By: Leonard Pitts Jr.
“If you want an abortion, you go to Planned Parenthood. And that’s well over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does.” — Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., April 8, 2011.

“(The statistic Kyl used) was not intended to be a factual statement …” — Statement from Kyl’s office to CNN, later that day.

Actually, about 3 percent of Planned Parenthood’s services are abortion-related. The overwhelming majority of the organization’s work involves cancer screenings, contraception and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases.

Granted, the 3 percent figure is self-reported and Politifact, the nonpartisan, Pulitzer Prize-winning fact-checking website, suggests it could nudge higher depending on how you crunch the numbers.

But it also rules that Kyl “vastly overstated” the organization’s involvement in abortions. In other words, he lied.

Conservatives seem to do that an awful lot.

No, the capacity for mendacity is not exclusive to any party or ideology. Yes, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid have all, at one point or another, been at variance with the truth.

But when it comes to serial lying, to the biggest, most brazen, most audacious lies, the lies repeated ad nauseam until people mistake them for truth, when it comes to the most absolute contempt for the facts and for the necessity of honest debate, it’s not even close.

Conservatives have no equal.

Consider: Politifact has six categories for judging veracity.

A statement is either true, mostly true, half true, barely true, false, or “Pants On Fire,” after the old schoolyard taunt that begins “Liar! Liar!”

Politifact uses this designation for statements that are not only untrue but also make some “ridiculous claim.”

I reviewed 100 such statements on Politifact’s website. By my count, of the 70 that originated with an identifiable individual or group (as opposed to a chain e-mail or miscellaneous source), 61 were from the political right.

That includes Rush Limbaugh saying President Obama is going to take away your right to fish, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer saying beheaded bodies are being found in the desert, Sarah Palin claiming death panels will stalk the elderly — 90 percent of the most audacious lies coming from conservatives.

And that word is used advisedly here. There is little that is truly conservative about what we are seeing.

No, this is extremism, true believers so rigidly committed to their ideological crusades that they feel justified in vandalizing reason and sacrificing integrity in furtherance of their cause. The end justifies any means.

So, as was the case with Jon Kyl, if you can’t prove your point with the facts at hand, make up some facts and prove it with those.

It says much about the intellectual state of what passes for conservatism and the intellectual state of the union itself that this sort of behavior has become business as usual, just another day in the Zeitgeist.

This cannot end well. To continue down this path is to carve out a future of intellectual incoherence and international irrelevance, to doom ourselves to yet more of a fractured political discourse that is loud, ignorant and incapable of reason, much less resolution.

And maybe Sen. Kyl’s claim was “not intended to be a factual statement,” but just so you know? Mine is.

Playlist: Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) — Liar, Arizona Bigot

By Leonard Pitts Jr.

We are gathered here today in sympathy with our brother, Rush Limbaugh.

As you are no doubt aware, these have been difficult days for Brother Limbaugh. There he was, happily revealing that he was part of an investment group that had submitted a bid to purchase the St. Louis Rams of the National Football League. Next thing you know, Al Sharpton is on him like ugly on King Kong, urging the NFL to reject him. And NFL players, not previously known for commenting on, or even visibly caring, who owns a team so long as the paychecks clear, are saying they would not play for him. And owners, who must vote to approve him, are telling reporters they will not.

It all came to a head last week as the talk show host was dumped by his fellow investors. Whose heart is so stony that it does not weep for Brother Limbaugh to find himself humiliated so? Put yourself in his shoes.

You’re a college dropout and OxyContin junkie who somehow managed to climb to the top of the media pile. You’ve made yourself one of the most popular and influential voices in the national dialogue and that, in turn, has made you rich beyond dreams of avarice. How satisfying must that be.

And you’re an avid sports fan, too, so naturally you jump at a chance to fulfill every sports fan’s dream — to buy yourself a team. You picture yourself watching games from the luxury box with a babe or two on your arm, evaluating talent and signing off on trades, partying in the locker room, champagne stinging your eyes, at the end of a championship game.

How cruel to have it all snatched away from you. And why? Because a bunch of black African-American Negroes start making noise? What reason do they have to be upset with you?

