Ann Coulter Goes Full Bigot – Calls Khizr Khan A ‘Snarling Muslim’ In Televised Rant (VIDEO)

Ann Coulter Goes Full Bigot – Calls Khizr Khan A ‘Snarling Muslim’ In Televised Rant (VIDEO)

Image via video screen capture

ADDICTING INFO

Conservative commentator and devout Trump lover Ann Coulter let her bigotry all hang out on Monday when she attacked Khizr Khan, the father of a slain American soldier, calling him a “snarling Muslim.”

During an appearance on Sky News Australia’s The Bolt Report, Coulter attacked the father of Humayun Khan, who gave his life fighting for the United States in Iraq. His heroism saved the lives of the men serving by his side.

But conservatives like Coulter could care less and have sought to crucify the grieving father ever since his speech at the Democratic National Convention. During his fiery DNC speech, Khan blasted Donald Trump for “the blackness of his character.” He then asked if the GOP nominee if he had ever even bothered to read the Constitution and offered to lend the bigoted billionaire his copy.

Australian commentator Andrew Bolt, host of the show, told Coulter that he thought it was wrong for anyone, including Donald Trump, to viciously go after the parents of a “soldier who died in battle.” At this point, Coulter complained about the “media’s endless attack on Trump” and then went full-on bigot, calling Khizr Khan a “snarling Muslim.”

“I don’t know America very well if they want to listen to a snarling Muslim lecture them and tell us we’re not allowed to have opinions on important public policy issues unless we had a son die in Iraq,” she said.

Watch Ann Coulter flaunt her bigotry here:

By April Hamlin

5 Reasons You Have To Be Tolerant Of Bigotry To Support Donald Trump

Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks to the media during a news conference at the construction site of the Trump International Hotel at the Old Post Office Building in Washington, March 21, 2016. REUTERS/Jim Bourg

REUTERS/Jim Bourg 

CROOKS & LIARS

Trump supporters — more than any other candidates’ — oppose diversity, feel minorities are taking their opportunities and generally prefer white people to black people.

It’s all just an act.

That’s what Donald Trump’s new, more professional staff – led by former war crimes advocate and old H.W. Bush/Dole convention delegate wrangler Paul Manafort – wants GOP insiders to know about the buffoonery of the billion-dollar baby they’re about to nominate to be president.

“When he’s out on the stage, when he’s talking about the kinds of things he’s talking about on the stump, he’s projecting an image that’s for that purpose,” Manafort told a recent Republican National Committee meeting.

Trump himself has vowed to become so presidential that he will bore you to tears when the time is right. If you trust the polls, the right time was about five years ago.

Trump’s favorability among Latino voters is at 9 percent, according to a recent Latino Decisions poll. Mitt Romney won close to 30 percent of the Latino vote – a lower number than John McCain, and he did even worse with the fastest growing group of new voters than George W. Bush.

Trump has made scapegoating Mexican immigrants his signature issue, and central to that the construction of a giant, impossible, mostly useless slab of concrete; a physical metaphor for his implicit promise to restore aging white Americans’ perceived dominance over ethnic minorities.

The fantasy that we’re bound to get a “new Trump” is endlessly appealing to the press, who look at general election polling numbers that show him being crushed by either Democratic frontrunner and fear a sudden ratings drop-off. The notion that Trump can whitewash away the bigotry that has defined his candidacy by starting fresh this summer is just a continuation of the premise that Trump’s appeal is based broadly on the economic concerns of a working class that feels left out in this new economy.

Reporters eagerly seek out the anomaly of a black businessman at a Trump rally to make the case that Trump’s populism isn’t modern know-nothingism built on hostility to minorities, but rather some last grasp at the American dream.

While it’s true that much of the middle class is running threadbare after decades of conservative policies have left older white Americans justifiably angry and scared, it’s not true that this is just some blue-collar movement built on economic anxiety. Trump supporters – more than any other candidates’ – oppose diversity, feel minorities are taking their opportunities and generally prefer white people to black people.

Be worried: These urges exist to some to degree in most American voters, but since the rejection of George Wallace, few candidates have sought to blatantly exploit them in the way Trump has.

The appeal to ethnocentrism has been a bulwark of conservative politics for generations,UC Berkeley Law professor Ian Haney López argues, and a key to the right’s strategy of turning the white working class against the government programs that made the world’s largest middle class possible in the first place. Trump’s willingness to turn to the darkest urges of dog-whistle politics has made him nearly unstoppable in the GOP primary, and apotential electoral catastrophe in the general election.

Most Republicans will eventually buy into the fantasy that Trump’s vicious racial appeals can be erased from our memories, because they have to. And so will the press.

The reluctance to smear a whole group as racist is a valuable urge. But it’s just condescending not to expect the adults who support Trump to see what that they’ve bought into.

That’s why it’s crucial to make keep making this point: Supporting Trump may not necessarily make you a racist, but at the very least it does mean you’re tolerant of bigotry. Here’s why.

  1. Birtherism.
    If you want to make the case that a compliant press has made Trump’s candidacy possible, as I have, consider why Trump isn’t asked about his obsession with Barack Obama’s birth certificate, the issue that made him a conservative hero after decades of trying to get someone to take him seriously as presidential candidate. Why? He tells them he doesn’t want to talk about it, and so they don’t. We have no idea if the soon-to-be GOP nominee for president believes the current president is even a citizen. Would he prosecute Obama for treason? What evidence were his claims of fraud built on? No one asks these questions but we all know the answers. It’s all bullshit. Trump exploited an issue based entirely on racial suspicion, and then suffered no consequences for this vile display. In fact, it’s why he’s where he is today. He knew he could get away with it, because he always has.
  2. He’s been like this for decades.
    Trump’s view that foreigners and minorities are America’s biggest problem isn’t new for him. He’s been playing to xenophobia and racial animus for years – whether it was calling for the death penalty for a group of innocent black kids or using the Japanese as a punching bag, long after his accusations bore any semblance of sense. There’s a reason white supremacists are inspired by his candidacy, and it isn’t just because he spreads their hate online to millions of Twitter followers.
  3. Muslim ban.
    The idea of banning a group of 1.6 billion people based on their religion is repugnant to a nation that was founded on the basis of offering refuge for freedom of expression. But it’s even uglier when it’s based on the exact kind of Islamophobia ISIS seeks to encourage as it wipes out “the grey zones” where religions co-exist. Muslims are the most common victims of extremist terror and have played a key role in keeping America safe since 9/11, having been responsible for far fewer deaths than – say – furniture or toddlers with guns. To support Trump’s willingness to scapegoat them out of convenience is to support the kind of bigotry that makes us all less safe.
  4. Anti-Mexican rhetoric.
    “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best,” Trump said as he launched his campaign in July of 2015. “They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.” With this began a campaign that has used the idea of the widespread criminality of Mexican-Americans as its foundational belief, backed up by as few facts as Trump’s birtherism. It’s especially ridiculous rhetoric at a time when crime and border crossings are at or near generational lows, and while America’s population of undocumented immigrants is actually dropping.
  5. Willingness to turn America into a police state to uproot immigrants.
    The Republican promise of a smaller government will instantly disappear when the party endorses “Deportation Squads” to round up 11 million undocumented people. “Conservatives” back this plan because they can’t – or won’t – acknowledge the millions of undocumented people who’ve come here by plane and the more than half of the 11 million who aren’t Mexicans. They’re enticed by the fantasy of a new “Operation Wetback,” or by visions of brown-skinned marauders flooding our border. How do we know? Because that’s exactly what Donald Trump put in his first TV commercial.

Re-published from The National Memo

Mike Pence Spends 20 Minutes Lying To ABC News About His Anti-Gay Discrimination Law

Crooks & Liars

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) on Sunday insisted that people on the Internet had conspired to create a “misunderstanding” that a so-called “religious freedom” law was about denying services to LGBT people. But at the same time, he repeatedly refused to answer if it effectively gave Christians a legal defense for discriminating against same-sex couples.

“I understand that there’s been a tremendous amount of misinformation and misunderstanding around this bill, and I’m just determined — and I appreciate the time on your program — I’m just determined to clarify this,” Pence told ABC’s George Stephanopolous.

“So this is a yes or no question,” the ABC host noted. “Is Advance America right when they say a florist in Indiana can now refuse to serve a gay couple without fear of punishment?”

Pence, however said that the purpose of the bill that he signed was to “empower” religious people.

And this was a pattern that would be repeated over the next 20 minutes: Stephanopolous asking if the bill allowed anti-LGBT discrimination, followed by Pence dodging the question.

“And so yes or no, if a florist in Indiana refuses to serve a gay couple at their wedding, is that legal now in Indiana?” Stephanopolous asked. “Yes or no?”

