Media

CNN Host Loses It Over Obama Harvard Vid, Calls White Supremacist Aspect of Critical Race Theory ‘A Complete Misreading’

CNN Host Loses It Over Obama Harvard Vid, Calls White Supremacist Aspect of Critical Race Theory A Complete Misreading | Soledad OBrien | Joel Pollak

CNN

CNN host Soledad O’Brien on Thursday seemed at times unable to contain her frustration with Breitbart.com editor in chief Joel Pollak during a discussion about the release of a video of then-Harvard Law School student Barack Obama raving about Professor Derrick Bell.

(Related: The Radical Racial Ideas of the Prof. Obama Raves About in New Harvard Video)

As The Blaze previously reported, BuzzFeed.com on Wednesday published a 1991 video of Obama at a rally praising Bell. In a post on Breitbart.com just hours later, Pollak said the video was one of the promised Obama college tapes Andrew Breitbart had said would be released, but charged BuzzFeed’s version was “selectively edited.” Pollak and Breitbart.com editor at large Ben Shapiro on Wednesday night unveiled a fuller version of the video, including a hug between Obama and Bell, as well as an admission by one of Obama’s Harvard Law mentors, Charles Ogletree, that he “hid” the video during the 2008 campaign. Bell, Pollak contended, “was the Jeremiah Wright of academia,” particularly for his role as the originator of a school of thought called critical race theory, which holds, they said, that the United States is a fundamentally white supremacist nation.

Speaking with Pollak — a Harvard Law graduate himself — Thursday morning, O’Brien belittled the significance of the tape and openly challenged his definition of critical race theory.

“What part of that was the bombshell? Because I missed it. I don’t get it,” O’Brien said. “What was the bombshell?”

“Well, the bombshell is the revelation of the relationship between Obama and Derrick Bell,” Pollak replied.

“OK, so he’s a Harvard Law student and a Harvard Law professor, yeah.” O’Brien cut in.

“Derrick Bell is the Jeremiah Wright of academia,” Pollak said. “He passed away last year, but during his lifetime, he developed a theory called critical race theory, which holds that the civil rights movement was a sham and that white supremacy is the order and it must be overthrown.”

“So that is a complete misreading,” O’Brien interjected. “I’ll stop you there for a second — then I’ll let you continue. That is a complete misreading of critical race theory. As you know, that’s an actual theory. You could Google it and some would give you a good definition. So that’s not correct. But keep going.”

“In what way is it a critical misreading?” Pollak shot back. “Can you explain to me? — Explain to your readers what it is.”

“I’m going to ask you to continue on,” O’Brien replied. “I’m just going to point out that that is inaccurate. Keep going. Tell me what the bombshell is. I haven’t seen it yet.”

“Well, wait a minute,” Pollak said. “You’ve made a claim that my characterization of critical race theory as the opposite of Martin Luther King is inaccurate. You’re telling your viewers that, but you’re not telling them what it is.”

“Critical race theory looks into the intersection of race and politics and the law and as a legal academic who would study this and write about it, he would advance the theory about what exactly happened when the law was examined in terms of racial politics,” O’Brien said. “There is no white supremacy in that. It is a theory. It’s an academic theory and as one of the leading academics at Harvard Law School, he was one of the people as part of that conversation. So that is a short definition.”

“I’m glad we’ve got you saying that on tape because that’s a complete misrepresentation,” Pollak replied. “Critical race theory is all about white supremacy. Critical race theory holds that civil rights laws are ineffective, that racial equality is impossible, because the legal and Constitutional in America is white supremacist.”

The two continued on that track, with O’Brien repeatedly demanding to know what “your bombshell is,” with Pollak making the point that the video exposes Obama’s connection to “a radical legal theory” and said when Obama was a teacher himself he had his own students read Bell’s work.

“A lot of law students read Derrick Bell!” O’Brien exploded. “You really don’t understand critical race theory, do you?”

At that point, CNN panelist Jay Thomas cut in and asked whether Pollak whether he was “frightened” of a “secret black movement that’s going to start killing white people?”

Pollak, incensed, said Thomas‘ question didn’t even deserve a response, though he answered anyway.

“No, I’m not afraid that black people are going to be violent and take over the country. What I‘m pointing out is that there is a pattern in Barack Obama’s associations with Derrick Bell with Reverend Wright that carries over into his governance,” he said. “At every point in his life when he could have followed the path of Martin Luther King, he threw in his lot with the Jeremiah Wrights and the Derrick Bells of the world,” Pollak said.

As the racial accusations continued, GBTV’s Amy Holmes — also a panelist — jumped in and asked why the video hadn’t surfaced in 2008.

“Of what?!” O’Brien burst out, sounding increasingly outraged. “Of hugging Derrick Bell, the renowned Harvard Law professor?”

“Hold on,” Holmes responded. “This would be something for the public to decide, not for the media to decide, and I think that is a worthy discussion to have, which is that the media as the gatekeeper of information here did not allow this to be put in the public square.”

As Glenn Beck said during his radio program Thursday, he too felt letdown by the footage released, saying the disappointment stemmed more from the high expectations that had been set for the videos following Breitbart’s death last week.

“It was, like, the last story Andrew Breitbart did,” Beck said. “‘Very important video?’ and you’re, like, ‘Not so much.’ That’s not his fault.”

Comments (524)

1 2 3 ... 14
  • MBA
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:37pm

    Liberals can‘t handle the truth when it’s written in plain black and white. Oh wait that makes the video and newspapers racists too.

    Report Post »  
    • BoyScout_Mom
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:00pm

      MEDIA BIAS: The Los Angeles Times has Admitted… they have Possession of tape of Obama/Khalidi and Not-Terrorist Bill Ayers, toasting PLO Khalidi and dumping on Israel… so damaging, they would not release it in ‘08…. but they release 24,000 Palin emails…

      http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/06/la-times-posts-24000-palin-emails-but-wont-release-obama-khalidi-tape/

      Release The Tape…

      Report Post » BoyScout_Mom  
    • BoyScout_Mom
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:05pm

      http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/226104/i-l-times-i-suppresses-obamas-khalidi-bash-tape/andrew-c-mccarthy

      Report Post » BoyScout_Mom  
    • TeaPartyForRomney
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:11pm

      Here is Buzzfeed being the liberal hack site: http://www.thedailycandidate.com/video/2012/mar/buzzfeed_protects_obama.html

      Report Post »  
    • granolajohn
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:13pm

      Lol this dude is trying to make something out of nothing. The political theory is based a lot of fact and was stated by one of the most respected Harvered Law Proff. Where Solidad went wrong was trying to say that he misstated the quote. No he is misinterpreting it to make it sound like its some African American conspiracy against American Law. That is an gross misinterpretation. O and MBA its usually quite the opposite with wing nuts not listening to facts or logic all together.

      Report Post » granolajohn  
    • Ookspay
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:19pm

      These liberal academic and media agitators had better hope that they do not succeed in tearing down America and unleashing chaos and anarchy. They will be rightfully blamed and hunted down ala the french revolution. While they have been attacking our 2nd amendment rights, we have been target practicing. A target rich environment indeed.

      Report Post » Ookspay  
    • Faith1029
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:22pm

      Wow, these people are so biased and blinded they couldn’t see the truth if it hit them in the face. Thank God we still have Fox News.

      Report Post »  
    • TeaPartyForRomney
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:31pm

      If you haven’t seen the whole interview, these two clips don’t give it justice. There are parts that CNN pulled, check it out here: http://www.thedailycandidate.com/video/2012/mar/cnn_breitbart_debate.html

      P.S. The link I posted above shows that Buzzfeed was and is trying to protect Obama from this scandal, yet they attack all of our candidates.

      Report Post »  
    • momsense
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:36pm

      You just learning that?

      Report Post »  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:43pm

      GRANOLAJOHN…one more time in English please?

      Report Post »  
    • cuinsong
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:48pm

      I always believed the lefties just thought we were stupid and they were much smarter then every one else! It seemed that no other reasoning applied. After this video I have another understanding.
      These lefties are not intelligent enough to realize that they are the ones that look and sound stupid.
      They could never conceive of them selves as superior intellectually because that is what they fear!
      The progressives have evolved out of a hate and fear of people that have succeeded and have been champions of freedom.
      They were not able to provide for them selves like higher achievers can so they are jealous which breeds hate which leads to OWS.
      They justify their behavior because they feel like they have been cheated in life so its acceptable to do what ever it takes to take the higher achievers money and destroy what they stand for!
      The face of this insanity is the open displeasure expressed by our president and all the left leaning progressives living the good life on our money!
      All the while fanning the flames of hate they them selves feel for this great nation of higher achievers who have given the world so many scientific advancements and inventions! The fact that we have built the greatest nation ever to exist is a burning hate to progressives! When communism they failed but never excepted it!
      This song is for them called “Their Wrong” http://www.reverbnation.com/play_now/song_12090926

      Report Post » cuinsong  
    • Runeback
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:18pm

      This link from UCLA sounds a lot like what Pollack stated

      http://spacrs.wordpress.com/what-is-critical-race-theory/

      Report Post » Runeback  
    • Quiata
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:28pm

      Soledad O’Brien UNGLUED!

      Report Post »  
    • Leader1776
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:32pm

      @granolajohn
      Time to go back eating your granola. Your arguments are as shaky as granola in a box.

      Report Post » Leader1776  
    • robert
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:40pm

      “Of what?!” O’Brien burst out, sounding increasingly outraged. “Of hugging Derrick Bell, the renowned Harvard Law professor?”

      “Renowned law professor?” My, my, my. How upset she is that this man’s racist writings and abject hatred of white people and America are being called out. She hysterically wants to create the impression this Bell is somebody that is offering an intelligent theory, when it is in fact a blatant racist one without question, and it’s based in childish nonsense no true intellectual could promote without laughing. She‘s either a moron herself or she’s so fantically dedicated to this community organizer and his hate-filled friends she refuses to discuss the matter civilly and consider the entire incidfent in an objective manner.

      With water carriers like these, why does Obama need donations for his campaign? Every MSM org does the same for him and it’s absolutely shameful.

      Report Post »  
    • resme
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 7:34pm

      Who cares about what obama did in college.

      There should be outrage over this video.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5zNwOeyuG84

      Report Post » resme  
    • dealer@678
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 8:01pm

      @teapartyforromrey. Looks like cnn deleted our Amy on pupose. Hmm

      Report Post »  
    • MIBUGNU2
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 8:55pm

      I watched the VIDEO 10 times..LUV seeing the steam
      come off this Dingbats forehead….GREAT !!!!
      Joel you are my NEW very best HERO ….KEEP UP
      the pressure on these AH’s, their heads will explode.
      Might even tune in to PigEd’s show, to see him lose it….
      you know they will spin the hell out of this…good stuff…

      Report Post » MIBUGNU2  
    • dmforman
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 8:59pm

      granolajohn, who respected this professor? Just because he worked at Harvard, does not mean that he was respected. Depending on who “respects” him, shows me if I respect him. I don’t respect racists of any color.

      Report Post »  
    • Clive
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 8:59pm

      “TeaPartyForRomney” is the funniest name i think i’ve seen on the blaze.

      Report Post »  
    • MIBUGNU2
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 9:41pm

      LUV the way the MEDIA (LSM)..are trying to discount these
      Videos…they must have the thermostat’s really cranked up in
      these studios, I see beads of sweat on all these Libotards..

      Report Post » MIBUGNU2  
    • Buck Shane
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 9:43am

      @ TeaPartyForRomney

      The Tea Party is not for Romney.

      Report Post » Buck Shane  
    • james4usa
      Posted on April 9, 2012 at 6:02pm

      Are white Supremists those people who claim that Ethiopia, Somalia, Kenya, Zimbabwe are INFERIOR to say Sweden,Denmark, Germany.

      Report Post »  
    • tthan43
      Posted on April 10, 2012 at 12:31pm

      Fact is…..Obama was NEVER a student. NEVER. He was a planted student mole…planted by the Ayer’s group which also included Bell. That is exactly why there have never been any friends, students, colleagues, professors, teachers, girlfriends…no one…ever came forward with knowledge of having known him. He was present at an unsupervised, open-air campus demonstration. Accolades for professors are ALWAYS given in university buildings and the staff do not monitor open-air events. This video was made for the express intent of “convincing” people that Obama was a student. He never was, and most certainly was NEVER a professor for God’s sakes. He is and always has been a pro-marxist shill/plant. It is a fact. He lived with Ayers and practiced and learned Saul Alinsky’s little red book completely during the time of his “supposed” being a student. No one ever knew him. Don’t you wonder why.

      Report Post » tthan43  
  • ShyLow
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:36pm

    The Body of obama is made up of “black racist radicals” and white FAGOLATE radicals” I love CNN’s “Not White in America” specials

    Report Post » ShyLow  
  • vtxphantom
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:36pm

    Soledad is one of obama’s bitc***. When she does have an original thought, it is hateful..

    Report Post »  
  • cloudsofwar
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:35pm

    explains his contempt for Israel.

    Report Post »  
    • Puddle Duck
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 11:30pm

      It explains the cabinet appointments, the entire admin to a T. When Beck freshly minted on a new show at 5pm decided to take BHO up on his offer “ judge my character by those I surround myself with” (paraphrase) Beck decided to do just that…the further he dug into the background of the new appointees the more alarming the picture became. I had argued with many liberals here in my neck of the woods that Obama had no record, no experience and was strangely absent of any real academic or professional relationships exposed to the public in order to get a feel for the man. Having noticed a heavily biased media for years and years (I stopped watching broadcast news at 6 pm decades ago after the fiasco of Hanoi Jane during the early 70′s and the loss of the last stalwart in news to retirement, Cronkite) and being sensitive to the obvious bias that conservative candidates received during campaigns I found it expecially troubling that the MSM 08 cycle was so heavilly in the tank for BHO while being rabid to the point of needless nit picking towards the GOP ticket. Having pointed these glaring differences out to friends it failed to register with any weight …..what we know now would have sunk the Democratic ticket in matter of weeks….I have some hope that this time around with the help of cables news and the internet that “truth” will finally find an audience big enough to do something about the lopsided state we know find ourselves chained to.

      Report Post » Puddle Duck  
    • JLocke
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 7:51am

      You and me both. I doubt that it will eveer change. My belief is that it will get worse.

