MRC's Graham: It's 'Liberal Junk' To Say Tsarnaev Was 'Promising' Topic: NewsBusters
Tim Graham uses a July 18 NewsBusters post to rail against the Rolling Stone cover featuring Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev:
Rolling Stone tried to manage the controversy label with the words over the picture: “THE BOMBER: How a Popular, Promising Student Was Failed by His Family, Fell Into Radical Islam, and Became a Monster.”
So there are the words “bomber,” “monster,” and “radical Islam.” But there’s also that usual liberal junk about being “popular” and “promising,” as if anyone in high school is voted “Most Likely To Kill and Maim In a Terrorist Attack.”
So only "liberals" would have described Tsarnaev as "popular" and "promising"? Really, Tim?
Devvy Kidd is a former regular WorldNetDaily columnist prone to far-right rants like calling for the repeal of the 17th Amendment. Her July 17 WND column is a veritable potpourri of old-school conspiracy theories about "secret socieities":
Nothing in politics happens by accident, so the saying goes and is absolutely true. Our constitutional republic has been under attack for more than a century by individuals who desire to rule the world. You and I are merely underlings who provide massive power and riches to them through the ballot box and our consumer dollars.
Unraveling all the organizations that yank the strings of American politics can be daunting. In 2005, I penned two important pieces for WND: “The treasonous Council on Foreign Relations” and “The treasonous Trilateral Commission.” Nothing has changed. Those two organizations are not some harmless think tanks. If you go to the CFR’s history page, nuggets of the truth are right there for everyone to see. Elihu Root headed the original CFR. The Rothschilds and Wall Street were instrumental in financing the Bolshevik Revolution. Root was the bag man to deliver $20 million to the Bolsheviks who were founded by mass murderer Vladimir Lenin and Alexander Bogdanov.
Seemingly harmless groups like the Alfalfa Club draw little if any attention, even from the compromised “mainstream” media. The Alfalfa Club meets once a year for a big dinner – 200 attendees who pay $200 per plate and no media. The official list of inductees (not invited dinner guests) is an eye opener.
Past presidents, both Bushes and the current impostor president, Barry Soetoro, aka Obama, have attended Alfalfa dinners. If you haven’t made the inner circle of elites, don’t expect an invitation. In 2012, attendees included John Boehner, John Kerry and out-going club president, former associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court Sandra Day O’Connor, who, in the infamous Lawrence v Texas sodomy set-up case didn’t deny homosexuality is a voluntarily chosen lifestyle.
One the more important things I’ve written is an in-depth research piece regarding who is behind the curtain and the evil agenda choking our beloved republic to death. “The House That Evil Built” will connect the dots and give you the truth – especially about secret organizations like the Skull and Bones. It’s real, and we ignore the bigger picture at our own peril. When one starts peeling back the layers, the number of secretive groups boggles the mind, but if we the people are ever going to take back our country to self-governance instead of totalitarian domination, we must identify those destroying it and stop supporting them.
Most people I know just roll their eyes when Michelle Obama comes out with a new part of her anti-obesity program, mainly because we are Americans and we don't need someone telling us what to do. But then, most people I know understand right from wrong and will pay our own way, thank you very much, and don't look to government to solve our problems.
But another headline touting another grand plan to get kids moving and eating healthy caught my eye and I thought, with all the hate-mongering and victimization happening in her Sweet Home Chicago and cities nationwide, she could lead as a First Lady ought to, and start healing the nation by teaching the female youth in this country how to behave as ladies.
Women can and should lead the way on improving the treatment of women and in turn, the treatment of everyone.
She has mentioned that being in the White House is kind of like being in prison. So, I ask, what better use of time could there be for a First Lady, who happens to be in the sphere of influence of every young female, regardless of color, than to teach them how to refuse to be labeled a "bitch" or a "ho" and how twerking is unacceptable?
Just once, I'd like to see Michelle Obama sit next to someone like Snooki on the couch at The View and have her say, "Sweetie, you don't need to degrade yourself like that. Twerking is not sexy, dear, it's porn."
So, perhaps I have found the reason why Mrs. Obama doesn't teach the youth of today to respect themselves. Perhaps, it is because keeping them degraded and sexually promiscuous and ruled by emotion keeps them dependent on government.
