But this post was mentioned over at the WSJ in the Best of the Web today column, albeit in the “Bottom stories of the day”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703578104575397100729241576.html

Levi, you simply are too incoherent for words.

Fox News does deserve some degree of blame, because without a massive media organization to mindlessly parrot these kinds of ridiculous attacks, people like Breitbart wouldn’t have the back-up they need to even attempt the con. Fox News creates the environment where this kind of opportunistic racism is expresssed.

As expected, you’re going to be a whiny little child and continue to dodge responding to me. I don’t suppose it would matter, but just know that I have absolutely no faith in you to respond. Your type always attaches these little disclaimers to their comments so that you can excuse yourself from arguing and pretend like it’s my fault.

Sounds like someone’s got a real problem with white people. That’s typical; Barack Obama himself supports and demands that school children be taught ludicrously racist theories, including this:

Carruthers is a defender of Leonard Jeffries, professor in the department of black studies at City College in Harlem, infamous for his black supremacist and anti-Semitic views. Jeffries sees whites as oppressive and violent “ice people,” in contrast to peaceful and mutually supportive black “sun people.” The divergence says Jeffries, is attributable to differing levels of melanin in the skin.

So when you have defenders of Barack Obama who insist that personality traits are based on skin color, I think it’s pretty clear who the actual racists are. Sherrod is a racist. You are a racist.

And now out comes the moral relativist.

First, Levi is arguing that Sherrod should be allowed to hate and discriminate against all white people because the person who allegedly killed her father was white.

Second, in Levi’s hypothetical scenario, desiring and wanting are not the same as doing. If the rape victim pays someone to rape her attacker in prison, if the family of the murdered hunts down and kills the murderer, that is a different matter entirely.

And that is exactly what Sherrod did. She generalized what happened to her father to all white people, and she acted to discriminate against them.

By that pathetic Levi logic, someone who is mugged by a black person is not only justified in hating all black people and holding them responsible, but also using whatever power they have to discriminate against black people.

Sherrod must truly be an inferior human being for you to hold her to such a pathetically low standard. And that is why you are a racist, Levi; you refuse to hold Sherrod accountable for her behavior because of her skin color.

I’ll do my best to avoid your particularly frustrating brand of stupidity from now on.

So can we call you Pot now?

Though again, let’s not forget ““a black woman getting fired for no reason because of the concerted efforts of racist, right-wing media organizations. :

Again, Levi’s words, she was fired because of the efforts of Fox.

So which is it, Levi? Destroyed or Fired? You’ve said both now.

You think you can win a debate. Heck you likely think you’re winning the race around the merry-go-round too.

I just don’t care anymore. Any effort to correct you or coax you back on topic is completely wasted. I’ll do my best to avoid your particularly frustrating brand of stupidity from now on.

Can you explain and elaborate on what you are saying here? (It is too oblique for me.)

Republicans preach a philosophy that make their own bigotry hypocritical

As an overseas observer on US politics for the last 10 years l cannot help but be amazed how self deluded American Right wingers who are minorities are.

You sit there and prostitute yourselves for a party who feel no shame in demonizing you, your friends and your loved ones an like battered spouses you defend them to the hilt in a vain idea that some of their money, and it comes down to money, will filter to you, which is why you support the false notion of trickle down economics.

I thought I’d comment on this. The problem is the Democratic Party is not any better then Republicans on treating minorities well. The truth is that anyone can succeed in life, *if they believe they can and work hard enough*, and I have a lot of family experience in what the Democrat’s policies do to poor people (so don’t tell me they are any better or they don’t encourage people to be poor).

Besides, the discrimination I’ve suffered from Democratic policies far, far outweights republican ones (or do you genuinely believe Democrats support minorities for any other reason then simply grabbing power?). Opposition to charter schools and school vouchers was one biggy (it screws the invisibly disabled), the Employee Free Choice act is another (if you think taking away secret ballots is at all acceptable, tell that to the 20% of us with the “highly sensitive personality type”, have trouble saying no, and tend to be sensitive to those bigger then us–or did you think only women suffer from that?).

In the end, Republicans preach a philosophy that make their own bigotry hypocritical, and I’ve watched many, many of them realize this and change. On the other hand, the Democratic philosophy is more openly corrupt, traps people I care about in poverty, tells them they can’t succeed (human beings can overcome an incredible amount of adversity), insists on toeing a party line and this ridiculous “solidarity” concept (collectivism always screws some minorities; it’s the nature of populism), etc.

Again, Levi’s words, she was fired because of the efforts of Fox.

So which is it, Levi? Destroyed or Fired? You’ve said both now.

You think you can win a debate. Heck you likely think you’re winning the race around the merry-go-round too.

Bu hey, we’re making progress. Note how he’s not contesting his own racisim and socialist beliefs any longer.

The case I have been making is that Fox News is racist and that it has no journalistic credibility.

Really? That is interesting.

Stand back, everybody, and let Levi make his case.

OK, Levi, make your case that (1) Fox News is racist and that (2) Fox News has no journalistic credibility.

Would you criticize a rape victim for expressing a desire that her attacker is raped in prison? Would you condemn the family of a murder victim for wanting to kill the murderer?

My God. Watching you trying to be smart is like watching a train wreck.

Yes… because wanting to ‘destroy’ someone includes letting them keep their job.

Levi, do you ever get motion sickness from spinning so hard?

Ah, I think you’re starting to figure out. You’re trying to pretend that my vague assertion (Fox wanted to destroy Sherrod) was actually a specific claim (Fox made Sherrod resign.) This is the last resort of people that are terrible at debate, though actually, in this situation it is your first resort. I meant what I said, my meaning was clear, I’ve clarified it numerous times, I’ve attempted to correct your misunderstanding of my statement…. and you’re still at it, because it’s all you’ve got. The problem I run into with people like you is not that you’re incapable of understanding or I’m incapable of making myself clear – you simply refuse to understand and choose to fight with a fabricated version of my argument.

Let me recap; I’ve never blamed Fox News for Sherrod’s firing. I have blamed the administration, which is 100% at fault in my opinion. The case I have been making is that Fox News is racist and that it has no journalistic credibility. Neither of those claims require me to prove that Fox News made her resign, that’s always been a construct of yours to squelch discussion and avoid the topic.

Aslo note how he changes the terms again (and I fell for it for a moment) I say that his rancid lies are that “Fox conspired to have her fired.” Levi tries to change it, since he’s caught in his quotes to ‘forced her to resign.’

Actually, your initial mischaracterization in the other thread was that I’d said ‘Fox News made her resign.’ Go dig it up, and then you can tell me who is changing the terms.

Guess what Levi. The Administration forced her to resign, because of their irrational fear of one man. You have said over and over, Fox conspired to destroy her. I was kind enough to limit it to ‘fired.’

See? This is exactly what I’m talking about above. You think it’s your prerogative to limit the meaning of my words for no other reason than it benefits your argument. Further, you think that this putting of words into my mouth is a ‘kind’ gesture. Are you even capable of grasping what you’re admitting to here?

Guess what Levi. The Administration forced her to resign, because of their irrational fear of one man. You have said over and over, Fox conspired to destroy her. I was kind enough to limit it to ‘fired.’

Levi, do you ever get motion sickness from spinning so hard?

See what I mean? Are you really going to go postal defending your analysis of severe delusion rather than address your claim?

Well, he’s insisting that I said something that I didn’t. To prove this, he copies and pastes a bunch of my comments that clearly contradict his argument.

What do you think, heliotrope? Based on what Livewire posted in 126, do you think that I said that Fox News forced Sherrod to resign?

If I suggest that what Breitbart did is “criticism” that makes me “absolutely insane.” You have erected an amazing iron curtain here. Naturally, I would not accept your analysis of my sanity, but, more importantly, you are walling yourself off from criticism. I do not see the difference between what you have written and slapping your hands over your ears and chanting: “I can’t hear you.”

Ergo, I have no opening, by your rules for debating with you. Why do you consistently do this? You have a compulsion for saying things are “absolute” and “ironclad” and “abject” and other such superlatives.

Try coming back with thoughtful discourse. If there are varying points of view, you should at least be open to hearing them and debating them with no holds barred.

What you are consistently doing is issuing proclamations. Ironically, if you want to spend time with a large aggregation of proclamation givers, you should visit a mental institution.

Okay heliotrope, I don’t know what you want from me. I hate the kind of semantic arguments that you’re trying to drag me into, you’re not the first conservative to do. If you don’t like my writing style or my word choice then I can’t help you. Playing stupid and pretending that words like ironclad and insanity have singular, rigid meanings and that you are some kind of definition arbiter is not impressive.

If you’d like to get back to talking about the issue, feel free to substitute ‘utter stupidity’ in the place of ‘absolute insanity’ in the comment that has so offended your sense of vocabulary.