Whoopi, Sharpton is Back in the News…
by Big Dog on Oct 10, 2007 at 19:01 Uncategorized
I don’t usually agree with Whoopi Goldberg because her views run counter to mine. She usually takes the wrong position on issues (she would think the same of me) and I find it difficult to listen to her most times. I think she is a talented actress and has done some good work but her antics with regard to our elected leaders has overshadowed her talent.
Having said that, I agree with what she said on the daily gab fest known as The View. She was discussing Al Sharpton and his demand that Isiah Thomas apologize to the woman that Thomas was recently found guilty of sexually harassing. Sharpton gave Thomas until Friday to apologize of the master race baiter will be out with his minions protesting. I find it interesting that Sharpton is taking a black man to task but that is beside the point here. It is none of Sharpton’s business. This was a matter between Thomas and the woman and the court that decided the issue. Sharpton has no say in the matter and should keep his mouth shut.
Goldberg, to her credit, discussed this and then said that Sharpton needed to apologize to the Duke lacrosse players. Goldberg indicated that she would take up the sign of protest once Sharpton made things right with the Duke players. She should not hold her breath because Sharpton has a history of running his mouth, accusing people, and inciting riots and then walking away as if he did something good. Sharpton is responsible for the deaths of people (coincidentally, all eight were Jewish) and he has never apologized. He refused to apologize to the guy who caught up in his support of Tawana Brawley and her admitted lies about being raped. The court ruled against him in the lawsuit and he paid the man a settlement decided by the court but he refused to apologize.
Sharpton never went to Duke but he was interviewed about the case and he made it clear that the woman deserved justice. He made it clear that the prosecutor must have a good case or he would not prosecute it. Sharpton did not presume innocence, he took the side of the woman even though there were gaping holes in her story. This transcript of his conversation with Bill O’Reilly makes it clear.
Al Sharpton sent Whoopi a letter stating that he owed no apology because he did not go to Duke and he took no position in the case. This is refuted by his interview with O’Reilly where Sharpton says he is on touch with the local NAACP and that they are advising people what happened. Sharpton says that we do not know what other evidence there is so we should wait before we try to discredit her. He dismissed the evidence that showed the boys could not have done it (DNA) and said we should proceed and let the court do its thing. We are supposed to discredit witnesses if they are lying so that cases get dropped quickly and lives do not get ruined.
Sharpton also indicated that he had apologized already. He told Whoopi he did not take a position and that there was no need to apologize and yet, he got all over Chris Wallace for asking if he would apologize and he told Wallace that he already had on his radio show. He either lied or wanted to make people think he apologized but his admission that he did leads me to believe he thought it necessary at the time.
Now it is not? Why did he not say that he had already apologized like he did to Wallace?
Once again, this guy is a waste of flesh and oxygen and he needs to keep his nose out of other people’s business. It is amazing to me that someone has not popped him by now. God knows if he can incite people to kill for him he can anger some to go against him.
UPDATE: I read this in the comments at Breitbart (linked above):
Duke Case (black victim, white defendants):
“We have to assume the DA knows what he’s doing.â€
Jena 6 Case (white victim, black defendants):
The DA is a racist.
Hmmmmm………
That is all we need to read…
Tags: Al Sharpton, Commentary, Duke, race, Whoopi
[…] [Discuss this article with the Big Dog…] Share Article Whoopi Goldberg, Isiah Thomas, Al Sharpton, Whoopi, Breitbart Sphere: Related Content | Trackback URL […]
I don’t get it, BD. Aren’t you always insisting that black leaders need to clean up their community and the supposedly low moral standards of black people? Isn’t that what Sharpton is attempting to do with Thomas?
BD,
I still have not come up with any reason why anyone still gives this fat little wantabe something any air time. Between him and Jessajerk all they have to hang their hats on for history is to be racebaiters and keep the pots stirred so that they can validate their existance. Two of the most pathetic turds ever.
Since you live where you do did you happen in the mid 90’s happen to see Sharpnot trying to get away from reporters at National? One of them happened to be there for something else a few weeks earlier and spotted him parking in the Senate parking lot. So they kept a watch and sure enough caught him sneaking in to the Senate parking lot again and rushed him. He was running as fast his little legs could go with a pack of cameramen and reporters chasing him. In the long run he promised to pay back all of the parking fees that he had not paid over the years. Don’t know if that ever happened I would doubt it. I saw the tape on channel 7 when Matthews and Barry were the anchors. I was also living in NY when the incidents up there happened. This piece of crap needs to get down on his knees and beg for everyone’s forgiveness white or black for all of the trouble he has caused. Then he needs to drop dead so someone who deserves it can breath the air that he does not deserve it.
Once again BT, you fail to comprehend. The point of the article is, who is Sharpton to demand apologies when he himself refuses to apologize. He answers to no one and expects everyone to answer to him.