      Report Post » JLocke  
  • The Goo
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:34pm

    Joel Polluck is right. Soledad O’Brien and Jay Thomas are now the story. How they reacted along with their ridiculous responses and comments are the story. If this was not a big deal, why did they get so incensed?

    Report Post »  
    • CatB
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:14pm

      and if he was incorrect as she stated .. why can’t she tell him how he is incorrect .. because HE ISN’T … but as stated they can’t HANDLE THE TRUTH.

      Report Post »  
  • fishmagnet
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:33pm

    Next we’ll see Obama eating lunch in the cafeteria reading Animal Farm. Now that will be a bomb shell!

    Report Post »  
    • Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:43pm

      That he actually reads something besides a teleprompter?

      Report Post » Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra  
    • BetterInformed
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:52pm

      Good. Now you are starting to understand.

      Report Post »  
    • Fried Okra
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:28pm

      @Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra….. hahah LOL! Good one

      Maybe President Obama should be reading more since he thinks there are 57 States and “Corpsmen” is pronounced “corspe men”.

      Report Post » Fried Okra  
    • Duckhead
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:55pm

      I would be shocked if he read Animal Farm since it is anti-communist.

      Report Post »  
  • Lloyd Drako
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:32pm

    Note all: the US IS historically a white supremacist nation. It IS BOT necessarily, essentially or fundamentally a white supremacist nation.

    Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:37pm

      “NOT necessarily,” etc.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:42pm

      So your‘e saying O’Brien is wrong LLOYD DRAKO?

      Report Post »  
    • krenshau
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:49pm

      Historically, the United States was a slave nation, not a white supremest nation. Originally, slaves were both black and white. Even after blacks became primarily slaves it was generally isolated to regions of the country, not the entire country.

      Report Post »  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:51pm

      Yes, she is wrong. On the basis of the evidence, Bell was a significant figure in Obama’s intellectual development, involving at one time even an emotional commitment. Bell as I understand him is one of many black intellectuals who wears Afro-colored glasses. They can’t help it; it’s the way they were raised. Such types are all over academia, this one happened to be at Harvard. As for the idea that Obama “should have followed King,” he was only 6 years old when King died, and it must have been a remote event to an American kid living in Indonesia! By the time he was in high school and college, King was a figure celebrated but no longer much emulated.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:12pm

      Good for you LLOYD DRAKO…..but I’ll take it a step further. Obama was born in a marinade of leftism. Both his father and mother were active socialists. His mother was even called “Anarchist Annie” by her teachers. After they abondoned him, he was raised by his left leaning grandparents (on them the “typical white woman” grandmother). His own biographies admit he gravitated to radicals at school. Which is why I dare say we have no papers or college writings from Obama’s college years. In the brief time he spent as a lawyer he represented non-profits. As a community organizer he taught Alinsky and Cloward-Piven to his classes. As a do nothing Senator he was rated as one of the most leftist in congress. I say M.L. King wasn‘t even in Obama’s thought process. Heck…he lied about his parents’ meeting at the Selma rally. He was born in 1961, the rally was in 1965. Socialists, anarchists, radicals and race baiters are all he’s even attached himself to.

      Report Post »  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:48pm

      Krenshau: After 1700 at the latest, enslavement of whites had ended; thereafter down to 1865–that is, over most of the colonial period and the first 90 years or so of the independent USA–slavery was exclusively white-over-black. For most of the 100 years after that, “Jim Crow” was the law across the South, no matter what the Constitution said, and not just in the South. The first strictly racially segregated public accommodations had appeared in northern states like New York before the Civil War, and until well into the 20th century interracial marriage was against the law in such unlikely places as Wyoming and Oregon as well as Virginia and Mississippi. As I said, the US is historically white supremacist, but not necessarily fundamentally or forever.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Elfangor87
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 5:02pm

      Lloyd Drako: I’m afraid that your claims are patently false. I will now proceed to demonstrate the fact that they are lies in the same order in which you make them.

      “After 1700 at the latest, enslavement of whites had ended…” Not so. In fact, at the time of the emancipation proclamation, white slaves outnumbered blacks 4 to 1 in some areas of the country. There was a widely known case in Louisiana that started in 1844 called Miller vs. Belmonti. Sally Miller was a white woman who was being held as a slave by Louis Belmonti. She was suing him for freedom based on a claim that she was enslaved after her father, an indentured servant, died. The First District Court of Louisiana ruled in favor of Belmonti, as did the Fifth District Court, obviously establishing that white slavery was well accepted even as late as 1844. In 1845, the state’s Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ms. Miller. Granted, this story, while establishing precedent and probable cause, does not specify the prevalence of white slavery. For that, we look to other sources. Example: Parker Pillsbury, famous minister, abolitionist, and women’s rights activist. He railed against slavery everywhere he went, and wrote extensively on the topic. In a letter to his colleague William Lloyd Garrison in 1853, he wrote, “A white skin is no security whatsoever. I should no more dare to send white children out to play alone, especially at night… than I should dare send them into a forest of tigers and