•   Just because you once called Philadelphia Eagles star Donovan McNabb overrated, the victim of media too eager to see a black quarterback do well?

•   Just because you referred to Barack Obama and Halle Berry as “Halfrican Americans?”

•   Just because you told your listeners Obama’s economic program is “reparations?”

•   Just because you called Obama “the little black man-child?”

•   Just because you said the NFL “all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips?”

•   Just because you once told a black caller to “take that bone out of your nose and call me back?”

For those “trifles” the sensitive pansies of the NFL don’t want to have anything to do with you? Just because 65 percent of their players are black African-American Negroes? Oh, the shame! Oh, the humanity!

So yes, the rest of us should rally around Brother Limbaugh. If they can deny one rich, racially inflammatory media lout his constitutional right to own a football team, what’s to stop them from denying another? This is a clear and present danger. Pat Buchanan, Glenn Beck … none of us is safe while this injustice stands.

And besides, what lesson does this teach our children?

That there are things (like respectability) even money can’t buy? That there are doors (like the one to the owner’s box) even fame can’t open? That you only have one reputation and it’s not stain-resistant, so you’d better not soil it? That karma is a female dog?

Do you really want your children to learn that sort of socialist claptrap? I don’t. How dare the high and mighty NFL act like the things we say carry consequences?

So let’s stand up for Brother Limbaugh. Indeed, here and now, I am starting a legal fund to help him carry on the fight. I will make the first contribution — a shiny new Franklin Roosevelt dime. What about you? Wouldn’t you like to see poor Rush get what he deserves?

Please give generously.

[Enlarge] About The Author: Leonard Pitts, Jr. is a nationally-syndicated columnist and winner of the 2004 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary. He was originally hired by the Miami Herald to critique music, but within a few years he received his own column in which he dealt extensively with race, politics, and culture. He lives in Bowie, Maryland. He has won awards for his writing from the Society of Professional Journalists and the American Society of Newspaper Editors, and was first nominated for the Pulitzer Prize in 1993, eventually claiming the honor in 2004. He is also the author of the bestselling book Becoming Dad: Black Men and the Journey to Fatherhood. Pitts gained national recognition for his widely-circulated column of September 12, 2001, “We’ll Go Forward From This Moment,” in which he described the toughness of the American spirit even in the face of such a horrible attack. In June 2007, Pitts was the subject of a campaign of death threats and harassment by neo-Nazis angry at a column he wrote about two whites raped and murdered in Knoxville, Tennessee. In his column addressing the murders, Pitts stated “for the crackpots, incendiaries and flat-out racists who have chosen this tragedy upon which to take an obscene and ludicrous stand. I have four words for them and any other white Americans who feel themselves similarly victimized. Cry me a river.” More death threats were made in April 2008 before his appearance at the University of Puget Sound. ——————————————————————- | Read More About Leonard Pitts Jr. | Visit his website at www.leonardpittsjr.com.

————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Writes: Leonard Pitts Jr.

Of course, we all have questions for Sarah Palin:

Does she actually think living across the Bering Strait from Russia constitutes foreign policy expertise? Does she really take the parable of Adam and Eve as literal truth? How, exactly, does one field dress a moose? And why would one want to?

My first question, though, would not be one of those. I’d simply ask which books she wants to ban – and why.

Yes, there’s a list of titles floating around the Internet right now, but it’s a fake. It is, however, established fact that our would-be vice president has in the past tried to pull books off library shelves.

The New York Times reports that as a member of the City Council of Wasilla, Alaska, Palin complained to colleagues about a book called “Daddy’s Roommate,” described in promotional material as being “for and about the children of lesbian and gay parents.”

Laura Chase, who ran Palin’s campaign for mayor, explained that the book was harmless and suggested Palin read it.

Chase told the New York Times that Palin replied she “didn’t need to read that stuff. It was disturbing that someone would be willing to remove a book from the library and she didn’t even read it.”

Later, as mayor, Palin reportedly asked the town’s librarian three times whether she would agree to remove controversial books from the shelves. Three times, the librarian refused. Palin fired her, but eventually bowed to public pressure and gave the woman her job back.

“I’m still proud of Sarah,” said Chase, “but she scares the bejeebers out of me.”

