Editor's Note: The action component has been removed. AOL's Political Machine is going to cross-post a portion of this response instead. — Erick.
Okay, one more on this.
In this kid's world, it is racist. But as has been stated repeatedly, the song is not a racist song (note to Chip Saltsman: that this stuff is now going on is reason number one you are not qualified to be RNC Chairman).
Now here is the thing: the guy has moved beyond claiming the parody itself is racist to claiming that any parody of Al Sharpton is racist.
He had originally contended that the song had nothing to do with Al Sharpton. I pointed out the four reasons why it very clearly has everything to do with Al Sharpton, including that Rush both introduced the song as sung by Sharpton and has used this Sharpton voice for years to mock and parody Sharpton. The guy responds with, "What he's basically saying is that it's okay, Limbaugh's been putting on a minstrel show for a long time. He and Shanklin are very good at it. "
Hit the brakes folks. We can't take on Sharpton? That makes us racist? Good grief. He also says the song is "clearly offensive" to "the rest of us." I guess I missed the memo that this guy has been designated taste tester for the world. Incidentally, as proof that "the rest of us" are "clearly offended", he links to a prior post of his wherein a black man, Ken Blackwell, is not "clearly offended." So . . . um . . . how exactly is it accurate to say "the rest of us" when clearly the rest of us are not offended? Or did the universe that comprises "the rest of us" just get reduced to this guy and his left-wing friends who have never actually paid attention to Rush Limbaugh or this song?
He continues, "he's defending a song that is clearly racist, along with others on that CD, and it's a big deal now because the person promoting it isn't a xenophobic imbecile radio host. It's the guy who wants to lead their party."
First, the song is not racist. He thinks it is racist because he very clearly is not bright. He heard the words "magic negro" and immediately did as all liberals do. He said "A ha!, racism" while totally ignorning the fact that the phrase was derived from a newspaper column written by a homosexual black man who called Barack Obama just that.
Second, he says I'm "defending . . . others on that CD." I didn't realize I'd done that. I don't, in the two other posts on this topic, remember making reference to the other songs.
Third, he goes back into liberal insultmongering by calling Rush Limbaugh "a xenophobic imbecile radio host." Never mind that Rush Limbaugh is an ardent supporter of legal immigration, was in favor of such things as the Dubai ports deal, is a huge proponent of free trade agreements with other countries, and, sadly, is a Francophile. How exactly is he xenophobic? Oh, wait, because Tommy Christopher, Taste Tester for the World, says so.
Here's the key take away:
AOL's Political Machine claims it will "sort the spin."
Instead, what we have here is some guy mouthing off left-wing talking points without any exploration of the underlying data.
The song is racist because it uses a phrase popularized by a gay black man who did not like Obama.
The song is not sung by an Al Sharpton imitator because Tommy Christopher says so.
Rush Limbaugh is xenophobic because . . . well . . . because everybody knows he is.
Facts can be added to and subtracted from outside reality just because they can.
It seems to me that AOL's Political Machine is not sorting out the spin, so much as amplifying the spin.