"[P]ro-White" radio host Edwards asks of Media Matters' funders: "[W]hat do you want to bet that a lot of those 'wealthy liberals' have funny last names?"
SUMMARY: Responding to a Media Matters item, James Edwards, co-host of the "pro-White" Political Cesspool Radio Show, asserted that Media Matters is funded by "a bunch of 'wealthy liberals,' " and said: "And what do you want to bet that a lot of those 'wealthy liberals' have funny last names?" Edwards also said of himself and his Political Cesspool co-hosts, "We are not rooting for either candidate. We're rooting for white people."
In an August 15 blog post, James Edwards, co-host of the "pro-White" Political Cesspool Radio Show, responded to a Media Matters for America item noting that Jerome Corsi, author of The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality, appeared on the July 20 edition of the show and is reportedly scheduled to appear in its August 17 broadcast. In his post, headlined "Gays, liberals attack Jerome Corsi," Edwards wrote that Media Matters was "founded and is run by homosexual David Brock." After asserting that Media Matters is funded by "a bunch of 'wealthy liberals,' " Edwards said: "And what do you want to bet that a lot of those 'wealthy liberals' have funny last names?"
Edwards also wrote: "And notice that no one ever refutes anything I've written. They can't. But they hate the fact that I'm telling the truth on my blog and on the radio show, so, because they can't refute me, they simply resort to name calling." In fact, Media Matters highlighted some of Edwards' comments. Edwards has asserted on his blog that "[i]nterracial sex is white genocide" and called British historian David Irving -- who was, according to BBC News, "jailed by an Austrian court after pleading guilty to denying that the Holocaust took place" -- a "real hero" and "a survivor of the Jewish Holocaust against free speech." As Media Matters noted, his radio show has on its website a "Statement of Principles" saying that the show "represent[s] a philosophy that is pro-White" and which "heartily endorse[s] and accept[s] as our own, the founding tenets of the Council of Conservative Citizens [CCC]."
In a second August 15 post responding to how his "blog has been getting a ton of traffic over the past two days thanks to the liberal/homosexual assault being waged against Jerome Corsi on behalf of the Barack Obama campaign," Edwards said of himself and his Political Cesspool co-hosts, "We are not rooting for either candidate. We're rooting for white people." Edwards further asserted: "Between McCain and Obama, we couldn't care less who wins. In fact, we think an Obama victory would be fitting. The only countries in the world that have black heads of state are third world countries, and as massive demographic changes in this country will soon make much of America a third world country, a black president would be entirely appropriate." Edwards' post also referred to "the left wing homosexuals over at Media Matters."
From Edwards' first August 15 post, headlined "Gays, liberals attack Jerome Corsi":
Jerome Corsi, author of the #1 bestseller The Obama Nation, is scheduled to appear on The Political Cesspool this Sunday. Yesterday the liberal hate machine went into high gear in a massive, coordinated attack campaign against Mr. Corsi, which is no doubt being managed and directed by the Obama campaign. They remember how devastatingly effective his book Unfit For Command was in keeping John Kerry out of the White House, and they're going to do their darndest to try to keep him from repeating his success with Obama.
And what's their latest angle of attack? They're trumpeting the fact that he's going to talk about his book on The Cesspool. The first big story came yesterday from the far left wing Media Matters, which was founded and is run by homosexual David Brock. You can read it here.
Summary: Despite stating that he had apologized for what was described as a "series of bigoted and hateful posts," Jerome Corsi, author of The Obama Nation, is scheduled to appear with host James Edwards on the August 17 edition of The Political Cesspool Radio Show, which, according to its "Statement of Principles," "represent[s] a philosophy that is pro-White." In a blog post, Edwards has stated that "[i]nterracial sex is white genocide."
Then the equally far left wing Huffington Post came after Corsi and The Cesspool. You can read their diatribe here.
[...]
And notice that no one ever refutes anything I've written. They can't. But they hate the fact that I'm telling the truth on my blog and on the radio show, so, because they can't refute me, they simply resort to name calling. And then they attack Dr. Corsi for appearing on my show, as if every guest on every radio show endorses every opinion and action of the host of that show. Which is insane. There are lots of things I've written that Dr. Corsi doesn't agree with, and there are lots of things he's written that I don't agree with. Appearing on a show to promote your book in no way implies anything, let alone that you agree with the radio host 100%. Corsi appeared on Larry King Live the other night, but no one ever accuses guests of Larry King of endorsing being married 7 times, not to mention King's criminal background, which includes charges of bribery, corruption, grand larceny, and passing 14 bad checks.