NEW ARTICLE -- NewsBusted: The Coleman File Topic: NewsBusters
NewsBusters blogger Jack Coleman is such a "recovering former liberal journalist" that he's a right-wing demagogue who cares nothing about facts as he bashes Rachel Maddow and defends right-wing crazies. Read more >>
WND's Molotov Mitchell Is Just As Thin-Skinned As Joseph Farah Topic: WorldNetDaily
It appears that Molotov Mitchell is as thin-skinned as has WorldNetDaily boss, Joseph Farah.
The overall theme of Mitchell's July 16 WND video is getting revenge on Glenn Beck for having "stole our show title" by naming one of the shows on his Blaze TV "For The Record" by pretending his hateful little video is now "The Blaze, Created by Molotov Mitchell." Here's a screenshot:
Perhaps if Mr. Mitchell had shown a little foresight and trademarked the name of his show for webcasting purposes, he wouldn't have this problem. Or perhaps he did try but was rejected because it was too common of a title to trademark.
For instance, a 2008 documentary on Britney Spears is titled "Britney: For the Record." Did Mitchell ask permission from Spears before cribbing her title? We suspect not.
By the way, this is at least Mitchell's second video on the subject. Back in January, he dedicated an entire video to an "open letter" to Beck begging him to change the show's name.
Uh, yeah. Farah and ol' Molotov deserve each other, don't they?
A July 15 CNSNews.com article by Michael W. Chapman promotes an apparent threat made by a Catholic bishop in the Dominican Republic against an "openly gay" Obama administration nominee as ambassador to the country:
President Barack Obama’s openly gay ambassadorial nominee to the Dominican Republic, James “Wally” Brewster,” faces strong opposition from the conservative and largely Catholic island nation, where Bishop Pablo Cedano says if Brewster becomes the U.S. ambassador, “he is going to suffer and will have to leave.”
On Monday, Catholic, evangelical, and other opponents in the Dominican Republic organized and took part in what were billed as “Black Monday” protests, whereby participants donned black clothing and set black decorations on cars and buildings to protest the nomination of Brewster, who is a long-time homosexual activist and fundraiser for the Democratic Party and President Obama.
Monsignor Cedano, who is the auxiliary Catholic bishop of Santo Domingo, said in early July that the selection of Brewster showed “a lack of sensitivity, of respect by the United States.” Cedano also, in reference to opposition against Brewster, according to the Associated Press, said, “I hope he does not arrive in the country because I know, if he comes, he is going to suffer and will have to leave.”
Chapman did not make any attempt to explain what Cedano meant by claiming that Brewster "is going to suffer and will have to leave," but it sure sounds like a threat, doesn't it? One gets the feeling that Chapman seems quite OK with that.
Chapman also hid an anti-gay slur voiced by the Dominican Republic's Catholic cardinal. He writes:
Cardinal Nicolas de Jesus Lopez Rodriguez, the archbishop of Santo Domingo, also expressed disappointment with the nomination of Brewster. As reported first in the Dominican newspaper La Opinion and then the Associated Press, Cardinal Nicolas said, “We don’t have to do anything. It’s the government’s job to accept them [homosexuals]. They’re interested in advancing their agenda, but they have to know there are many people in the world who are against that, both in Christian and non-Christian governments.”
“Ask the Muslim world what they think about that, in addition to Christians and Evangelicals,” said the cardinal.
But the Daily Mail reports that the cardinal has expressed much more than "disappointment": He also referred to Brewster as a "maricón" -- slang for "faggot" or "sissy" -- during a press conference. Chapman made no mention of this in his article.
If Chapman has no problem with a bishop threatening a gay man, why would he get all squemish about an anti-gay slur? Perhaps he's trying to protect the Catholic Church from folks who might look askance at a man of God using such vile language.
Newsmax Touts Anti-Obamacare Lawsuit Backed By Fringe Medical Group Topic: Newsmax
A July 11 Newsmax article by Todd Beamon promotes a lawsuit by a Texas doctor seeking to stop the individual mandate in health care reform. But Beamon buries the doctor's ties to a fringe medical organization that's backing the lawsuit.
Beamon waits until the 18th paragraph to reveal that Steven Hotze's lawsuit is being represented by Andrew Schlafly, counsel for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, which Beamon describes only as "a conservative nonprofit association founded in 1943 that seeks to 'fight socialized medicine and to fight the government takeover of medicine,' according to its website."
In fact, the AAPS is a right-wing group that peddles fringe medical theories and political conspiracies. AAPS has defended corrupt doctors that prescribed thousands of pain pills per day to patients, some of whom died of overdoses or resold the pills. Not only did AAPS fight health care reform under the Clinton administration, it peddled Vince Foster conspiracy theories.
Perhaps most notoriously, in 2005 the AAPS' Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons published an attack on illegal immigrants, claiming that leprosy "was so rare in America that in 40 years only 900 people were afflicted. Suddenly, in the past three years America has more than 7,000 cases of leprosy." In fact, there had been just 431 reported cases of Hansen's disease, or leprosy, over the "past three years" in question.
Additionally, Hotze himself holds some fringe views. He's a proponent of "bioidentical" hormone replacement that are not supported by science and are potentially harmful. He also once signed onto a "Manifesto for the Christian Church" that proclaimed, among other things, that "Biblical spanking" that results in "temporary or superficial bruises or welts" should not be considered a crime" and "Medical problems are frequently caused by personal sin." He's also anti anti-gay activist who has funded anti-gay candidates and campaigns in his native Houston.
This is who Newsmax thinks is a credible opponent of Obamacare.
Sure, all thinking people are very relieved that George Zimmerman was found not guilty by the intelligent, justice-driven women of the jury, in spite of the façade presented by the prosecution and forced by the threat of racism by everyone from President Obama, to Eric Holder, the New Black Panther gangstas, NAACP, excuse makers of every stripe and even the governor of Florida, but still this innocent man who simply defended his life from a violent, life-threatening, bloodying, head-and-face slamming attack by an enraged black man-child has so wrongly paid an inexplicable price financially and emotionally.
The parents of Trayvon Martin get a huge million-dollar-plus payoff from the gated community just to shut them up, and so obviously to fend off the ambulance chaser racist lawyers for the simple fact that their son was guilty of a vicious, violent attack on a man for no good reason whatsoever.
What did the gated community have to do with any of it? Where is a judge capable of making a justice call in this travesty? Does anyone care at all anymore?
The entire system is screwed up.
But George Zimmerman and his entire family, innocent of any wrongdoing, have lost everything and will be in debt for a long, long time for having to fight the trumped-up charges that he “profiled” and/or set out to murder the poor, helpless, dope-smoking, dope-peddling, gangsta wannabe, Skittles hoodie boy.
Like it or not, agree or not, Martin made a decision to behave like a common street thug and gangsta when he attacked George Zimmerman. That decision speaks volumes about his character (or lack thereof). There is an attempt to portray Martin as worthy of deification, but I submit that he chose to attack another person for what amounts to no reason at all, and that speaks volumes pursuant to his real character.
How many reading this have children who would physically attack someone for the reasons Martin did? I know, without hesitation, that my son wouldn’t. The ugly truth is that Martin was given to the violent mentality of thinking he could bully a white person, and it cost him his life.
Let’s put this in perspective. Ben Jealous of the NAACP, Al Sharpton of MSNBC, Jesse Jackson, and the left-wing media compete to incite hatred of America generally and white America specifically. Over what? A tragic incident in which a Hispanic man (regularly labeled “white”) said, with all physical evidence to support him, that fearing for his life, he killed a black 17-year-old (regularly labeled “a child”).
The very fact that George Zimmerman – who is as white as Barack Obama – is labeled “white” bears testimony to the left-wing agenda of blaming white America and to the desire of many blacks to vent anger at whites.
And that is why the election of a black president has meant nothing. Indeed, to those whose lives and/or ideologies are predicated on labeling America and its white population as racist, it wouldn’t matter if half the Senate, half the House and half the governors were black.
What happened on the night of Feb. 26, 2012 in Sanford, Fla., between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was a tragedy. What has happened since that fateful night is nothing short of an American farce, exacerbated by racial demagogues, the Obama administration and a media that poured 10-gallons of anti-white gasoline onto a small fire that really had nothing to do with white people at all.
“That child had every right to do what he was doing, walking home,” said John Guy, one of the prosecuting attorneys in the case in which George Zimmerman has been acquitted of charges of second degree murder and manslaughter of Trayvon Martin.
“That child,” prosecutor Guy said – three times – in referring to 17-year-old Trayvon, a high-school football player.
Think about that.
How many high-school teams, or high-school players, in this nation have ever been identified as “those children” or “that child”?
And if that has ever been done – perhaps by bitter athletic rivals – how in the name of common sense and any kind of respect for jurisprudence could such insufferable verbal subterfuge have been injected into the court record of a trial being watched by so many millions of people worldwide?
