MSNBC Host Thanks God For Right To Kill His Own Unborn Child…

MSNBC’s Toure has already repeatedly proven his increasingly low threshold for intelligent conversation – but this week he manages to devolve into perhaps the single most repugnant, arrogant, and shockingly insensitive rant seen on a major news network in quite some time.  Watch as he expounds on the deep gratitude he has for his right to kill off an unborn child because it would have been far too much of an inconvenience for him.  He actually speaks the phrase “abortion saved me” – apparently unaware of the stunning irony of such a statement. (Given his obvious stupidity, it is likely Toure is unaware of most things…)

(And why does this guy talk like a white homosexual interior designer?  Just sayin…)

____________________________

Toure wraps his gratitude around his own self-importance of course – an all too common theme among liberals.  While the issue of abortion is a worthy topic of discussion, given its significant moral and societal implications, Toure cheapens the discussion, minimizes it to near-parody, while also managing to interject the concept of abortion as being “God’s will”.

Now Toure is a slight, rather effeminate man who was not particularly successful early in life and who most recently was dubbed the “Kim Kardashian of social commentary” by Dr. Boyce Watkins of YourBlackWorld.com.  Here is an excerpt of Dr. Watkins’ quite accurate assessment of the unintentionally comical Toure:

Toure of MSNBC is the man who has every intelligent black person in America wondering why he’s on TV, myself included.   There are no credentials in his background which lead you to believe that he should be defining the direction of national thought on serious political issues (the bio I found says that he dropped out of Emory University in 1992).  He also seems to say things for entertainment, rather than substantive, value and doesn’t seem to take his work all that seriously.

…I refer to Toure as the Kim Kardashian of social commentary because both Toure and Kim are the kinds of fascinating cartoon characters who are famous for d**n near nothing.  His talent is that he is able to make white folks keep him propped up as a relevant black face when everything on his resume says that he’s disgustingly unqualified.  He enters debates with brilliant and well-trained scholars like Michael Eric Dyson with nothing more to say than “I agree with what he just said.” Seeing Dyson debating with Toure is like watching Denzel Washington perform Shakespeare with Young Jeezy.

…Forgive me for stating the obvious when it comes to Toure, but networks need to respect black experts who know what the h**l they’re talking about, and not just chase after their favorite go-to negro who entertains them the most.  Times and issues are too serious for this kind of buffoonery, and it’s time to call it for what it is.   LINK

____________________

While Dr. Watkins’ has little use for the self-important Toure, it should be noted he also points an accusatory finger of racism directly at MSNBC as well.  Toure is the “go-to negro” for MSNBC.  A vapid, oddly white-ish character (which makes him similar to Barack Obama) that is supposed to add some laughable attempted street cred to the flailing far-left network.

For those who might think that assessment a tad harsh, simply watch the video of Toure thanking God for abortion.  Case closed…

 

446 days ago by in News | You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
About the

Be courteous to all, but intimate with few, and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence. -G. Washington

21 Comments to MSNBC Host Thanks God For Right To Kill His Own Unborn Child…
    • Mark
    • *Off Topic*

      The Senate has just reached agrement in principle on immigration reform. It looks as if the newly developed Republican strategy of capitulation is being thrust upon the public and house of reps.

      This POS piece of garbage legislation will allow a pathway for 11 million to become citizens. Here’s a brain twister question for all of you neoconservatives……how many of these 11 million will vote Republican??? How many will vote Constitution Party, Reform Party, or Libertarian??? I see 11 million votes for Democrats if this passes. The Republicans are signing their own relevance away. Harry Reid has stated he’ll sign it “as soon as he can”…you know when he makes statements like that it is not good for the rest of us.

      Lindsey Graham, John McCain will vote for it. YES…the same John McCain who’s campaign ads had him saying” build the dang fence.” has now shown his true colors again.

      Stupid Party / War Party strikes again!

    • M. Simon
    • Look you fools – abortion is in the main the left killing of their own future. And you want to stop that?

      Idiots.

      Next it will be gay marriage is ruining the country. Well divorce has already done the real job. Gay marriage is just a mopping up operation.

      And then we have the War On Drugs which brought you “Mohammed Atta and the Venice Flying Circus”.

      If people don’t want to raise children we are all better off if they don’t. Eventually we will get to the point where the only people reproducing are those that want to. Of my 4 kids, two are engineers. How are the rest of you doing?

    • bill o'rights
    • I find Toure’s position on abortion confusing in some ways, but eye-opening in others.

      For example, Toure has now confirmed for me what I had long suspected–namely, that he himself wields a frightfully misused and well concealed babymaker. Why else would he(?) care so much about HIS abortion “rights”.

      What I do find mysterious though, is thanking God for the ability to perform an action which both denies God anr his omnipotence…that’s just off the reservation.