Besides, what conservative wouldn't be proud to be attacked by these freaks? Like David Brock, the former "conservative" writer for The American Spectator, who's now openly homosexual and a flaming liberal, who wrote in one of his books about arranging a dinner/interview with Matt Drudge. But Drudge misunderstood -- he thought it was a date, and brought a dozen roses for Brock, and took him gay bar hopping. Drudge later wrote to Brock that some were saying that Drudge and Brock were gay lovers and "I should only be so lucky." Brock, the former "conservative", then went on to found Media Matters which exists to expose "the lies of the right wing media." And guess who's funding this little venture? The notorious Moveon.org, for one, and a bunch of "wealthy liberals." And what do you want to bet that a lot of those "wealthy liberals" have funny last names?
From Edwards' second post, headlined "Note for our newer readers":
My blog has been getting a ton of traffic over the past two days thanks to the liberal/homosexual assault being waged against Jerome Corsi on behalf of the Barack Obama campaign. Most of the liberal bloggers/websites that have mentioned us do nothing but call us names, lifting passages directly from a hate piece by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Many of them give the impression that we're McCain supporters. Some make outrageously false accusations that we "malign" Jews and non-whites. These are both lies.
I am the furthest thing possible from a McCain supporter. The same is true of all my co-hosts on The Political Cesspool radio program. We've never been McCain supporters, nor Bush supporters. We are NOT Republicans. We are pro-white, and seek what's best for white people. (We are not "white supremacists" as all these gay/liberal liars are saying.) We believe the interests of white people come first, and we want what's best for our people. A McCain victory would not be in the interests of white people by any stretch of the imagination. Between McCain and Obama, we couldn't care less who wins. In fact, we think an Obama victory would be fitting. The only countries in the world that have black heads of state are third world countries, and as massive demographic changes in this country will soon make much of America a third world country, a black president would be entirely appropriate.
We are not rooting for either candidate. We're rooting for white people.
Nor do we malign any racial group. We tell the truth about racial differences, and unlike the mainstream media, we don't cover up the racial angles of important news stories. Unlike some people, we don't consider pointing out that a Jew is a Jew to be "anti-semitic", any more than pointing out that Obama is black is "anti-black." And the very people attacking us as racists, the left wing homosexuals over at Media Matters, have no compunctions at all about highlighting people's race when it suits their purposes. Of course, when they do it, it's not "racism", it's just "honest reporting", etc.
















Hey, James Edwards...White Power! You give it those homosexual liberals...with funny last names. like, uhh...Brock! ;>)
Who wants to bet that 85% of James Edwards' audience wear their hair in a mullet?
Talk about a sweeping statement. Did you just assume that everyone in the South has mullets? Or that anyone that has a mullet is from the south?
Onionhead, I think you missed something. Irony merely suggested that 85% of Edwards' audience wear mullets. Science seemed to equate "all southerners" with Edwards' audience and mullets with racism. It was a more bizarre jump than you gave Science credit for.
Who wants to bet that 85% of James Edwards' audience wear their hair in a mullet? --- IRONY 101
Are you honestly trying to assert that 85% of southerners &/or country folk are racist against blacks? Talk about a sweeping hate statement. --- Science101
Please explain how you derived this information based on the statement that Irony made. And please let us know, for the record, do you still beat your wife?
No, Science, a sweeping hate statement would be something like this:
100% of Nazi skinheads are A holes...
I live in the south. And I take offense at the assertion that 85% of southerners are racist. That's clearly not the case.
I'd say it's closer to 83%.
Check one
--- white
--- pro white
--- snow white
Do you own a sheet?
Burning cross pin $4.00 (includes gas)
We are not rooting for either candidate. We're rooting for white people.
And I'm rooting for James Edwards to be run over by a bus--preferably about seven times--when he walks out of his studio. The world would instantly be a better place...
Ahh, great way to show ignorance.
Twice.
We are not rooting for either candidate. We're rooting for white people.
And because one happens to be black, the only vote he gets is on whether we use a nine millimeter or a zero-ought-six to take him out.
While I may not agree with the extreme nature of his comments how does it justify your hate speech?
His comments are not anymore extreme than I have heard from Black, Latino, Asian, and Indian (and "Indian" I mean the people who are mistakenly called "Native Americans") pride groups. What is wrong with having pride in one's race and being a little zealous about it. In fact it is only when someone aspouses pride in the "white race" is when this kind of speech is labeled as racist.
