Joel Pollak is a senior editor-at-large at breitbart.com, a conservative website.

Earlier this week he tried to attend a speech by Robert Frances “Beto” O’Rourke at Benedict College, a primarily Black educational institution.  But he was tossed out before the speech took place.

Why?  Because breitbart in general, and Pollak in particular, have been highly critical of O’Rourke.  In fact, a day earlier, Pollak challenged O’Rourke’s claim that Trump called the nazi wannabes in Charlottesville, Virginia “very fine people”.

But a political campaign can’t really use the act of asking a question as an excuse to ban reporters.

So, instead, O’Rourke trotted out his Press Secretary,  Aleigha Cavalier, to inform the world it was because Pollak was a danger to Black students.  When asked what that was supposed to mean, Cavalier wrote the following:

View image on Twitter

FYI:  That claim is an overt, despicable lie.

I have been reading breitbart.com for years and often use it as a source for my own blogs.  In that time I have read many, many commentaries by Joel Pollak.  The next one I read that is racist will be the first.

But if this is not good enough for you (and my personal opinion alone should not be), read the following statement from Breitbart, which tells you more about Mr. Pollak:

 “The false accusation that Breitbart is racist, or that its award-winning reporter — an Orthodox Jew, married to a black woman who serves in the military — is either racist or would make anyone at a black university uncomfortable is absurd. The irony of Mr. O’Rourke — who has stated himself that he is the beneficiary of ‘white privilege’ — purporting to decide for black students who should be banned from events that are open to the press, or what they should feel, is not lost on us.”

I would think that settles the issue about Mr. Pollak’s “racism”.

Now, what about O’Rourke’s gratuitous playing of the race card to get rid of him before that speech?

The saddest part of this farce is that every time the race card is played this way – i.e. invoking racism where it does not exist – it further cheapens and trivializes the term, making it less meaningful when acts of racism really do occur.

It’s like the old story of the boy who cried wolf.  Lie about something enough times and then, if/when you’re telling the truth, people will not believe you.

I would say that O’Rourke and Cavalier should be ashamed of themselves, but I decline to do so on the grounds that it would inaccurately suggest I have any confidence at all in their capacity to be ashamed.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *