What’s the Matter with Soledad O’Brien?

Pages: 1 2

In one of her own books, Brown asserted that the purpose of CRT was to “highlight the ways in which the law is not neutral and objective, but designed to support White supremacy and the subordination of people of color.” Oops.

O’Brien is entitled to her opinions, of course. The problem is that she masks her political activism under the banner of corporate media “diversity.” Of multicultural heritage, O’Brien has won countless accolades for her “Black in America” and “Latino in America” documentaries for CNN. The medical school at historically black Morehouse College created the “Soledad O’Brien Freedom’s Voice Award” to honor “outstanding catalysts of social change.” The first recipient of the activist award? Soledad O’Brien, of course.

O’Brien is also a card-carrying member of two racial/ethnic-centered journalism lobbying groups: the National Association of Black Journalists and the National Association of Hispanic Journalists. These organizations are inherently politicized entities that enforce a skin color-deep ideological solidarity and push a social justice agenda of advocacy journalism. I know because I’ve fought their collective herd mentality for the past 20 years.

Liberal minority journalists have themselves acknowledged their slavish fealty to Obama and his progressive agenda. During the 2008 campaign, the NABJ, NAHJ and Asian American Journalists Association held a “journalists of color” confab where then-candidate Obama was welcomed with Justin Bieber-style mania. One journalist squealed, “He touched me!” after Obama’s address, which was interrupted multiple times with standing ovations, cheers and whistles by the press.

Organizers were so concerned about public displays of Obamedia affection that they issued several warnings to their news professional members that the speech would be broadcast live on (Soledad O’Brien’s) CNN. “Professional decorum” was encouraged. One wire story even fretted: “Can minority journalists resist applauding Obama?”

Nope, liberal minority journalists simply can’t resist carrying water for Obama. That’s because their journalistic unity demands political unanimity. If you don’t accept the left-leaning agenda of “social change” journalism, you’re enabling racism. If you don’t support the pursuit of racial hiring goals as a primary journalistic and academic goal, you’re selling out.

Now you know the reason for O’Brien’s thin-skinned reaction to Obama’s critics. When you vet the president, you vet the media. And they don’t like the narrative table-turning one bit.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • JamesinUSA

    May Bell rest in Hell!

    • Sound&Fury

      He's counting on racial quotas to secure a place in heaven.

  • StephenD

    With a straight face she looks into the camera and is suddenly the "every-woman" that people everywhere could love and trust…until you disagree with her. Lefties always betray themselves. They are the most tolerant of people anywhere until you have a different view. They will not tolerate that.

  • tagalog

    In doing a little homework (inspired by the claim of Soledad O'Brien that Joel Pollak was misstating Critical Race Theory), I came across an explanation that informed me that Critical Race Theory is informed by the assumptions that racism is embodied in the legal system, and that a rule of law based on equality before the law is in fact racist; further, racism is inherent in the human condition and therefore inescapable. Lastly, I was told that our legal system should be based on narrative and not on rationality/logic.

    So, applying those assumptions to racial discrimination, I see Critical Race Theory saying that a social system based on what stories people tell about their particular groups will ALWAYS be racist and nothing can be done about that; that no legal system will provide equal justice under law because one race will always be persecuting another, and that this is part of the human condition and must simply be accepted. Therefore, if we accept CRT as a valid description of social systems, we must accept racism forever. I'd rather have the system that we have now, because it at least strives for equality before the law within the framework of individual liberty.

  • BS77

    Critical race theory…another steaming pile from the left.

  • Sound&Fury

    Thomas Sowell exposed Derrick Bell as a flunkie Harvard professor who decided to become a somebody by trumpeting CRT. Of course, Ms O'Brien failed to disclose her devotion to this man during her interview with Pollack. It's worth reading… http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2012/

  • Serafino

    Another Harvard degenerate who has conned her way into what they call "journalism". God knows how she actually got there. The best thing that a TV viewer can do is to change the channel. Short and simple. Let liberals poison each other.

  • Spider

    What’s the Matter with Soledad O’Brien?

    For one thing she's a clueless wigger like many others that
    helped get a leftist clown with no experience elected who
    is doing everything in his power to ruin our economy, lives
    and our childrens financial future

  • mgoldberg

    where is the counter attack, to open the publics eyes to the obvious? I mean, it's wonderful to read this article, to read articles by Pollack that showed the immense hypocrisy involved in 'news spokesman' like O'brien, who pretend it's just an important theory of politics and race, when it's a racist, bigoted, theoretical construct that demands an end to merit, and defies criticism of it, of 'oppressed'- who constitute all those who the 'white' world has created into those who deserve special favor. This 'racism' this series of untruths, peddles as progressive theorizing is quite fascist, quite arbitrary and yet…. we have these articles that then get quiety stuffed away without the attack that should take place to demand O'bien's historical lying is taken to her full force with demands that it be shown for her viewers on CNN. Wouldn't that be the kind of response that we need to her dissimulation?

    • stevefraser

      None, because the GOP and conservatives are wussys and scared….you know, the kind of people who are bullied no matter how much they run to the teacher.

  • Jerry

    Critical Race Theory is wrong because it does not tolerate questioning its presumptions. Everyone must entertain the possibility that they are wrong when positing a theoretical construct, because from some perspective they probably are wrong. But this knife cuts both ways. CRT raises individuals' experiences to the level of data. These stories could be data points that support the presence of bigotry if enough of them are validated. The problem is that uncritical acceptance of individual stories leads to the use of Taquiyah or justified lying in order to gain control of the dialogue and thus acquire political power. To say that things are really complicated is an understatement. Given the acceptance of the death of truth as the currency of daily human interchange is to leave the realm of reasoned rational life. The Left therefore is hoisted on their own petard, since they denigrate truth but demand adherence to their version of it.

    • tagalog

      Before things get to the level of taquiyyah, I submit that we will have a wave of "the lie illustrates a LARGER TRUTH" stories.

      After all, it was a total fabrication that what's her name, Al Sharpton's entree into celebrity, Tawana Brawley, that's it, was attacked, abused, and raped, but it illustrated a LARGER TRUTH in Sharpton's universe. That kind of thing will become common. It will be like Newspeak: LIES ARE TRUTH!

      My question is whether or not white people can re-institute the custom of thinking that a black man looking at a white woman is a clear-cut message of savage, animal lust, which can only be responded to with at minimum a beating, or, more drastically, a lynching involving pre-hanging castration? I mean, if racist narrative is the basis for the system, doesn't it cut both ways? Obviously Derrick Bell would say not. But he's in the oppressed group…and on and on…

  • Len_Powder

    Controlling the narrative is a primordial objective of leftist media personalities. In this interview Soledad had the tables turned on her as Michelle indicated. Hats off to Mr. Pollack who would not allow her to intimidate him. This is an example of how conservative guests should contend with leftist moderators and journalists. They are the ones who should be put on the defensive. They are the ones who cannot justify or support their radical Marxist positions on any social policies which is why they scream 'racist', 'bigot', 'homophobe', etc. when anyone disagrees with them. They are brainwashed people who, in most cases, have no idea why they believe what they do. Their minds were programmed with indoctrination but they have no awareness of such conditioning. Hence, the debate advantage falls to the conservative that they seek to slice into a thousand pieces. It's amazing how many conservatives allow themselves to be intimidated by these drones. Dealing with them is like dealing with bullies. Once you stand up to them they never bother you again.