      Report Post »  
    • Elfangor87
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 5:03pm

      “thereafter down to 1865–that is, over most of the colonial period and the first 90 years or so of the independent USA–slavery was exclusively white-over-black…” I take special exception to this remark. It is well established fact that there were many slave owners throughout the period to which you refer, who were, in point of fact, black! In fact, the first person to own a legally recognized, hereditary slave (that is, a slave who is in servitude for life, whose children will be born into slavery) was a black man. Anthony Johnson (nee Antonio) was born in the African nation of Angola, and was brought to Virginia as an indentured servant. He became free in approximately 1635. In the year 1654, one of his indentured servants, named John Casor, brought him to court in a “freedom suit”, because Anthony refused to honor their contract and grant his freedom. Anthony managed to convince the court that John Casor was his property “for life”, establishing slavery in the fledgling colony of Virginia. In the 1860 US Census, it was determined that only 4.8% of Southern Whites owned slaves, while 28% of Free Blacks owned slaves. One african-american woman, C. Richards of Louisiana, owned 152 slaves! I hardly think that this is “exclusively white-over-black.”

      Report Post »  
    • Elfangor87
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 5:03pm

      “the US is historically white supremacist, but not necessarily fundamentally or forever.” I do appreciate your gracious allowance that the US has a chance to not be “white supremacist” in the future, but I cannot allow you to impugn my nation’s honor by inferring that it is or has been such. I would argue that there have been white supremacists in this nation, but we are not a nation of white supremacists. It is a logical fallacy, a “straw man” argument, to say that a statistical minority defines the whole. If you do live in the US, I invite you to take a walk outside, and politely greet your neighbors of other races. See what kind of a reaction you get. If you do not live here, I invite you to make arrangements so that you can visit. Come and meet us before you judge us.

      Before I open up my comments to criticism, I would like to clarify one simple thing. I am in no way denying the atrocities of slavery, nor the factual history of it, regardless of the color of the slave. I think it is one of the greatest tragedies of our history. I do believe that another tragedy is occurring now, though. I believe that progressive movements are attempting to re-write our history to their own political ends, and we must not allow that to happen. If you believe that this is true, I encourage you to do your own research, learn the truth, and stand for it.

      Report Post »  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 6:31pm

      ElFangor87:

      I don’t think it in anyway impugns American honor to suggest that for most of its history, it’s been a country of white supremacists. It’s simply a statement of fact.

      I‘m aware that it wasn’t unheard-of for blacks to own slaves, especially early on. I’m also aware that occasionally a white or white-appearing person might be held as an indentured servant until well into the 19th century, and that the servant/slave line could be blurry, as in the Miller case. (I note that Miller was freed, but not her mixed-race children!) Usually a little probing will show the servants in question usually had some African blood, but as you say, one case does not establish the prevalence of whites held in slavery, whose number was surely infinitesimal by the 1840s.

      The testimony of an abolitionist like Pillsbury doesn’t really prove much. Abolitionists did their best to paint slavery in the worst possible light, raising the lurid possibility of white children being snatched by slave-catchers, but are there really many instances of such a thing happening? It happened to blacks all the time, even free blacks in the North.

      You haven’t addressed the post-Civil War period, but Jim Crow in the South was assuredly white-supremacist, and as I indicated, it even spread to the North and West. Not just diehard southern conservatives but (as you should know!) early 20th-century progressives also held white-supremacist views.

      This is American history, deal with it!

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
  • eschatologist
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:31pm

    Soledad got schooled! So, like she said, I Googled critical race theory and sure enough, just like Pollack said, white supremacy is an integral part – too bad O‘Brien didn’t read past the first line of the Wikipedia post but how am I not surprised by a CNN “journalist’s” lack of journalism?

    Critical Race Theory (CRT) is an academic discipline focused upon the intersection of race, law and power.
    Although no set of canonical doctrines or methodologies defines CRT, the movement is loosely unified by two common areas of inquiry. First, CRT has analyzed the way in which white supremacy and racial power are reproduced over time, and in particular, the role that law plays in this process. Second, CRT work has investigated the possibility of transforming the relationship between law and racial power, and more broadly, the possibility of achieving racial emancipation and anti-subordination.[1]

    Report Post »  
    • ET43
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:44pm

      I was about to write this commit myself, but as I can see people did as she said and Googled the term. Facts are something all liberals wish did not exist. Seems to me she is a CRT herself, story telling and crating a false narrative of racial implications of white supremacy.

      Report Post » ET43  
    • Locked
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:52pm

      Note: the white supremacy part was added on March 8th. Check the history.