The demonstrations and unrest following the just acquittal of George Zimmerman are more of the poison fruit from Obama’s war on America. Now Trayvon protesters have burned flags and smashed a cop car after the verdict, and news photographers were roughed up during a protest against the acquittal of Zimmerman. Oh yes, this is Obama’s doing.
And the Baltimore Sun reported this on Monday: “Baltimore police say they are investigating a witness account that a group of black youths beat a Hispanic man near Patterson Park Sunday while saying, ‘This is for Trayvon.’”
Is Attorney General Eric Holder investigating if this man’s civil rights were violated? Is anyone even looking for these racist thugs?
This is outrageous. A lynch mob sanctioned by the president of the United States. A lynch mob stoked by the Department of Justice. Remember, Obama said if he had a son, he would have looked like Trayvon. Indeed.
Now that we know Barack Obama’s Justice Department, under the direction of Eric Holder, paid for trips to Florida by race-baiting hater Al Sharpton, with the express purpose of influencing the trial of George Zimmerman by striking fear into the jury pool about race riots in the event of his acquittal in the death of Trayvon Martin, there’s simply no other way to put it.
Holder and Obama are Sharpton-style race-baiting criminals.
Blowback from the recent verdict acquitting George Zimmerman of second-degree murder in the Feb. 26, 2012, death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin defies all logic and common sense but is an object lesson in the duplicity and opportunism of the radical left. This would include the Obama administration, which is attempting to use contrived activism to attenuate the scrutiny under which it finds itself, as well as advancing its gun control agenda and dividing Americans.
NewsBusters Pretends 'Stand Your Ground' Had Nothing To Do With Zimmerman Trial Topic: NewsBusters
NewsBusters appears to want to squelch discussion of "stand your ground" laws in numerous states by insisting that such laws had nothing to do with the trial of George Zimmerman in the death of Trayvon Martin:
Tom Blumer complained that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg suggested that "'stand your ground' was at issue in the Zimmerman trial. It wasn't." Blumer added, "Bloomberg appears to be saying that the mere existence of 'stand your ground' laws encourages people who are armed to defend themselves if they are attacked and fear serious bodily harm. Even in the unlikely case that it's true, why are we supposed to have a problem with that?"
Scott Whitlock asserted that "the Florida case had nothing to do with stand-your-ground. Zimmer[m]an's case was based on self defense." Whiltock then likened those making such a claim to "9/11 truthers and conspiracy theorists."
Noel Sheppard responded to Stevie Wonder's announced boycott of states with stand-your-ground laws by saying, "Maybe someone should inform Wonder and all the other ignorant reactionaries on the left that "Stand Your Ground" had nothing to do with this case."
In fact, while "stand your ground" was not specifically invoked by Zimmerman's defense lawyers, it's the centerpiece of Florida self-defense laws, and jury instructions in self-defense cases in Florida have changed because of "stand your ground." Further, one of the Zimmerman jurors has stated that the stand-your-ground law was discussed during jury deliberations.
In other words, it was a factor. NewsBusters simply wants to pretend it wasn't.
Is WND Mocking Rachel Jeantel's Weight? Topic: WorldNetDaily
In linking to a WorldNetDaily article recounting Rachel Jeantel's statement that Trayvon Martin had subjected George Zimmerman to "whoop-ass" prior to Zimmerman shooting Martin to death, a WND email teaser promotes the story with the headline: "A big can of whoop-a--: U.S. mesmerized by Jeantel":
The tone of the email suggests that WND is working in some mocking of Jeantel's plus-size figure along with its story tease. That's pretty low, even for WND.
(That ad about FEMA camps embedded in the email, on the other hand, is totally up WND's alley.)
Black Conservative At CNS Defends Racial Profiling Topic: CNSNews.com
Bob Parks announces what we're in for in the headline of his July 14 CNSNews.com blog post: "Pundits Lament 'Profiling of Blacks,' But Don't Some of Us Kinda Invite It?"
Parks starts by complaining that "MSNBC and CNN are both vying for the position of being the new 'Black Entertainment Television,' giving air time to every black face they can find to give an opinion of the 'not guilty' verdict in the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin murder trial." Somehow Fox News gets a pass on this, even though it gave air time to extremists like Erik Rush, who has called for the death of all Muslims in the aftermath of the Boston bombings and has called for armed revolution against President Obama.