    • Randall
    • A Detour through Benghazi

      On January 23, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified before Congress regarding the events of September 11, 2012. On that day, four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were murdered following an extended firefight at what was originally termed an American consulate. The political battle that erupted in the aftermath of the killings has revolved around the administration initially placing blame on an anti-Islamic video that spurred an allegedly spontaneous (and deadly) protest, rather than a coordinated assault by terrorist groups; for example, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). Some speculate that before the November election, for President Obama to acknowledge that al-Qaeda had taken more American lives would contradict his hard-on-terror public persona, so carefully groomed since the killing of Osama bin Laden by SEAL Team Six.

      Instead, the administration lumped the Benghazi incident in with other protests that day, including one in Cairo, which were apparently in response to a now infamous anti-Islamic movie, The Innocence of Muslims. The movie’s creator, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, turned out to be criminal with a long rap sheet including bank fraud and drug charges. He is now in jail for violating the terms of his parole. One can only speculate why a fraudster with a criminal record related to drugs would launder spend $5 million and take the time to create a sensational movie that had no audience outside of its notoriety in inciting riots.

      Yet in recent weeks, the very premise of the Benghazi story has been called into question. Multiple sources claim that in fact the “consulate” was no such thing (also see here and here), but in fact a CIA safe house established for the purpose of running Libyan weapons into Syria to arm the rebels. Recently, Senator Rand Paul called the operation “a kind of international Fast and Furious in Benghazi.” Notwithstanding that gun running between Mexico and the United States is implicitly international, this would help to explain the odd fact that the attack happened right after a visit from the Turkish Ambassador with Stevens.

      AQIM, like the PKK and IMU is also in the business. The terrorist group, which has recently made headlines due to the Benghazi attack and the French incursion into Mali, transports drugs imported from South America through northern Africa, to Europe and Asia. Looked at through the perspective of a Profit and Loss Statement rather then ideology, it is not improbable that such notorious (one might say intentionally flagrant) attacks are carefully considered distractions aimed to draw attention away from smuggling rings operating in the area. Lest the idea of committing acts of terrorism for profit sounds too risky, consider that recent narco-subs have the capacity to carry up to twelve tons of product, worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Take the recent hostage crisis and subsequent massacre at a natural gas facility in In Aménas, on the Algerian-Libyan border, by an AQIM splinter group; with such large amount of money on the line, the ultimate intentions of such violence cannot automatically be assumed to be ideologically inspired.

      Could all these events be coordinated distractions to draw security focus away from ports of entry and common shipment routes? Recognizing the overlapping, self-reinforcing, networks of terrorism and the international drug traffic, and the coincidence of interests between drug smugglers and non-state paramilitary organizations, such tactics cannot be ruled out.

      http://tinyurl.com/bzjuqy2

    • AmericaTheBeautiful
    • Colin Powell on OReilly revealed three things..Colin is a racist .. he hates the USA and Lincoln was right..the black man should have been given their own country after the Civil War… as their anger is destructive and divisive to the health of this nation.

      • Francesca
      • Bringing these people over here from Africa was a TERRIBLE mistake. The truth is that if they were to go back to Africa, they would hate it, ahd the true Africans would probably hate them. ::sigh::

    • AmericaTheBeautiful
    • UM, still having problems with the site? Doesn’t lad…eats the posts..What is the problem? Managed?

      Randall, Chambers posed the same questions as several have here…and I post Chambers questions To remind the reader….

      Might I suggest you go back to UM in the weeks after 9/11/12 for information that informs on Holder, the film maker, AlQaeda…please pay attention to VTX, a much missed poster here…

      The questions :

      This raises a number of questions related to American interests and the priorities of the Obama administration:

      Why is the US, with France and the UK, systematically installing Islamist/Muslim Brotherhood regimes across the Middle East and North Africa?

      Why is the United States seeking a direct conflict with Russia in the region, when it appears as if the aspirations of the Islamists, especially the Muslim Brotherhood, are counter to both American and Russian geopolitical agendas? How does it benefit the United States to be on the opposite side of events as a diverse set of nations including Russia, Israel, and Hizbollah?

      What is the Obama administration doing arming al-Qaeda and Taliban affiliates? A pattern emerges when linked to Fast and Furious: arming dangerous criminal and drug interests with no apparent strategic goal.

      With American light and heavy arms going to Mexican drug cartels, al-Qaeda jihadis, and the Taliban, how does the Obama administration in good conscience seek to limit access to firearms by law abiding American citizens?

    • AmericaTheBeautiful
    • UM could you please start connecting some of the dots….

      Such as Al Gore…Bringing Al Jazeera, the mouthpiece of Islamo Communism into the USA…it is Beyond propaganda now…even Matt Lauer is calling Gore out…

      Al Gore the “Sex Poodle”…..who first brought us the Watermelon movement….Green on the outside…all RED inside…it is quite simply Communism.

