shouldn’t have a fair trial before he’s hung.
Andy, the shooter is half-Hispanic.
I certainly don’t know enough to attribute racism to Zimmerman, nor is it necessary to do so as he committed a murder either way.
Tamara Holder was in for Beckel last week and was totally unprepared. I’d be willing to bet something less than ten grand that Ainsley Earhardt would chew Holder up and spit her out in a debate.
We need to get this done because keeping these drugs illegal isn’t working. While I absolutely believe that there will be far fewer drug-related deaths with legalisation, we should know that doing so will mean a different set of people will circle the drain because of it. There are no silver bullets and people can’t be protected from stupidity.
If you call a black man a c00n, there is no debate about racism. I doubt most racists use that word anymore.
And race does matter because murder-based-on-racial-hatred is its own separate crime.
Lived in the South for 39 years, and the last time I heard that word was on All in the Family.
Racial-based separate crime
I’m not a lawyer, but not necessarily. And we really shouldn’t be prosecuting anyone for thought crimes. I could certainly be wrong but I believe that a racial factor may be needed in order for the feds to take up the prosecution if Florida doesn’t – but that’s racial motivation on the part of the local authorities and not Zimmerman.
And we really shouldn’t be prosecuting anyone for thought crimes.
Oh please, “hate crime” was invented specifically to prosecute violence based on race, gender, or sexual orientation. Zimmerman has a massive history of following and calling 911 on only black people, and used a racial slur in a crime he clearly instigated out of thin air. He killed that boy because he was black. It’s a hate crime.
“And race does matter because murder-based-on-racial-hatred is its own separate crime.”
Thank God. Cuz, “racial hatred” is probably a factor in at least 1 out of every 10,000 murders. Maybe. But, those laws make me feel better about the world and the butterflies and stuff so it’s good we have them.
No, Andy, it’s prolly not cuz he’s white since he’s half hispanic. His name sounds white I suppose but his picture doesn’t reflect that. But, maybe the police haven’t met him and just assume he’s white.
“Oh please, “hate crime” was invented specifically to prosecute violence based on race, gender, or sexual orientation.”
No, it was invented to make certain people feel better about themselves. The whole idea of a “hate crime” is beyond stupid.
whoever murders me, I hope he didn’t hate me because I’m Irish
or too damn good looking to live.
I hope I get murdered for my money. That will mean I have some.
Really? Murdering a 17yo boy because he’s black isn’t a hate crime? You have NO CLUE what you’re talking about. As usual, when it comes to race. I knew it was only a matter of time ’til you jumped into this with your bizarre attitudes. Good times.
Local news says there is a Florida grand jury investigating the case. If so, expect him to be charged soon.
I’m not a fan of hate crime prosecutions. A murder is a murder and motivation for the murder should be a consideration of the jury for conviction and of the judge for sentencing. Seems inherently wrong to me that on one hand we think it especially egregious to discriminate based on race but with the other hand race is used in formulating special prosecution. Would you feel less sincere in your sympathy for the boy’s family if he was white?
Well Al admits he is not a lawyer. The rest of us have watched enough TV to feel that hardly matters.
I’m still working on whether the hate of all things Palin could be a crime. Maybe in Alaska?
“Local news says there is a Florida grand jury investigating the case.”
I seem to have heard that. Oh, yeah, I said it above.
Would you feel less sincere in your sympathy for the boy’s family if he was white?
Of course not. The point of hate crime law is that you become a target simply based on existing in a certain way. You don’t have to be threatening, or have pissed the guy off in any personal way. You get the bullet simply by “walking black, or g@y”, or whatever. It’s a different standard than the more common type of murder.
“I knew it was only a matter of time ’til you jumped into this with your bizarre attitudes.”
Yep, it’s certainly bizarre to think that murder is murder whether it’s because you hate somebody because of their race, fatness, skinnyness, coolneess, asshatness or just cuz you want their shoes.
What does hate crime legistlation do other than make people like you feel better about yourselves? Pretty much nothing. And, that sums up most liberal ideas.
“It’s a different standard than the more common type of murder.”
is the victim more dead?
Or… when the white kid from the ‘burbs is mugged walking through an inner-city neighbourhood, is that a “hate crime”? It’s just as likely that he was targeted for the colour of his skin than anything else. Seems silly when “robbery” is already a crime.
Larry, you forget that liberals live in a land of theory and fantasy. It’s complicated out there.
Maybe we should have a different standard for the execution of hate murderers.
Perhaps peeing on the dead body of the executed. No, that wouldn’t do.
Somebody on CNN inferred that they should run it through a grand jury so I assumed the prosecutor wasn’t.
“Or… when the white kid from the ‘burbs is mugged walking through an inner-city neighbourhood, is that a “hate crime”? It’s just as likely that he was targeted for the colour of his skin than anything else. ”
No, Sec. 4, Article 982 of the hate crime legistlation clearly reads: “…only straight white people are capable of hate crimes. However, there may be certain circumstances where half white people are capable of committing hate crimes but it really depends on just how white they look.”