      Report Post »  
    • AFeatherAdrift
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:27pm

      Now if you could only understand what you just “read”. Try again.

      Report Post » AFeatherAdrift  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:22pm

      LOCKED

      21:15, 8 March 2012‎ 68.54.72.114 (talk)‎ . . (14,398 bytes) (+14)‎ . . (This has obviously been changed so it matches Soledad Obrien’s empty-headed explanation on television last night. I’d like to see the language of the theorists used whenever possible, transient political squabbles be damned.)

      If a person were to read much of Derrick Bell’s work they would never get through it unless they were a radical. They would be too incensed. i think everyone ion America should read Derrick Bell. Obama & the Democrats would lose the Popular vote. They would only get 30%.

      Who were the editors TheRedPenOfDoom & MAlik Shabazz? They made a lot of edits.
      I bet they are conservatives! NOT!

      Report Post »  
  • cloudsofwar
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:31pm

    what a suprise cnn will cover for obama. cover and run interference for him as well the rest of the MSM. Romney as well as the others have to run against obama and the msm. seems to me that the msm is pushing santorum on us. after super tuesday they talked more about santorum who won 3 states than romney who won 6 states. msm thinks obama can easily beat santorum.

    Report Post »  
    • LongRange
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:51pm

      Conservatisim wins, if they are thinking Rick is too far right, they will be sorry they wished for him as their opponant.

      Report Post » LongRange  
    • kaydeebeau
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 10:37pm

      uh that would be the opposite – conservative principles articulated always win – Santorum an easy win over Obama – Romeny not so much different in his speech than Obama – mostly nice emotional platitudes – no substance -

      Report Post » kaydeebeau  
  • booger71
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:29pm

    Remember, in the communist world, the end justifies the means.

    Report Post » booger71  
    • dmforman
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 9:02pm

      Yup, and they use words that do not allow the common man to understand what you are actually saying or mean, but make you the speaker look smart. Tired of liberals not being totally honest and upfront.

      Report Post »  
  • Rowgue
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:29pm

    All this bimbo did was quote the wikipedia entry for critical race theory, which she probably editted just before citing it lol. What she described is a curriculum or a field of study.

    A theory puts forth what it’s creator thinks is the causal relationship between two things. She identified no such theory, just a sanitized bullcrap description from whatever moron posted the information to wikipedia. Please explain what the theory is if you’re claiming your guest is wrong. You don’t get to just interrupt somebody, say they‘re wrong and they’re lying, and then simply say continue. If you make a claim like that you have to defend it. You have to present some sort of rational reasoning for your contention. If you stop somebody and say “you‘re a lier that’s not what this is” then you are obligated to explain what you claim it actually is.

    Report Post »  
  • SquidVetOhio
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:29pm

    Breitbart, driving liberals crazy from beyond the grave. Well done sir, well done.

    Report Post » SquidVetOhio  
    • CatB
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:19pm

      I agree … GOD BLESS ANDREW .. and his family and those who carry on his work!

      Report Post »  
    • Fried Okra
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:32pm

      Exactly right! Good job Andrew!

      Report Post » Fried Okra  
    • madasblazes
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 2:23pm

      I can’t wait for the rest to come out and slam these slimeballs down into the ground!

      Report Post »  
  • Gonzo
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:29pm

    Her reaction to Pollak tells you everything you need to know about CNN. Her first and foremost objective is to deflect criticism of Obama and attack the intellect of Pollack. Typical Progressive. Every leftist reporter in America will be brushing up on critical race theory tonight.

    Report Post » Gonzo  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:35pm

      They shouldn’t even have to look it up! I expect it amounts to the claim that nothing, at least in America, is understandable without reference to race. Like all “critical theory,” it surely teaches that there is no such thing as an objective viewpoint or objective truth. Maybe someone here can do a little research so the left doesn’t have to do all the work.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:41pm

      Exactly!..She didn’t even define “critical race theory”, O’Brien merely offered what it does, not what it’s core tenets are. You can see the left is scared. And then of course the MSNBC sock puppet tries to inject racism on Pollack’s part and credit to Pollack, he took a cue from Breitbart and hit right back. This is why Ogletree is on tape saying the video was intentionally hidden during the campaign because it is relevent in understand who Obama really is. And the best part? There’s more coming. God bless you Mr Breitbart, not only for your prosecution of the media, but for being intelligent enough to surround yourself with equally creditable lieutentants to take up your cause.

      Report Post »  
  • BatonRogue
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:27pm

    Oy! … Sure, Solebad exhibits every bit of the bitterness you’d expect from the “runt puppy” in a litter of champions (her 5 siblings are CEOs, surgeons and lawyers. It took Solebad 5 years of on-and-off again attendance to squeeze out her undistinguished undergraduate journalism degree). But it‘s the belligerence ingrained in her ignorance that’s most striking here. To paraphrase a favorite line from an under-appreciated Jimmy Stewart movie, “Flight of the Phoenix” (the original – not the cheeky Dennis Quaid remake), Ms. Obrien acts as though she considers stupidity to be a virtue!