Find me a "white pride" group that asserts its pride within a larger culture, as part of an inclusive whole, as the groups you mentioned do.
And, for the record, "native Americans" is far more accurate than "Indians."
Where I live...CSA flags and #3/NASCAR flags fly freely. They have yet to learn that
1. The South lost
2. Earnhardt is dead..and he's not coming back.
They look/act like Edwards's target demo...
But I do commend those people for sticking with their roots and voicing what they believe in.
If you are speaking of Southerners who still long for the Confederacy, then roots equal slavery, and what they believe in is that Blacks are inferior to whites as a race and should act that way.
Now you're gonna claim "live and let live"?
Too late for that. Your posting record speaks elsewise.
But I do commend those people for sticking with their roots and voicing what they believe in.
If you are speaking of Southerners who still long for the Confederacy, then roots equal slavery, and what they believe in is that Blacks are inferior to whites as a race and should act that way.
Would it be possible to have some information on what names Mr. Edwards finds funny? I fear he may be guilty of heterodoxy.
We can't have that!
Signed, Bernard Flappdoddle
President and flounder of The National Associoation of Funny Names Club, of America.
Bernard Flappdoddle lives across the street from me, and right next door to Harvey Dungflinger. Harvey's a republican.
Ah the Dungflingers, a name to conjur with in failed sanitation services everywhere.
Still, you have deflected my question. Fess up or I'll ask Bernard to serve you one of his "Special Ice Blue Mosses." Just one sip to new horizons in alienation!
Why doesn't he just come out and say it as he claims to be an unrepentant racist:
THIS HERE IS A SCARY BLACK FELLA WITH A FUNNY NAME WHO THE OLD WHITE GUY SAYS IS TRYING TO TAKE OUR WIMMIN' AND HE IS BEING PROTECTED BY THE JEWS IN THE MEDIA!!!
I guess I'm one of the few posters honest enough to use my last name.I'll even throw in my family crest.
I love how this Science fellow is trying to give off the impression that he's indignant about what Edwards wrote, but is practically commending the guy for being so overtly racist.
You shouldn't be ashamed to say that you agree with him.
Tommy strikes again. They believe you should be free to say any rotten thing you want on the airwaves... just not about Tommy or Science. If you call something reprehensible, you're somehow against free speech...unless they do it.
It's a clueless revolving door that those two go through.
Has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing. I dont know him, nor do I care what he says or what his views are. I don't believe the same things he does, but I dont go out and try to change laws to ban him from doing it.
You're missing the bigger point here. We are discussing how insane this guy is and the thing you are focusing on is how great it is that this guy has the stones to be pro-white.
I don't believe the same things he does, but I dont go out and try to change laws to ban him from doing it. - Science101
One does not have a constitutional right to a talk show. Got that? There is no law stating we, as a nation, must provide air time for crazy racists. Remember, the Fairness Doctrine is gone, and in all fairness, so should bigots like Edwards.
It's not a matter of censorship. It's a matter of quality control.
The more a society bends over to accommodate the needs of the criminally inclined, the less civilized it is. Racism is not a victimless crime. It starts with demeaning one or many among us and ends with America, all of us, left ablated, lessened and shamed by the backward traditions of racial purists.
Progress cannot progress if it must oblige the wants of petty minds petitioning for stagnation.
Randy
It's not a matter of censorship. It's a matter of quality control.
Err, yes it is. What you are proposing is censorship. If you dont agree with his views, even if 99.9% of the country doesn't either, he should be banned from voicing his free speech on the air waves? Thats straight up commie and you know it. You want censorship for only what you believe in? Then move to China and let me know how that works out for you.
What you are proposing is censorship.
Not in the slightest. This isn't the first time you've been called on your ignorance of what censorship is, and, given your track record of abject inability to learn, it won't be the last.
You have been wrong every time you have tried to make this pea-brained point, you are wrong to try to make this pea-brained point now, and you will be wrong every time you try to make this pea-brained point in the future.
So you think Edwards has a constitutional right to a radio show? TV program? What about a book deal? Mass media outlets must distribute his material, they have no choice in the matter because they are all government run?
Willfully ignoring this point doesn't overturn reality. Nobody has a RIGHT to any of the things I mentioned. The government shall not abridge free speech. The 1st Amendment doesn't include private organizations of any stripe. Period. End O story.
Randy
"And what do you want to bet that a lot of those 'wealthy liberals' have funny last names?"
Cater to your audience much?