      Yes the global Warming movement is nothing more than a Communist scam to deindustrialise the USA, kill jobs and industry in the USA …give the no-information voter a religion …so those morons can spew moronic talking points and demand the truth be drowned out by the Chicken Littles…giving us politically correct muzzles.

      Al, the blustering communist, is the only hot air that is responsible for global warming, global cooling, global weather change…it is all his blustering bullshit..there is NO Global warming… and only communists embrace that garbage…it is easily sold as weather is changing and cyclical and the moron class can be counted on to screech the sky is falling.
      …and the weather studying professors could be counted on to join in …IF they wanted grants and tenure…. to stay in business…

      Fat Albert’s father was a well known communist …who carried Armand Hammer’s water and was richly rewarded..

      http://mobile.wnd.com/1998/12/1268/

      Please start showing the bonifides of the …lets call them Dems for now…show their communist associations…

      Shouldn’t your army post info on your commie of the week …everywhere…across the net.

      • Jules
      • ” commie of the week” AtB, I like it. So, is fat Albert it for this week?

        ” Edward Jay Epstein extensively documented in his book Dossier: The Secret History of Armand Hammer, based on KGB files that became public after the collapse of the Soviet Union, that Hammer was in fact — as had been widely suspected before the release of said documents — a top-level paymaster of the Soviet foreign-intelligence services from 1922 onward. According to Epstein, Gore Sr. received his payoff in return for his help in preventing prosecution of Hammer by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, as well as for his key role in encouraging King Idris of Libya to transfer control of his country’s oilfields to Occidental — a move that no doubt facilitated the subsequent transfer of control of Libya itself to the Soviet camp.”

        See Robert Zubrin’s “Al Gore’s Payday”
        http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/337670/al-gore-s-payday-robert-zubrin

    • AmericaTheBeautiful
    • RI, like your opinion on this…

      Either Boehner deserves an Oscar…. or this is complete bologna and Forbes has reached out to save him…if true, apparently those who got shafted with more taxes don’t count…

      Ralph Benko
      How President Obama Lost His Shirt to John Boehner

      The House, under the leadership of Speaker John Boehner, has precipitated a postponement in the debt ceiling fight until May. This represents a strategic choice by Boehner to make the Sequester fight, not the debt ceiling fight, the next major engagement. Much of the mainstream media now is accusing Congress of “kicking the can down the road.” They are missing the strategic implications.
      In retrospect, at the Battle at Fiscal Cliff, Boehner took President Obama to the cleaners. He did it suavely, without histrionics. While Obama churlishly, and in a politically amateurish manner, publicly strutted about having forced the Republicans to raise tax rates on “the wealthiest Americans” Boehner, quietly, was pocketing his winnings.

      Dazzled by Obama’s Ozymandias-scale sneer most liberals failed to notice that Boehner quietly made 99% of the Bush tax cuts permanent. As Boehner himself dryly observed, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board member Steve Moore, “”Who would have ever guessed that we could make 99% of the Bush tax cuts permanent? When we had a Republican House and Senate and a Republican in the White House, we couldn’t get that. And so, not bad.’”

      “Not bad” is a resounding understatement. Dealt a weak hand, Boehner managed to 99% outfox, on tax policy, a president who had the massive apparatus of the executive branch, the Senate majority, and a left-leaning national elite media whooping it up for a whopping tax increase. Even more impressively, Boehner pulled it off with steady nerves while under heavy pressure from the anti-spending hawks in his own caucus.

      Boehner, deftly, also dramatically raised the threshold, on which Obama had campaigned, at which the modest 3.6% rate increase kicked in. Yet his biggest win may have been in making the Alternative Minimum Tax patch permanent. This changes the baseline with profoundly positive implications for future tax reform and economic growth.

      Boehner thereby won a triple jackpot, a bonanza for conservatives and supply-siders … while Obama, giving up all that for a trivial symbolic victory, lost his Progressive shirt. The mainstream media, with a few exceptions such as Howard Kurtz at the Daily Beast, was too deep in the tank to report that the Emperor has no clothes.

      But Obama ended up, at least, shirtless. Next … off come the pants. Here come the real spending cuts. As reported by Moore, Boehner privately told Obama “’Mr. President, we have a very serious spending problem.’ He repeated this message so often, he says, that toward the end of the negotiations, the president became irritated and said: ‘I’m getting tired of hearing you say that.’”

      Boehner, last week, again bested Obama by pushing the debt ceiling fight back to May. This is a double whammy by Boehner. According to specialists, by structuring the law to allow new borrowing only to the extent of obligations “outstanding on May 19, 2013, exceeds the face amount of such obligations outstanding on the date of the enactment of this Act” Boehner effectively instituted a spending freeze. This, in the face of Obama’s relentless demand for even more spending, is a victory for anti-profligacy hawks.

      There’s a much bigger whammy embedded. Pushing the debt ceiling fight back to May, as the New York Times put it, “re-sequenced” the fight. Re-sequencing was not an idle gesture. It was a major tactical win by the House. The Times reported that “’The president stared down the Republicans. They blinked,’ said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York.” Schumer speaks with macho naiveté.

      The Democrats, apparently, still don’t know what Boehner has hit them with. Thanks to the Sequester anti-profligacy conservatives now negotiate from strength. What are the implications of putting the Sequester fight before the debt ceiling fight? Steve Moore:

      “The Republicans’ stronger card, Mr. Boehner believes, will be the automatic spending sequester trigger that trims all discretionary programs—defense and domestic. It now appears that the president made a severe political miscalculation when he came up with the sequester idea in 2011.

      “As Mr. Boehner tells the story: Mr. Obama was sure Republicans would call for ending the sequester—the other ‘cliff’—because it included deep defense cuts. But Republicans never raised the issue. ‘It wasn’t until literally last week [columnist’s note: just before the deadline] that the White House brought up replacing the sequester,’ Mr. Boehner says. ‘They said, ‘We can’t have the sequester.’ They were always counting on us to bring this to the table.”

      “Mr. Boehner says he has significant Republican support, including GOP defense hawks, on his side for letting the sequester do its work. ‘I got that in my back pocket,’ the speaker says. He is counting on the president’s liberal base putting pressure on him when cherished domestic programs face the sequester’s sharp knife. Republican willingness to support the sequester, Mr. Boehner says, is ‘as much leverage as we’re going to get.’”

      Will the support of the defense hawks hold? It appears Boehner’s not bluffing. Although Obama’s outgoing defense secretary, Leon Panetta, infamously called the sequester “catastrophic,” the secretary obviously is falling back on the old bureaucratic tactic called “squealing louder than it hurts.” The Washington Post afterward called Panetta “the former (emphasis added) deficit hawk.”

      As the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and nobody’s patsy, crisply notes about the Sequester: “This cut is significant to be sure, but it does not reach that of previous postwar drawdowns.”

      Catastrophic? Oh please. Panetta surely knows better. The Post reprised a younger Panetta who, at a 1992 hearing (when the deficit was less than half its current size), stated “I think the most dangerous threat to our national security right now is debt, very heavy debt, that we confront in this country.”

      “As chairman of the House Budget Committee and later as budget director in the Clinton administration, Panetta was an unforgiving enforcer of the bottom line as the United States grappled with record-size debts. As the largest government agency, the Pentagon found itself a frequent target of his whip, especially as it struggled to justify its missions in the aftermath of the Cold War.

      “’I think the most dangerous threat to our national security right now is debt, very heavy debt, that we confront in this country,’ Panetta lectured then-Defense Secretary Richard B. Cheney and Gen. Colin L. Powell, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, during a hearing in 1992.”

      It now should be clear to every Tea Party Patriot that Boehner is acting with integrity, with acute political sophistication, as an authentic conservative serious about reducing the debt by reducing spending. His claim, to Moore, that “he has significant Republican support, including GOP defense hawks … for letting the sequester do its work,” promises to be a game changer.

      Given the assessments by sober defense analysts — and according to other, private, reports from Capitol Hill — there is no reason to think that Boehner is bluffing about having the support he needs to take the Sequester or barter it for even better cuts. And Boehner’s abhorrence of debt appears completely authentic. Moore: “He sees debt as almost a moral failing, noting that when he grew up in a little middle-class, blue-collar neighborhood’ outside of Cincinnati, ‘nobody had debt. It was unheard of. I just don’t do debt’.”

      Boehner, having shrewdly identified the conservatives’ point of maximum leverage, appears poised for an historic victory. Boehner may prove himself to be the guy big enough and smart enough finally to engineer something that eluded even the great Reagan: pushing federal spending onto a downward trajectory.

      If Boehner succeeds in closing the deal as he, with a critical assist from Senate Minority Leader McConnell, seems about to do he will go down in history as having brought about “the moment when the rise of the oceans (of debt) began to slow” … and our republic “began to heal.” If so John Boehner will deserve to be more than a Republican, conservative, and tea party, hero. He will go up in popular esteem, and down in history, as the master who staunched Washington’s hemorrhaging of America’s wealth.

    • Chunkdog
    • Toure thanks god abortion is legal?

      I think that baby probably thanks god abortion is legal, more than Toure does.

      In this case abortion might have been a good thing.

      Can you imagine having to spend the next 18 years being raised by that thing?

Leave A Response

* Required

-->