    Report Post » BatonRogue  
  • Locked
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:24pm

    Huh, the wikipedia page on critical race theory is interesting. Seems there was a flurry of activity in the last two days as people edited the entry to add in Derrick Bell and make it sound more fringe, while others undid the revisions and demanded they not be put in without sources. When the sources were not applied but the revisions made again and again, the reversions continued. Seems the current debate is over this sentence:

    “First, CRT has analyzed the way in which racial hierarchies are reproduced over time, and in particular, the role that law plays in this process.”

    Where the new editors tried to replace “hierarchies” with “white supremacy and racial power.”

    Culture wars and data manipulation, now in real time!

    Report Post »  
    • Locked
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:31pm

      Ah, some of the other changes:

      “Critical Race Theory inherited many of its political and intellectual commitments from civil rights scholarship and [[Critical Legal Studies]], even as the movement departed significantly from both. ”

      Changed to (and then was reverted back from): “Critical Race Theory began as a reaction to Marxism and educational theory: origins and issues By Mike Cole”

      Also, there seems to have been some removal of references to Reagan appointees and their views on the theory.

      The latest update reverts the last part back to the “white supremacy and racial power” with the note:
      “This has obviously been changed so it matches Soledad Obrien’s empty-headed explanation on television last night. I’d like to see the language of the theorists used whenever possible, transient political squabbles be damned.”

      Report Post »  
    • Rowgue
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:39pm

      That is why wikipedia is the worst possible source of information when you’re looking for reliable honest unbiased information. It can be editted by anyone regardless of their qualification to be commenting on a particular topic or requiring sources to be cited.

      They only delete someone‘s stuff and demand that they cite sources when it’s something they don’t agree with. And once it‘s established that they don’t want a particular piece of information on a page no amount or quality of sources will ever be enough to get it there. People post complete BS there thousands of times a day and are never required to provide sources at all, as long as it fits into the narrative that they’re attempting to maintain.

      Report Post »  
    • goahead.makemyday
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:44pm

      Case in point why I never use wikipedia for anything important. For things like this try searching for books and other writings.

      Report Post » goahead.makemyday  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:57pm

      LOL…ROWGUE…touche’. Well done.

      Report Post »  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:05pm

      Perhaps LOCKED can stop playing with his wiki for a second and tell us why Bell wrote a science fiction piece in 1993 in which he offered that white Americans would sell black Americans into slavery to aliens to relieve the national debt, and that Jews would sit on the sidelines and go along with it. The parallels to the racist histrionics of Obama’s “sounding board for his conscience) Rev. Jerry Wright are alarming. It appears Pollack‘s assertion is dead on the money and O’Brien is scrubbing and sanitizing like a mad cleaning woman. Well LOCKED? Put your wiki down and answer it.

      Report Post »  
    • Locked
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:40pm

      Aw, Avengerk, I thought you weren’t responding to me any more today? Get a little too flustered? :-)

      I can speculate why he wrote it, but can’t say for sure. And I just KNOW how much you hate assumptions! If I had to venture a guess, it’s because he believed racism is alive and well systemically, and would see the slavery of whites as an analogue to how blacks are still kept down in institutions today.

      Of course, you missed the point of my post: people on both sides are furiously editing wikipedia to try and keep their “facts” up as “truth”. It’s been going on all day; hence why I’m not debating the definitions (it’s somewhere in the middle of what both said), but I’m discussing the frenzy of changing the perception.

      Report Post »  
    • sdarbro
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 9:23am

      Why are people quoting Wikipedia?!? Why not get transcripts from lectures? Is the issue how people define CRT or is it how Derrick Bell presented CRT to his students? it seems they would like us to debate semantics as opposed to address the message Bell delivered.

      Report Post » sdarbro  
  • jakartaman
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:22pm

    O‘Brein’s IQ is at most room temperature.
    Liberals can see it with their own eyes and hear it with their own ears but,
    because their brains are hard wired to be stupid – they will stay in denial or profuse excuses.

    Report Post »  
    • I.Gaspar
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:33pm

      Room temperature in the middle of winter when the boiler is down.
      This will probably be considered misogynistic by the lib trolls who frequent the Blaze…but someone should consider putting a muzzle on that vituperous little nincompoop. Like a little miniature terrier snipping at the heels of any conservative that dares to enter her house.
      What a pathetic excuse for a journalist.

      Report Post »  
  • elosogrande
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:22pm

    Nothing surprising here. O’Brien has alway been a water carrier for the Democrat Party. Her leftist bias is so obvious that you would have expected her to have beenrecruited by MSNBC long ago. Anither over educated, but not too smart news reader who always shades the news in Obama’s behalf. Probably too much Marx and Lenin in her college days.

