Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Mark Fuhrman Too Racially Sensitive For Hannity

Reported by Ellen - March 14, 2007 -

Yes, you read that right. Mark Fuhrman was the guest on tonight’s Hannity & Colmes (3/14/07) to discuss the pending Grand Jury decision on the case of the unarmed bridegroom, Sean Bell, shot and killed by policemen in New York City last fall. One of Hannity’s favorite black boogeymen, Councilman Charles Barron, was the other guest. Rather than discuss the facts of the Bell case, Hannity and FOX News made the story about Barron and his alleged incitement to violence. Updated with video.

No violence has yet occurred over the case, though Bell’s death HAS. Nevertheless, this hypothetical occurrence in the future got all the attention. Viewers were shown a clip of Barron saying, “I am fed up, I’m not asking my people to do anything passive any more... We’re not the only ones that can bleed.”

In his brief go-round with Alan Colmes, Barron refused to say that he had a duty to discourage violence. “I’m not gonna tell them to calm down. I’m gonna tell them to fight by any means necessary.”

Comment: I wish Barron had confronted the show on its misplaced efforts to make the story about him, rather than Bell’s death, and I wish Barron behaved less like a demagogue but I have to love the way he gets in Hannity’s face and confronts his bigotry.

When it was his turn, Hannity quickly went to Mark Fuhrman for a comment on the case.

Barron said what I suspect a lot of non-bigots must have been thinking: “Mark Fuhrman? You have a lot of nerve bringing him on!”

Hannity, in his bullyboy voice, read a quote from Barron and asked Fuhrman, “Is he inciting a riot?”

But to Hannity’s evident chagrin, Fuhrman didn’t think so. Fuhrman replied, “He’s crafting the words very carefully… I’m not sure it would be a threat or a passionate response.”

Hannity interrupted Fuhrman in an obvious effort to egg him on against Barron.

Other Democrats should take a lesson from Barron on how to handle Hannity. Barron didn’t sit there like a lump and wait for the invective against him to stop. He knew his opponent and seized the moment. He interrupted Hannity by saying, “Let (Fuhrman) talk.” Then the canny Barron said, “Mark, you didn’t say what he wanted to hear.”

Fuhrman continued, “When you incite a riot, there’s very specific comments made… I think what the greater point here is… I saw the tactics in this shooting. They were a dog and pony show. And if we went through this, I think Mr. Barron’s position would be supported by facts.”

Oops, that was SO not what Hannity wanted to hear. “I understand that, Mark but can police officers make a mistake and does it then become criminal?”

Fuhrman answered, “Every round that’s fired, the officer that fired those rounds has to be responsible for his probable cause for a life-threatening situation for which he responds that way.”

Barron’s surprised pleasure was evident on his face.

Hannity’s displeasure was immediately evident in his voice. Fuhrman was not heard from again. To Barron, Hannity sneered, “There are two issues here.” One was the glided-over grand jury decision. “The second issue is you. You are a racist…” Barron’s alleged racism remained the focus for the rest of the segment.

I doubt many other people besides the race-obsessed Hannity thought Barron was an important part of this story. But whenever a white guy is in trouble in a race-related issue, Hannity has an uncanny knack for finding a black person to attack. Besides, it’s been at least two days since his last attack on a black.

Barron, a previous News Hounds top dog, was up to the hostility, though. When Hannity asked the finger-pointing, in-your-face Barron if he wanted to slap him, Barron replied, “You’re not worth a slap.”