Story continues below

And in that context, it seems apropos that next week is Banned Books Week. As you doubtless know, that’s the week set aside each year by the American Library Association to bring attention to attempts by some of us to regulate what others of us may read. The ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom reports that it has seen 9,700 “challenges” – a challenge is defined as a formal written request to remove a book from a library because the content offends or is deemed inappropriate – since 1990. Chillingly, the office suggests that’s probably an undercount. It says that for every challenge reported, four or five are not.

So Palin has company, to say the least.

Count among that number the woman from a Cuban exile group who bragged to a Miami Herald reporter how in 2006 she checked out and kept an elementary school library book she felt painted too rosy a picture of life on that Communist island. Like Palin, she thought she had good reason. Would-be book banners always do.

I’m reminded of how someone challenged me the other day on my contention that anti-intellectualism has overtaken this land. I mentioned by way of example Palin’s Bible literalism, but really, there’s so much more. There’s the “Jay Walking” segment on Leno. There’s this notion that “elite” is a four-letter word. There’s the White House’s censorship and politicization of science. There’s the recent survey that found that more people can name all five Simpsons than all five freedoms enumerated in the First Amendment.

And there’s this: as many as 50,000 incidents since 1990 in which a book was forced to justify its existence. We’re talking books like “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,” books like “The Color Purple,” books like “Harry Potter” and, yes, books like “Daddy’s Roommate,” books that offended because they expressed ideas that made someone uncomfortable. As if any other kind of idea was worth expressing.

We are becoming the stupid giant of planet Earth: richer than Midas, mightier than Thor, dumber than rocks. Which makes us a danger to the planet – and to ourselves. This country cannot continue to prosper and to embrace stupidity. The two are fundamentally incompatible.

So do us all a favor: Annoy Sarah Palin. For goodness’ sake, read.

[Enlarge] About The Author: Leonard Pitts, Jr. is a nationally-syndicated columnist and winner of the 2004 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary. He was originally hired by the Miami Herald to critique music, but within a few years he received his own column in which he dealt extensively with race, politics, and culture. He lives in Bowie, Maryland. He has won awards for his writing from the Society of Professional Journalists and the American Society of Newspaper Editors, and was first nominated for the Pulitzer Prize in 1993, eventually claiming the honor in 2004. He is also the author of the bestselling book Becoming Dad: Black Men and the Journey to Fatherhood. Pitts gained national recognition for his widely-circulated column of September 12, 2001, “We’ll Go Forward From This Moment,” in which he described the toughness of the American spirit even in the face of such a horrible attack. In June 2007, Pitts was the subject of a campaign of death threats and harassment by neo-Nazis angry at a column he wrote about two whites raped and murdered in Knoxville, Tennessee. In his column addressing the murders, Pitts stated “for the crackpots, incendiaries and flat-out racists who have chosen this tragedy upon which to take an obscene and ludicrous stand. I have four words for them and any other white Americans who feel themselves similarly victimized. Cry me a river.” More death threats were made in April 2008 before his appearance at the University of Puget Sound. | Read More About Leonard Pitts Jr. | Visit his website at www.leonardpittsjr.com.

Writes: Leonard Pitts Jr.

This will be a history of rope.

It strikes me that such a history is desperately needed just now. It seems the travesty in Jena, La., has spawned a ghastly trend. Remember how white students at Jena High placed nooses in a tree last year to communicate antipathy toward their black classmates? Now it’s happening all over.

A noose is left for a black workman at a construction site in the Chicago area. In Queens, a woman brandishes a noose to threaten her black neighbors. A noose is left on the door of a black professor at Columbia University. And that’s just last week. Go back a little further and you have similar incidents at the University of Maryland in College Park, at a police department on Long Island, on a Coast Guard cutter and in a bus maintenance garage in Pittsburgh.

Mark Potok, the director of the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, told USA Today, “For a dozen incidents to come to the public’s attention is a lot. I don’t generally see noose incidents in a typical month. We might hear about a handful in a year.”

The superintendent of schools in Jena famously dismissed the original incident as a “prank.” It was an astonishing response, speaking volumes about the blithe historical ignorance of people who have found it convenient not to peer too closely at the atrocities of the past lest they be accidentally … moved.