    Report Post »  
  • fobama
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:21pm

    she is a moron! put Bell with Wright, with wallis, with all the rest of the radicals, an you have radical thinking, this solidud is a moron, is she not?

    Report Post » fobama  
  • TRONINTHEMORNING
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:20pm

    Great job Pollak and Amy; Jay and Soledad are desperate to bury this story. Guess what libs, more to come! Yep, pass out the xanax at CNN. ahahahaha!!

    Report Post »  
  • tweetybird
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:20pm

    Soledad kept saying about Bell…“He is a Harvard law professor”. I say….BIG FN DEAL. Just because he went to Harvard doesn’t mean he is right. Soledad needs to take a chill pill and stop trying to cover up what is so blatantly clear. If you have to cover, lie, cheat ect….something up, then it is completely wrong. These people just don’t get it. If you have to hide who you are….then something is obviously wrong.

    Report Post » tweetybird  
  • wboehmer
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:20pm

    One more in a long line of examples of how racism in America is perfectly OK . . .

    as long as it’s being done by minorities.

    Report Post »  
  • McQandO
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:14pm

    Soledad quoted Wikipedia on Critical Race Theory (see very first line in entry). And obviously, Jay Thomas didn’t have a clue that Jason Pollacks wife is black (from South Africa).

    Report Post »  
    • cosette
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:20pm

      My My My! A member of the MSM being openly bias in a hostile manner toward a,gasp, conservative! And this is news how?

      Report Post »  
    • lukerw
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:31pm

      Critical Race Theory is RUBBISH! The fact is… when you identify a Racial Group in Law & Legislation, you forever isolate that group from Integration into the Whole… which is the failure of the Civil Rights program (re. Rand Paul).
      America is for Americans… not Ethnic-Americans, with special Entitlements… where “the Pursuit of Happiness” is about the Ability to Achieve based upon an Individual’s Talent & Work Ethic.
      There is no room here… for Feel Sorry for Me because of….

      Report Post » lukerw  
    • jasmer
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 6:53pm

      Black & Beautiful!

      http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/03/08/jay-thomas-to-joel-pollack-why-are-you-afraid-of-black-people/

      Jay Thomas = publicly racist buffoon

      Report Post »  
  • TeaPartyForRomney
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:14pm

    There are a few pieces missing from this interview, probably removed by CNN hacks. Watch the who video at: http://www.thedailycandidate.com/video/2012/mar/cnn_breitbart_debate.html

    Report Post »  
  • ChiefGeorge
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:12pm

    She is biased towards accepting the truth and promotes a lie instead of listening to what is being brought before her. CNN is going to find out real fast that having folks on from Breitbart.com will be a challenge because they do not bring it weak. Soledad’s racial makeup is showing through her ideology in this regard. She trys to bury the concern of the story by mitigating it as just another normal everyday student to prof relationship…no bombshell there at all. But lets consider the roles as White student who is mentored by a racist White Supremist and is now our president..uummm? I think that would be a bombshell in anyones book. Heres the problem! Minorities and those who think themselves minorities and or victims cannot believe that they now have become the NEW RACISTS of the 21st century. If you take rights away from others based on race then your a racist. If you advocate for more rights than what we already have outlined in the civilrights laws of the 60s then your advocating for more than the other person who happens to be White has. Special Protections for extra special people winds up being racist towards others who now have no such societal protections and it no goes against the norms of what is classified as racism.

    Report Post » ChiefGeorge  
    • dmforman
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 8:23pm

      She is trying to make him look stupid, when she is the one who is not understanding it. Having lived in Chicago for 6 years, there are great radicals there. These radicals have kept Black people down and most Black people have not taken time to think and investigate things for themselves. They take what people like Obama, Jackson, Sharpton, and mass media tells them and never look into it in any way.

      Amy Holmes was awesome, as was Joel Pollak! Solodad and the other guy were complete idiots and had no real information, but cut up people which seems to be the tactics that liberals use. I am tired of media taking sides, not telling the whole story, and being very biased.

      Hopefully America is waking up! But I am not so sure!!!

      Report Post »  
  • GeorgieJo
    Posted on March 8, 2012 at 4:05pm

    SoulADad needs a xanax immediately. Who made her judge and jury?
    Pollak did well. The spirit of Andrew Breitbart lives on.

    CNN has an attitude and thats one reason I won’t watch.

    OMG 2012

    Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on March 8, 2012 at 6:24pm

      Soledad is no different than Dan Rather or Brokaw. She just hasn’t been discredited yet. One day she’ll say something so racist that she will be fired, but that is in the future.

      Report Post »  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 7:11pm

      It wasn‘t so much O’Brien who went over the top as Thomas, with his suggestion that Pollak believes Bell wanted some sort of violent racial revolution, hence that must be Obama’s aim too. Pollak to his credit didn’t fall for it.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
1 2 3 ... 14

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love