“This is where this debate has gone, with misinformation,” Pence replied. “There’s been shameless rhetoric about my state and about this law and about its intention all over the Internet. People are trying to make it about one particular issue. And now you’re doing that, as well.”

“That was one of your supporters who was talking about the bill right there,” Stephanopolous pressed. “It said it would protect a Christian florist who — against any kind of punishment. Is that true or not?”

“George, look, the issue here is, you know, is tolerance a two way street or not?” Pence opined. “I mean, you know, there’s a lot of talk about tolerance in this country today having to do with people on the left. But here Indiana, steps forward to protect the constitutional rights and privileges of freedom of religion for people of faith and families of faith in our state and this avalanche of intolerance that’s been poured on our state is just outrageous.”

“So when you say tolerance is a two way street, does that mean that Christians who want to refuse service or people of any other faith who want to refuse service to gays and lesbians, that it’s now legal in the state of Indiana?” the ABC host tried again.

And again, Pence deflected: “I’m telling you, George, it is a red herring and I think it’s deeply troubling to millions of Americans and, frankly, people all across the state of Indiana who feel troubled about government overreach.”

The Indiana governor added that he had no plans to add protections for LGBT people to the state’s civil rights laws. But officials had been “been doing our level best, George, to correct the gross mischaracterization of this law that has been spread all over the country by many in the media.”

“I mean, frankly, some of the media coverage of this has been shameless and reckless,” he insisted. “The online attacks against the people of our state, I’m just not going to stand for it.”

Pence said that he would be open to a bill that “amplifies” the current law, but “we’re not going to change this law.”

“A final question, a final yes or no question, Governor,” Stephanopolous pushed. “Do you think it should be legal in the state of Indiana to discriminate against gays or lesbians?”

“It’s a yes or no question,” the host added.

“Hoosiers don’t believe in discrimination,” Pence insisted. “I mean this is not about discrimination. This is about protecting the religious liberty of every Hoosier of every faith.”

“We’re going to continue to explain it to people that don’t understand it. And in — and if possible, we will find a way to amplify what this bill really is in a legislative process. But I stand by this law,” he concluded. “I’m proud that Indiana has adopted the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.”

South Texas Senate hopeful slammed for racial slur

Sharon Hall, field representative for Houston Sen. Dan Patrick, visits with U.S. Senate candidate Chris Mapp at a Republican candidates forum in the New Braunfels Civic Center on Jan. 28, 2014. | Photo: San Antonio Express

Some Republicans refuse to hide their prejudices and hatred for “the other”.  Chris Mapp, a Texas hopeful for a seat in the U.S. Senate is just one of them.  We’ll be keeping an eye on this guy during the run-up to the March 4th primary…

My San Antonio

A Republican hopeful for the U.S. Senate who used a racial slur to describe undocumented immigrants has defended the language as “normal” in South Texas.

Chris Mapp, a Port O’Connor businessman, stood by his comments that “wetbacks” should be shot by ranchers and that President Barack Obama is a “socialist son of a bitch” — remarks that have created a national stir among both parties.

“That kind of rhetoric is discouraging from anybody,” U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said during a visit to a San Antonio charter school Friday. “I recognize this is a free country but that’s not the sort of way to gain people’s confidence that you care about them and you want to represent their concerns in the halls of Congress.”

Mapp, 53, first made the remarks at an editorial board meeting with the Dallas Morning News last week, but told the San Antonio Express-News on Friday that using the derogatory term for Mexican immigrants is as “normal as breathing air in South Texas.”

He said he was discussing immigration policy and that the Dallas editorial board didn’t include all of his statements.

“We can’t have illegal immigrants, drug cartels, human traffickers or terrorists coming across our border,” he said. “Our borders can either be sealed by choice or force, and so far choice hasn’t worked.”

“That is way out of bounds and I can’t imagine many people in Texas, much less Texas Republicans, voting for that guy,” said Robert Stovall, the chairman of the Bexar County Republican Party. “His views are in no way a reflection of the Republican Party nationally, statewide or in Bexar County.”

Diana Arevalo, secretary of the Bexar County Democratic Party, said she’s “offended by his comments and that he doesn’t want to offer an apology to the Latino community and to our president of the United States of America.”

Mapp said farmers with land on the Texas-Mexico border should be allowed to protect it from undocumented immigrants by shooting them. He also said that “a lot of people are here to work” and they deserve that chance.

“This is why we have primaries, so that we can see people’s traits that come out when they are under pressure,” Stovall said. “And in this case, his true colors came out.”