Parks goes on to describe how he's a victim of racial profiling, but he's mostly OK with it because it's only young blacks who pose any actual threat, and besides, it can all be blamed on liberals somehow:
For example, I am a black conservative. However, I would be willing to bet that when I'm seen walking down the street, the average person assumes I'm a liberal who votes accordingly. An initial conversation would be started on that basis and the response would vary depending upon the philosophies held by the person starting such conversation.
Young people, especially young black people, do things seen everyday that make many of us cringe. We see young black females initiating violent acts at McDonald's restaurants, young black males playing the "knock out game" on innocent people just walking down the street, and of course, we see the daily tally of deadly shootings within black communities nationally that all these media pundits on the left seldom seem to find time to talk about.
I said condescension.
Many of the liberals look at blacks (not their "black friends") as the downtrodden. I contend they look at blacks as one would look at their pet. We don't get terribly angry when a cat or dog pees in the corner because we assume it doesn't know any better. So, when blacks kill each other indiscriminately, liberals don't consider them as potentially intelligent human beings who knew right from wrong, but blame their "socioeconomic conditions" as an excuse for conduct that would be intolerable in any other community.
Despite the holier-than-thou personae now being displayed by the visually-concerned air talent on MSNBC and CNN, I'm quite certain that, if some young black males walked in their direction on the sidewalk, they would be concerned. Not that a created-out-of-convenience "white Hispanic" would take those kids out, but that those kids might do... something.
We don't profile little old white ladies for suspicion of crimes because they don't commit crimes that often. I don't have baggy jeans, don't wear a do-rag and slippers, but do have some grey hair that comes and goes (if you know what I mean), so I don't generate the kind of scrutiny the activists lament. But, until we get a handle on the self-inflicted image wounds, we will continue to be profiled and people will expect the worst from us.
I would hope that, one day, white liberals would have the same expectations of blacks that they have for themselves. I would hope that, one day, all blacks would behave in a civilized manner and that our communities would not be killing fields no MSNBC or CNN pundit would enter without armed security.
Parks somehow leaps from this to spouting conspiracy theories about the George Zimmerman trial:
Until then, we'll continue to see black activists and white-guilt liberals lamenting the continuation of racial profiling in America, with no mention of the conduct of some blacks that may justify it. The Zimmerman-Martin trial was a media concoction that was done for ratings. Any damage done to race relations in this country makes for potentially profitable sequels. How it affects us on the street means little to them. And, until the climate that liberals created, perpetuate, and excuse in the black community is addressed, there will be another Zimmerman-Martin trial coming very soon.
WND's Farah: I Make Maddow 'Blush Like A Heterosexual Schoolgirl' Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've previously documented Joseph Farah's latest thin-skinned response to criticism, this time from MSNBC's Rachel Maddow. Farah has now followed up in his usual thin-skinned way by devoting a column to it.
Farah predicably rants that Maddow is engaging in "modern-day blacklisting" of him "because I published a book about Obama’s provably illegitimate and fraudulent birth certificate." Farah then goes to a really weird place:
She calls me “the guy who’s so handsome he makes you remember there is an O in mustachioed.” I don’t get that. But maybe this explains Maddow’s abject fear of actual debate with me, a subject of so many of her televised tirades, even if MSNBC ratings make it more like closed-circuit TV. She might just blush like a heterosexual schoolgirl.
Yeah, he really said that.
And Farah complaining about "Maddow’s abject fear of actual debate with me" is really rich, given that Farah and WND have systematically hidden from their readers any and all evidence that disproves his claim that Obama's birth certificate is "provably illegitimate and fraudulent."
But that's the birther way. Dr. Conspiracy notes that Carl Gallups -- the WND-published birther preacher who peddles his Obama-hate under the pseudonym PP Simmons -- challenged any “Obot” to call into his Internet radio show and prove that Obama is even a citizen. One did (around 65:00), and Gallups shouted him down and cut him off after a few seconds.
If Farah can't do something so simple and journalistically ethical as report on, say, John Woodman's birther-debunking book, why should Maddow treat Farah with respect he hasn't earned?
MSNBC Host's Descriptions Not As Imaginary As MRC Thinks Topic: Media Research Center
Kyle Drennen writes in a July 15 Media Research Center item:
On his 11 a.m. ET hour MSNBC show on Monday, host Thomas Roberts condemned America's current social contract as being "so wrong," launching into an angry rant about the supposed persecution of certain groups in the country and making demands of his liberal network to move even farther left: "I want to challenge this network. We had to have an 'I am other' agenda..."