But watching this trend unfold, it occurs to me that maybe what we need here is the opposite of ignorance. Maybe what we need is information. Maybe what we need is a history of rope.

A history of rope would have to include, in 1904, Luther Holbert and his wife, who had their fingers chopped off and handed out as souvenirs. Holbert was beaten so badly one of his eyes came out. It hung by a thread. A large corkscrew was used to bore into the couple’s flesh. It tore out big chunks of them each time it was withdrawn. A rope was used to tie them to the tree.

A history of rope would have to include, in 1917, Rufus Moncrief, who was beaten senseless by a mob. They used a saw to cut off his arms and otherwise mutilated him. The mob hanged Moncrief. Then, for good measure, they hanged his dog. Ropes were used for both.

A history of rope would have to include, in 1918, Mary Turner, burned alive in Valdosta. A man used a hog-splitting knife to slash her swollen stomach. The baby she had carried nearly to term tumbled out and managed two cries before the man crushed its head beneath his heel. A rope was used to tie Turner upside down in a tree.

A history of rope would include thousands of Turners, Moncriefs and Holberts. It would range widely across the geography of this nation and the years of the past two centuries. A history of rope would travel from Cairo, Ill., in 1909 to Fort Lauderdale, Fla., in 1935 to Urbana, Ohio, in 1897 to Wrightsville in 1903, to Leitchfield, Ky., in 1913 to Newbern, Tenn. in 1902. And beyond.

You might say the country has changed since then, and it has. The problem is, it’s changing again.

It feels as if in recent years we the people have backward traveled from even the pretense of believing our loftiest ideals. It has become fashionable to decry excessive “political correctness,” deride “diversity,” sneer at the “protected classes.” Code words sanding down hatred’s rough edge. “State’s rights” for the new millennium. And now, out come the nooses. Just a prank, the man says.

Mary Turner would argue otherwise. I find it useful to remember her, useful to be reminded of things we would rather forget. To remember her is to understand that there is no prank here.

A history of rope would drown your conscience in blood.

[Enlarge] About The Author: Leonard Pitts, Jr. is a nationally-syndicated columnist and winner of the 2004 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary. He was originally hired by the Miami Herald to critique music, but within a few years he received his own column in which he dealt extensively with race, politics, and culture. He lives in Bowie, Maryland. He has won awards for his writing from the Society of Professional Journalists and the American Society of Newspaper Editors, and was first nominated for the Pulitzer Prize in 1993, eventually claiming the honor in 2004. He is also the author of the bestselling book Becoming Dad: Black Men and the Journey to Fatherhood. Pitts gained national recognition for his widely-circulated column of September 12, 2001, “We’ll Go Forward From This Moment,” in which he described the toughness of the American spirit even in the face of such a horrible attack. In June 2007, Pitts was the subject of a campaign of death threats and harassment by neo-Nazis angry at a column he wrote about two whites raped and murdered in Knoxville, Tennessee. In his column addressing the murders, Pitts stated “for the crackpots, incendiaries and flat-out racists who have chosen this tragedy upon which to take an obscene and ludicrous stand. I have four words for them and any other white Americans who feel themselves similarly victimized. Cry me a river.” More death threats were made in April 2008 before his appearance at the University of Puget Sound. | Read More About Leonard Pitts Jr. | Visit his website at www.leonardpittsjr.com.

REFERENCES:

1. Southern Horrors and Other Writings; The Anti-Lynching Campaign of Ida B. Wells, 1892-1900
2. At the Hands of Persons Unknown: The Lynching of Black America
3. Contempt of Court: The Turn Of-The-Century Lynching That Launched 100 Years of Federalism
4. Getting Away with Murder (Jane Addams Honor Book (Awards))
5. Lynching in Mississippi: A History, 1865-1965
6. A Spectacular Secret: Lynching in American Life and Literature
7. In Jena and Beyond, Nooses Return as a Symbol of Hate
8. On Culture: Symbols of Hatred in the Shadows
9. Facing Down The Status Quo: African American Museum’s Inaugural Exhibition Shows The Stalwarts of ‘Resistance