Libtalker: US Supreme Court 'Might Call Obama The N-Word'

MINDING THE STORE

With Crazy Rant, Fill-In Libtalker Upstages Regular Host







Here's a question for any talk host taking time off: who's minding the store?

Available fill-in talent often ranges from boring and unlistenable to dangerously over-the-top. Ed Schultz's regular sub, Norman Goldman, is in the latter camp, often sounding simply deranged and mean-spirited.

Goldman, who hosts his own program in addition to serving as Ed's primary relief, parrots the latter's mannerisms right down to the Sylvester The Cat-like vocal style. But the rhetoric may even surpass his mentor's, as noted elsewhere today by Jack Coleman, who cites other hate-filled portions of Monday's radio show here.

This passage, however, may actually win the prize for hate-mongering as Goldman wonders aloud whether a majority of the US Supreme Court would call Obama the N-word:

NORMAN GOLDMAN (32:06): The best argument that I can see coming from the opponents of health insurance reform, the best argument is, is that the mandate is unconstitutional.

The mandate's unconstitutional, their argument is, is that it is not, quote, 'regulating interstate commerce to force people to do business with private insurance companies.'

That's their best argument and they may win. Because five members of the Supreme Court don't like Mr Obama. And they'd be happy to rub his nose in the mud.

They might even call him the N-word. You never know.

As Goldman is better connected to the left than some might suspect, is he revealing his party's next strategy, a concentrated campaign of harassment against US Supreme Court justices?


HAVE YOU SEEN our companion site for New England regional talk radio updates?



Amazon orders originating with clicks here benefit The Radio Equalizer's ongoing operations. Your PayPal contributions keep this site humming along. Thanks!