Roberts recited imagined lines of attack against such groups: "Being an other, whether it's LGBT, because you're then suspected of being a pedophile and a rabid disease carrier. And if you are a woman, well, you certainly don't have a right to your own body and your own reproductive health because if you do, then you're just a slut who wants to sleep around and use abortion as birth control. And then if you're Hispanic, well you're just a taker, you're not a maker, and you want to come here and have anchor babies and you just want to lay off the land."
But Roberts didn't imagine those lines of attack -- they come straight from real life.
Denigrating gays as disease-ridden pedophiles is the stock in trade of homophobes like WorldNetDaily's Les Kinsolving and other anti-gay activists. The idea that woman talking about birth control makes her a slut is what Rush Limbaugh said about Sandra Fluke last year -- an attack the MRC condoned and even encouraged. And immigrant- and Hispanic-bashing is what the typical Fox News viewer believes in.
If Drennen think Roberts merely "imagined" those lines of attack, he's not a very good media monitor.
WND's Simpson: Soccer Fights Demonstrate Latinos Shouldn't Be U.S. Citizens Topic: WorldNetDaily
Barbara Simpson writes in her July 14 WorldNetDaily column:
Do cultural differences matter?
Consider: The exhibition soccer match two weeks ago in Las Vegas between Mexican rivals Chivas and Club America hadn’t even begun when fans swarmed the parking lot and the crowd erupted into massive brawl of rock and can throwing and bloody fighting.
Despite police presence, fighting continued through halftime and after the game, involving players and fans.
One was quoted in the Las Vegas Sun as saying the rivalry is “deadly,” and “We don’t like each other.”
Could’ve fooled me.
The first week of July saw some of the same and more in Brazil. Another soccer game, this time a player disagreed with the referee and was expelled from the game but not before the ref stabbed him.
The player died. That’s when the fans took over, swarmed the ref, stoned him, cut his head off, put it on a stake and cut his body apart.
At that point, nobody much cared who won the game.
Not to say that such violence is typical, but in a sense it is. Soccer games are notoriously violent, and it’s an example of what we face as we enable foreigners to become legal before they’ve become American.
So, Simpson is basically suggesting that Latinos be barred from entering the U.S. because of soccer brawls.
It's not like America doesn't have a traditionofviolenceatsportsevents (though, to be fair, without the beheading and quartering). One could actually say that fighting Latino soccer fans are well with the American tradition.
So let's not pretend that Simpson is all that worried about "cultural diffrences" -- she just wants to fearmonger about illegal immigrants, and immigrants in general. She goes on to declare that immigration reform means "the end of the USA as we’ve known it."
PolitiFact Busts CNS on Food Stamp Claim Topic: CNSNews.com
In a July 8 CNSNews.com article, Elizabeth Harrington reported that "The number of Americans receiving subsidized food assistance from the federal government has risen to 101 million, representing roughly a third of the U.S. population," adding, "That means the number of Americans receiving food assistance has surpassed the number of full-time private sector workers in the U.S."
It turns out that isn't quite true.
Examining Allen West's repeating a version of Harrington's claim, PolitiFact rated the claim "false," pointing out that there is likely overlap in participation in the food aid programs Harrington counted to achieve her total, meaning that the number of people in the programs is probably less than Harrington claimed.
Harrington also very narrowly defined her number of working Americans to "full-time private sector workers," which is misleading at best and dishonest at worst. PolitiFact states:
The universe of people who could potentially receive food aid is the entire U.S. population. But the universe of people who could potentially hold a private-sector job consists only of those 16 years old and over. And one could easily make that universe smaller by excluding those who are 16 or 17 (and who are supposed to be in school) or those older than 65 (who have reached retirement age).
If you adjust for the differences in the size of these universes, one could easily come to the opposite conclusion than the one West offered.
Using the 101 million figure for food aid, which as we noted is likely overstated, means that about 33 percent of the U.S. population receives food assistance.
By contrast, about 47 percent of people age 16 and up work in the private sector. If you restrict it to people age 18 to 64, the percentage working in the private sector rises to 59 percent.
So, the percentage of working-age people with private-sector jobs is at least twice as high as the percentage of Americans who receive food assistance -- the opposite conclusion to the one West drew.
West tweeted that "more Americans receive food aid than work in (the) private sector."
However, the data West used appears to have undercounted the number of people with a private-sector job and overcounted the number of people receiving food aid. In addition, the comparison isn’t really apples to apples. We rate the claim False.
Will Harrington correct the information in her article? Time will tell.