Thomas had his day in court and it is really none of Sharpton’s business. I applauded when he went after rappers for the same things he demanded Imus be fired for. The only problem I had with it was he did not demand that rappers be fired or their sponsors stop supporting them.
He is an anti Semite, a hypocrite, and a racist.
Is Sharpton really an anti-Semite? Why would he and Mayor Bloomberg (a Jew) get along well if that was so?
Is Sharpton more of an anti-Semite than Ann Coulter who just a day or two ago said Jews need to be ‘perfected’?
I would like the entire quote and context from Coulter. You have this propensity to snip things out and use them out of context to try to make a point.
As for Sharpton, just because he hates Jews does not mean he will not slither up to them if he thinks it will help him. When you call them diamond merchants and start chanting kill the Jew and when you blame Jews for things that happen in the black community, you are an anti Semite. When those chants lead to the deaths of 8 people your are a murdering anti Semite.
But let us assume you are correct and all these remarks mean nothing. How then, can Sharpton demand Imus be fired when what Imus said meant nothing (and no one died because of it)? How is it Al gets to say Imus is a racist for what he says but Sharpton is not an anti Semite for what he says?
I want you to use the liberal twisted logic of yours to explain that to me. The whole point of the article is that Sharpton is in no position to demand an apology because he has never apologized for what he did. You make my point well when you say that he is not anti Semite because he hangs with a Jew, despite what he has said and done because if this is the case what right does he have to say anything to Imus?
Go work on it, I am sure it will sink in.
You can see the coulter video in it’s entirety here:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200710100008?f=h_top
You’ll have to tolerate her stupidity for the first 2 minutes of the video. You would have been a more interesting guest on the program.
I would like the entire quote and context from Sharpton (the anti-semetic comments & and some sort of authoritative article about Sharpton being at least partially responsible for 8 deaths). You have this propensity to snip things out and use them out of context to try to make a point.
Well, I knew what she was talking about right from the start. She is saying that in order to be perfect you have to accept Jesus as the son of God and that he died for our sins. The only way to the Father is through the son. Jews do not believe that Jesus was God’s son and they do not follow the teachings of the New Testament. The word perfected was intended to mean believers in the New Testament and word of God therein.
I do not feel it was insulting when you look at the details. BTW, Media Matters IS NOT an impartial source. I watched the video because I figured if they edited it I could tell. They distort and they pick and choose, no wonder you do that. Isn’t Media Matters the group started by Hillary and who distorted what Limbaugh said. I listened to that as well and they took it out of context and without the other parts that made it clear.
This article originally appeared in the Boston Globe.
So, BD, I’m not sure I understand your point above… Did Media Matters ‘edit’ the Coulter footage? It looked complete to me. I’m not sure how replaying the interview in it’s entirety is ‘biased’ and was wondering if you could enlighten us as to how it is.
Regarding the ‘perfected’ statement, the Christianity expert, Ann Coulter, is basically saying Jews will go to Hell, right? And that’s what you’re saying, too, aren’t you, since they don’t believe in Jesus? She’s also saying that Christians are ‘perfect’, which is convenient for her (and you), isn’t it?
I think I already told you they did not edit the video.
It is the Christian belief that if you do not believe in Christ as the son of God you will not go to Heaven (though in the video Coulter says Jews will still go to Heaven which answers your stupid question. Maybe you should pay attention to all of it instead of cherry picking). Just to clear up your words, you said since Jews do not believe in Jesus and that is incorrect. Jews, and Muslims for that matter, believe in Jesus as a prophet. They just do not believe him to be the son of God.
Coulter was not insulting, you are saying she was because she expressed what her religious beliefs are. She is entitled to express her beliefs and she believes that the Jews are not a perfect people because, once again, they rejected God. They are the chosen people and they have rejected God on a number of occasions, just like rejecting Jesus as his son.
They are entitled to that belief but to a Christian it is a wrong belief, just like to Muslims it is wrong to ignore Islam and Mohammad (a false prophet) The difference is, Christians do not go around killing people because they do not believe.
As for Media Matters. They presented a video and wrote all the words to influence people with mush for brains. Hillary helped them get started and they are a VERY partisan group. They are the ones who completely took Limbaugh out of context in order to attempt to silence him.
Where is the evidence that Hillary helped start Media Matters? My understanding is that it was started by David Brock, a former right wing author who, in 1993, wrote the book, The Real Anita Hill.
You can find it here where she herself said:
In the end, that’s going to be hard to do, for on August 4, while speaking at the YearlyKos convention in Chicago, the junior senator from New York boasted of “institutions that I helped to start and support like Media Matters and Center for American Progress.”
She said it, there is no mistaking that she said it. There is your evidence and now Troll, you are no longer welcome here.
Do not comment again because I will not approve them.