Mapp is in a crowded primary with seven opponents, including Cornyn. Early voting began Tuesday and Election Day is March 4.

Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism

As I’ve said before in a similar article, this study is not a conclusive statement that all of the above have low I.Q.s…

The Huffington Post

Are racists dumb? Do conservatives tend to be less intelligent than liberals? A provocative new study from Brock University in Ontario suggests the answer to both questions may be a qualified yes.

The study, published in Psychological Science, showed that people who score low on I.Q. tests in childhood are more likely to develop prejudiced beliefs and socially conservative politics in adulthood.

I.Q., or intelligence quotient, is a score determined by standardized tests, but whether the tests truly reveal intelligence remains a topic of hot debate among psychologists.

Dr. Gordon Hodson, a professor of psychology at the university and the study’s lead author, said the finding represented evidence of a vicious cycle: People of low intelligence gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, which stress resistance to change and, in turn, prejudice, he told LiveScience.

Why might less intelligent people be drawn to conservative ideologies? Because such ideologies feature “structure and order” that make it easier to comprehend a complicated world, Dodson said. “Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice,” he added.

Dr. Brian Nosek, a University of Virginia psychologist, echoed those sentiments.

“Reality is complicated and messy,” he told The Huffington Post in an email. “Ideologies get rid of the messiness and impose a simpler solution. So, it may not be surprising that people with less cognitive capacity will be attracted to simplifying ideologies.”

But Nosek said less intelligent types might be attracted to liberal “simplifying ideologies” as well as conservative ones.

In any case, the study has taken the Internet by storm, with some outspoken liberals saying that it validates their suspicions about conservatives and conservatives arguing that the research has been misinterpreted.

What do you think? Do conservatives tend to be less intelligent? Or is this just political opinion masquerading as science?

Mario Piperni: Herman Cain Is A Disgusting Bigot

“Bigot” is a mild word (albeit a correct one) for Cain’s insidious hatred for ‘others’ who don’t espouse to his ideology.

Mario Piperni

If there was ever a shred of doubt that Herman Cain is anything more than a low-life, bigoted snake oil salesman, there should not be now.  The more we learn of this man, the more distasteful he becomes.

He did have a slight worry at one point during the chemotherapy process when he discovered that one of the surgeon’s name was “Dr. Abdallah.”

“I said to his physician assistant, I said, ‘That sounds foreign–not that I had anything against foreign doctors–but it sounded too foreign,” Cain tells the audience. “She said, ‘He’s from Lebanon.’ Oh, Lebanon! My mind immediately started thinking, wait a minute, maybe his religious persuasion is different than mine! She could see the look on my face and she said, ‘Don’t worry, Mr. Cain, he’s a Christian from Lebanon.’”

“Hallelujah!” Cain says. “Thank God!”

What a disgusting little man.  I wonder what Cain would say if he heard of a white man saying of his black doctor: “His skin looks dark – not that I have anything against dark-skinned doctors – but it does look too dark.”  Or what about a Jewish man hesitant about his Christian doctor, saying: “His name doesn’t sound Jewish – not that I have anything against gentiles – but it does sound too Christian.”

There is something seriously wrong with a political party which allows bigots, racists, homophobes and slimeballs of the Herman Cain variety within its leadership ranks.  Bigots can be found everywhere but no political party applauds them like Republicans do.

Arizona Elementary School Will Whiten The Faces Of Its Own Students On A Mural Because Some Racists Yelled At It [UPDATE]

It appears there has been a good resolution to this story.  Giving in to bigotry and racism is not the answer.

Huffington Post

UPDATE: Good news. The gutless, carbound racists lost, and the mural is being restored to its “original theme.” Jeff Lane, the principal of Miller Valley Elementary School, and Kevin Kapp, the school superintendent, showed up at a protest today to apologize for giving in to whims of mentally deranged adults, spewing racial epithets at a painting:         

  

I am not a racist individual, but I will tell you depicting a black guy in the middle of that mural, based upon who’s President of the United States today and based upon the history of this community, when I grew up we had four black families – who I have been very good friends with for years – to depict the biggest picture on that building as a black person, I would have to ask the question, ‘Why?’

Yes. WHY DID SOMEONE PUT A BLACK PERSON ON A PAINTING? You “have” to “ask” the “question!”

Anyway, Steve Blair lost too, and I am delighted.

[Thanks to Moses Siregar III for the video. For more, visit his YouTube channel.]