Robbery usually cancels the “hate” angle. Where hate crime comes in is when it can be demonstrably proven that the only motivation was discrimination. I’m not a fan of it being over-prosecuted. In my mind you better have a big stack of evidence to support it, with no mitigating circumstances like robbery, feeling threatened, or “crime of passion” (ending a heated argument with a bullet).
This case qualifies. He shot that boy for one reason..
^ Your reasoning is still stupid. Either someone murders someone or they don’t. Why is it worse if it was done because someone doesn’t like the black folks or if it was because someone really wanted that 15 year-old kid’s new Air Jordans?
I can’t think of many things dumber than “hate-crimes”. Last I checked, people rarely commit crimes against others cuz they just like them too much.
And, in this case, you don’t know what happened. Neither do I.
Oh that’s crap, LS. You don’t like my completely coherent and reasonable argument because you have a problem with racism ever being addressed on any level. We’ve been here too many times.
I think hate crimes came into existence because some lawmakers wanted to show that they were “doing something”. Apparently enforcing laws already on the books doesn’t look as good on their political resume’.
Perhaps having my gloved hands on the mangled insides of a kid is what makes me not give a damn what their skin colour is. The weeping from a black mom or a white mom after I’ve had to tell them that their baby didn’t make it sounds exactly the same to my ears Yeah, keep bringing race into everything. That’ll sure help to end the senseless killings.
I don’t like it because it doesn’t make sense. This is a good example of the way liberals operate. They come up with meaningless laws, legistlations, etc. that sound good and make people feel all warm & fuzz inside. But, in actuality, they are worthless. A crime is a crime.
My point is that hate-crime legistlation is meaningless. Mine is actually a fairly popular position. You think you can legistlate thought. You can’t. Having hate crime laws on the books isn’t going to make Bill Smith from down the street hate his g@y neighbor any less. But, because I don’t live in a utopian fantasy land, you accuse me of not liking your argument because of something about racism being addressed.
“I think hate crimes came into existence because some lawmakers wanted to show that they were “doing something”.”
That’s basically what I’ve been trying to say. Hey, look, we did something. Now, we can wash our hands an move on to the next thing.
“Bringing race into everything” unfairly generalizes my very specific argument. This particular case appears to be a hate crime, just as Mathew Shepard’s was when he was murdered for being g@y.
I’m going to say it one more time. Dying because you walked through the wrong neighborhood looking the way you look, or liking sex with the same gender, is different. You didn’t do anything to instigate the crime, and had no ability to defend yourself from it other than staying in the house so no one would ever see the person you are. It’s an impossible standard to protect yourself from, and is why the law exists.
I also suspect this case will be used by special interest groups to foster new laws and gun control demands. I’ve always felt guns should be kept out of the hands of Latinos with German names. In the 30’s the Nazis tried to get a foothold in Mexico.
“I’m going to say it one more time…”
Nope, didn’t help.
“It’s an impossible standard to protect yourself from, and is why the law exists.”
Laws are there to prevent people from doing things. I imagine you think a conversation goes like this:
Jack: I’m gonna go kill that g@y dude
John: You can’t it’s illegal
Jack: Killing is illegal?
John: It is if you do it cuz you don’t like g@y people
Jack: Oh, thanks for telling me. I coulda ended up in prison.
Uh..no..laws are also there to punish the crime. “Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.”
Aside from the simple but powerful prohibition from discrimination based upon race, I believe these hate-specific laws actively harm society. Instead of reinforcing our mutual sense of equal treatment they really only serve to regurgitate and highlight our differences.
It’s been half a century since the civil rights movement and yet so many are still incessantly harping about race. It’s high time to give something else a try… like shutting up about it so that maybe this newest generation of kids can have a chance to grow up without that horrendous ball and chain holding them back.
^ Good luck with that. What would Democrats do with their time?
What would Democrats do with their time?
Care about people.
Caring that actually helped would be nice for a change.
Not going into a left/right snit over this case would’ve been nice, too. He killed that kid because he was black, and I got people in my face because I dared mention racism. It’s ridiculous.
I wasn’t arguing with you over racism, I have no idea what happened, I wasn’t there. I was arguing about the stuipidity of “hate crimes”.
It is ridiculous. No need to bring the politics of race into the cold-blooded killing of an innocent boy.
If you would listen to the 911 tapes and the witnesses, you might have a clue what happened. If you haven’t done those things, you have no credibility in this discussion.
Uh..yeah..”the politics of race” is part of the story. He profiled only blacks 49 times; called this one a “c00n”; then hunted him down and killed him. It’s a hate crime. The boy died for being black.
Does not make his death any more nor any less senseless,
Democrat care is smothering, not nurturing.
OWS is still a bunch of jerks.
Liberals feed on hate. Makes ‘em happy to be riled up. They get to top it off with condisnding selfrichessness. The drug of superiority.
Joe, Matthew Shepard may not have been killed because of his sexual orientation. Many people believe it was a mugging, pure and simple, that ended in tragedy. Why don’t I ever hear of blacks being charged with hate crimes when they kill whites?
Considering blacks get harsher sentences on average than whites, it hardly matters. If you can find cases of blacks being demonstrably anti-white, and killing on that basis..bring it on. It’s not common.