Sean Hannity “covered” Michael Brown’s funeral earlier today much the way he “covered” Coretta Scott King’s funeral: as a launch pad for attacking African Americans.
If he had any class or sense of decency, Hannity would have honored the moment and explored why this case touched such a nerve in African Americans. To their credit, Bill O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly at least made an effort in that regard.
But Hannity only seemed to care about using the moment as an opportunity to malign African Americans. His first question to guest Daryl Parks, attorney for the Brown family: “Do you know how many shootings took place in Chicago this weekend? Do you have any idea?”
The message was clear: Brown did not deserve this attention, not when there are so many black thugs out there - that African Americans should be condemning instead.
I wish Parks had confronted Hannity’s concern trolling. If black-on-black violence is such a big story, why isn’t Fox covering it in any significant way? Why didn’t Hannity have a guest who could speak to that situation instead of Parks, who is clearly busy with other issues right now? I think we know the answer: Hannity only cares about black-on-black violence when he can use it to smear black civil rights activists and activism.
Parks agreed, however, with Hannity's premise. He said, “We need a reduction in violence in our community so we addressed that within the course of even this service today.”
But, not surprisingly, Hannity didn’t care what was said in the service (except the parts that were inflammatory, that he could hold against the mourners). He brought up a case of a black police officer shooting an unarmed 20 year-old white “teenager.” Hannity “asked,” “Why are there certain cases that make it to the media’s consciousness and others do not? Or the activists’ consciousness and others do not? …Do they have their own agendas here?”
“Last weekend, 29 people were shot in Chicago,” Hannity continued. “This weekend 42 people were shot in Chicago. I don’t see the protests. I don’t see the anger. I don’t see people going in the community and saying ‘Knock it off.’” And I don’t see any segments on Hannity discussing it, except in the context of using it against African Americans.
Hannity said that seeing civil rights leaders in Ferguson (think: Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson) “makes me think that they only try to capitalize – or this is selective moral outrage when it’s an issue that they think they can drive home a racial message.”
The fact is, Hannity is the king of “selective moral outrage” and “driving home a racial message.” Just not the kind that’s being televised in Ferguson. While he railed about the black community rushing to judgment, he didn’t mind at all when his racist pal, Mark Fuhrman, announced he knew that Brown was the aggressor in his fatal confrontation with the Ferguson police officer.
Hannity made the flimsiest of efforts to show some sympathy over Brown’s death. He told Parks, “And by the way, I share your sympathy. I’ve told you this before. My thoughts and prayers are with this guy’s mother. “ I guess “this guy’s” father didn’t merit that special consideration.
And then Hannity immediately moved on to race bait Brown’s uncle. “You know, when his uncle says, “Michael’s blood is crying from the ground, crying for vengeance.' And Spike Lee says what he said, that, basically, burn the place down afterwards. …I’m thinking this is irresponsible of people that are supposed to be leading. And here’s the problem. You don’t know what happened that day. You do not know what happened. I don’t know what happened. …It’s irresponsible."
“Shouldn’t the people that are there, whipping people up into a frenzy, saying no justice no peace …Isn’t that irresponsible?” Hannity later "asked" Parks. “You’re an attorney, you believe in the justice system, don’t you?”
Well, at least he didn’t say, “Let me educate you about the legal system in America.”
Watch Hannity's dishonest concern about the black community in Chicago (and Ferguson) below.
Isn’t “…whipping people up into a frenzy,…” what he’s paid by Faux News to do?
And yes Sean, you are irresponsible.
New York native Hannocchio is hiding this little fact from his audience. Gangs are responsible for 40% of the crime in NYC. On second thought, forget Chicago. Send Hannocchio to the mean streets of NYC. It would be home for Hannocchio, given his hoodlum background.
Mr. “Let me educate you about the legal system in America” should have passed his own advice to his friends:
1. “A name you can trust” R Allen Stanford
2. The indicted Rick Perry
3. Hannocchio’s endorsement of scandal-ridden VA Gov. Bob McDonnell
4. Girlfriend Annie’s voter fraud
5. Bad cop Bernard Kerik
6. Hatemonger Hal Turner
7. Ollie North of Iran-Contra fame
Birds of a feather…
NOTE TO MASSES
Call talk radio shows across America and discuss Hannocchio’s pals.
What’s really enraging about the perpetual “I don’t see these people in Chicago” cry of Fox is that those people are regularly in Chicago trying everything they can think of to find a way to get the violence to stop. But since Fox doesn’t bother to go there, they have no idea what’s going on in the black communities of major cities, Chicago or anywhere else.
Also worth pointing out is that contrary to what Hannity would have his white viewers believe, the rate of violent crime in Chicago and other big cities has plunged dramatically over the last 10 years or more.