Not at all surprisingly, Georgetown University professor and MSNBC contributor Michael Eric Dyson on Sunday made the case that the criticism of President Obama's harsh remarks to the Supreme Court this week were racially motivated.
Fortunately for the sane component of those that view ABC's This Week, George Will and Peggy Noonan were there to add some desperately needed reason (video follows with transcript and commentary):
MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR AND MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Look all of this othering of Obama, like he's from some other planet. Everything he does is subject to a different lens and seen through a microscope that really tends to pick him apart. I think it's indivisible from the broader issue of his race, of his being a black man with a certain kind of authority. These are impolite things we don't want to talk about. We think that they're being extraordinary ratcheted up. But I don't see any other way to explain it but a remarkable resistance to the integrity of this man that has no other explanation.
Those familiar with Dyson know this to be his common position on anything involving Obama: any criticism of the President is because he's black. Period. End of story.
Possibly realizing the absurdity on display before him, substitute host Jake Tapper challenged his guest:
JAKE TAPPER, HOST: When you hear Republicans say that President Obama is being a bully, you hear racial subtexts?
DYSON: Of course. Bully -- I mean look this guy -- if -- if you can't deal with this reasoned, articulate expression of difference and dissent and calling that bullying. And on the one hand Obama has to be worried about, I can't be an angry black man. I can't speak up in a certain way. He's already constrained by the stereotypes that prevail. If you can't even take his dissent as an expression of legitimate disagreement and instead of ascribing to him bullying, I don't see how...
CHRYSTIA FREELAND, REUTERS: You think being black has made the president less effective?
DYSON: Well, it's made his job much more difficult because even white liberals who support him, obviously play into certain racial scripts. Black people who support him -- and -- and across the board, I think it's very difficult for the president to be able to maneuver because he has to be so concerned. He can focus on the 50th anniversary of To Kill a Mockingbird, but can't necessarily highlight the 44th anniversary of the death of Martin Luther King, Jr. There are choices to be made. I think he's done an extraordinarily interesting and powerful job of it. But I think the constraints are not his, but imposed on him from the outside.
George Will clearly had enough of this nonsense and offered some much-needed sanity:
GEORGE WILL: But regardless of his skin pigmentation, what he said was factually, demonstrably false. He said something would be unprecedented that has many precedents, probably thousands since 1803.
DYSON: That I don't have a problem with. I'm talking about the overall response to him and the picking apart and the refusal to concede legitimacy of difference. Not to point out where you would disagree with him. I think that's powerful.
PEGGY NOONAN, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Can I say this -- the president is known as an extremely bright man. He was an instructor of constitutional law. For him to say something so deeply incorrect and almost unknowing about the -- the purpose of the Supreme Court seemed provocative. At the very least sloppy and what the heck is he doing? But at the most, provocative. A real brush back. A real, I'm going to go to war with the court.
Indeed. In fact, this was so obvious to everyone on the panel except Dyson that Yahoo! News's Washington bureau chief thirded the proposition:
DAVID CHALIAN, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF FOR YAHOO! NEWS: He was definitely laying a predicate. I mean the aids will say, no, no, no he wasn't thinking that far in advance. But he clearly was laying the predicate that in case the -- the law is overturned, he's going to set up sort of that politicization of the court and another 5:4 decision. And -- and these comments will be looked back at. But let's be clear, he -- he gave his critics an opening here and the White House knew it. He cleaned it up the next day because of the -- the inaccuracy. They did not want to spend this whole week talking about Marbury V. Madison. And -- and Jay Carney had to walk back these comments all week. He -- he definitely slipped here and I think they tried to make a course for it.
But imagine this same conversation happening on MSNBC where Dyson frequents and even guest-hosts.
With nary a conservative involved in the discussion, all heads would have been nodding over the racially-divisive nonsense coming out of his mouth.
And that is why there really ought to be a disclaimer running at the bottom of all MSNBC programs warning viewers that the opinions being expressed are completely divorced from reality and any factual basis.
Nice job David, George and Peggy. Bravo - or should I say Yahoo!?!