———

Via Ken Layne at Wonkette, this is just the worst story in the world:

An Arizona elementary school mural featuring the faces of kids who attend the school has been the subject of constant daytime drive-by racist screaming, from adults, as well as a radio talk-show campaign (by an actual city councilman, who has an AM talk-radio show) to remove the black student’s face, and now the school principal has ordered the faces of the Latino and Black students to be changed to Caucasian skin.

F’ing hell. Read the rest of the details here. And here’s Richard Lawson’s reaction, at Gawker.

What can I say about this? We are talking about a bunch of mentally deranged adults, who have terrorized an elementary school, for daring to paint a mural featuring the faces of black and Latino children — actual black and Latino children who live in Arizona. And we’re also talking about a group of adults who have decided to send a stirring message to their students and the world: when a bunch of mentally deranged adults — and we are not talking about people who are particularly threatening, this is a bunch of utterly gutless mopes, yelling racial slurs from their cars, egged on by some pinhead city councilman cowering behind a radio microphone — threaten a bunch of children, the best thing to do is to accede to their psychotic, racist “demands.”

Seriously, educators of Prescott, Arizona, when some creep demands you whiten the faces of your own students on a mural, the correct response is to say, “No, we will not be doing anything of the sort.”

This story really should be blasted, far and wide. You cable news producers need to get this story in the mix with a quickness. And let me be clear to you all: there are no “two sides to this story.” This is not something you need to have a panel discussion about. CNN, I don’t want to see you plumbing the depths of your counterintuition on your website, or lending credence to the notion that the gutless mopes in their cars, shrieking racial slurs at the images of children have an interesting point of view that we should “hear out” because of the need to be “balanced.” This is your moment to decry, condemn, and brutalize these evil people.  Blast them to hell, or go jump in the Gulf of Mexico.

SC senator: We’ve ‘got one raghead in the White House, we don’t need a raghead in the governor’s mansion.’

I don’t think I’ve ever heard a more shocking statement from a government official since I was a kid coming of age and political awareness in the 60’s.  This is actually very shocking to me.  I suppose a fake apology will be rendered tomorrow and then back to business as usual until the next disgusting bigot comes out with something else.

In this country free speech includes hateful words like that of the very disgusting South Carolina State Senator Jake Knotts ( a Republican of course.) 

So the vitriol and hatred goes on and on and will continue until the POTUS ends his term.  What a sad commentary about our country in these times.  Did some one mention a “post-racial” society after Obama’s election?  Not hardly.   It breaks my heart to read this stuff…but it’s out there and should be reported.  The ignorance of people like Knotts, a public official is astounding.  Yet I’m seeing more and more politicians out there on the state and federal level who haven’t got a clue.  What color is the sky in their world?

Think Progress

Today, the Christian Broadcasting Network published a story about Nikki Haley, the frontrunner to become South Carolina’s GOP gubernatorial nominee, saying that she “recently changed the language on her website to reflect a more Christian tone.” The story said that although Haley has “gone out of her way to make sure people know she is a Christian,” she was raised in the Sikh faith and placed more emphasis on that tradition when she ran for the state legislature in 2004. This evening in an interview with Pub Politics, state Sen. Jake Knotts (R-SC) — who is supporting a different candidate — slammed Haley by using a racial slur:

We already got one raghead in the White House, we don’t need a raghead in the governor’s mansion.

The South Carolina Republican Party has issued a statement condemning Knott’s remarks, saying, “Senator Knotts should apologize for his inappropriate comments, so that we can put this unfortunate incident behind us and focus on issues important to moving our state forward.”

Huckabigot

 

Mario Piperni has a really good website with great graphics.  I’ve used some of his pictures on my blog.  Today, I ran across this article and the answer to Piperni’s question begs to be answered:

Mike Huckabee

“You don’t go ahead and accommodate every behavioral pattern that is against the ideal,” he said of same-sex marriage. “That would be like saying, well, there are a lot of people who like to use drugs, so let’s go ahead and accommodate those who want who use drugs. There are some people who believe in incest, so we should accommodate them. There are people who believe in polygamy, so we should accommodate them.”

In a single sentence, Huckabee equates homosexuality with drug use, incest and polygamy and in so doing demonstrates his religious-based ignorance and bigotry.  It’s remarkable how so many on the right who yell out for less government in the lives of ordinary Americans see no problem with government telling these same folks how to live their personal lives, the type of people they should be allowed to marry and how they should conduct their sex lives.  Now why would that be?