News

  • BOOM: Karoline Leavitt ENDS Jimmy Kimmel’s Career in One Sentence!
  • 0:00 My argument is that we should try our 0:02 very best to treat people without regard 0:04 to race both in our personal lives and 0:06 our public policy. Of course, and the 0:07 reason I wrote this book, Thank you. 0:13 The reason I wrote this book is because 0:14 in the past 10 years, it has been become 0:16 very popular to in the name of 0:18 anti-racism teach a kind of philosophy 0:21 to our children and in general that says 0:23 your race is everything, right? And I 0:25 think that is the wrong way to fight 0:27 racism. And that’s why I wrote this book 0:29 at this time. 0:30 And so many in the black community, 0:32 if I’m being honest with you, cuz I want 0:35 to be, believe that you are being used 0:37 as a pawn by the right and that you’re a 0:39 charlatan of sorts. 0:40 He’s not a Republican. How do you 0:43 You You’ve said that you’re a 0:44 conservative. You 0:46 No, you did. You actually said that uh 0:49 podcast that you did two weeks ago. 0:50 I said I was a conservative. 0:51 He’s not. Yes, you did. So, but my 0:54 question to you, my question to you is 0:56 how do you respond to those critics? 1:00 Let’s give it a little answer. 1:02 First thing I want to say that uh 1:04 socioeconomics 1:06 picks out people in a better way than 1:08 race. 1:09 When you do look at the socioeconomics, 1:11 you see the huge disparity between white 1:14 households and black households. You see 1:16 the huge disparity between white 1:18 households and Hispanic households. So 1:21 your argument and I’ve read your book 1:22 twice because I wanted to give it a 1:24 chance. Argument that race has no place 1:27 in that equation is really fundamentally 1:30 flawed in my 1:31 No. Well, 1:32 it started with one man walking straight 1:34 into the lion’s den, a calm voice 1:36 surrounded by chaos. He sat across from 1:38 the views panel, ready to challenge a 1:40 room that wasn’t known for letting 1:42 opposing voices breathe. His message 1:44 that race should not be the lens through 1:46 which we view every issue. Instead, we 1:48 should focus on class. Help the poor 1:50 regardless of their skin color and 1:52 racial equality will follow. Simple, 1:55 bold, but apparently too much for 1:57 daytime television. 1:58 Two separate questions. One is whether 2:01 each racial group is socioeconomically 2:04 the same. That I agree with you. They’re 2:05 not. 2:06 Yeah, they’re not. And the stats show 2:07 that. 2:08 But yeah, of course I agree with that 2:09 fully. The question is how do you how do 2:11 you address that in the way that 2:12 actually targets poverty the best, 2:13 right? And what Martin Luther King wrote 2:15 in his book, Why We Can’t Wait, is he 2:17 called it, “We need a bill of rights for 2:19 the disadvantaged.” And he said, “Yes, 2:21 we should address racial inequality. 2:23 Yes, we should address the legacy of 2:24 slavery.” But the way to do that is on 2:26 the basis of class. And that will 2:28 disproportionately target blacks and 2:30 Hispanics because they’re 2:31 disproportionately poor. But it will be 2:33 doing so in a way that also helps the 2:35 white poor, in a way that addresses 2:37 poverty as the thing to be. 2:39 He wasn’t shouting. He wasn’t attacking, 2:41 but his words were a grenade tossed into 2:43 the safe space of identity politics. He 2:46 argued that race-based thinking once 2:48 used to divide is now being dressed up 2:50 as social justice, and it’s being pushed 2:53 onto kids in schools, politicians in 2:55 office, and celebrities on air. He 2:58 called it out for what it is, a 3:00 dangerous reversal of progress. 3:02 A student of Dr. King. I’m not only a 3:03 student of Dr. King, I know his 3:05 daughter, Bernice. Right. 3:07 So, I I’m I’m going to get to my 3:08 question. 3:09 Go ahead. Go right ahead. um 3:11 this is fundamentally flawed. You you 3:13 claim that colorblindness was the goal 3:15 of the civil rights movement 3:17 based upon Dr. King’s I have a dream 3:19 speech, you know, content of character 3:21 versus the um color of skin. 3:26 Bernice points out that four years after 3:29 giving that speech actually um Dr. King 3:33 also said this, “A society that has done 3:36 something special against a negro for 3:38 hundreds of years must now do something 3:40 special for Negroes.” He also said in 3:43 1968, it was about less than a week 3:45 before he was assassinated. This country 3:49 never stops to realize that they owe a 3:52 people kept in slavery for 244 years. So 3:56 rather than class, he did write about 3:58 that earlier on. Right before his death, 4:01 he made the argument for racial equality 4:04 and racial 4:06 reparations. And so 4:07 teaching kids that skin color is their 4:09 identity, he said, is not how you end 4:12 racism, it’s how you keep it alive. And 4:14 right there in the middle of that set, 4:17 things started to shift. Some eyebrows 4:20 raised, some eyes rolled. But the 4:22 conversation was far from over. Because 4:25 the moment you challenge the sacred 4:26 narrative, the one that says race must 4:28 be the focus, you’re not just 4:30 disagreeing, you’re threatening an 4:31 entire world view. By the way, before we 4:34 continue, don’t forget to like this 4:36 video and subscribe to the channel. It 4:38 really helps us grow and share more 4:40 intriguing stories. Now, let’s continue. 4:42 This 4:42 I think is something that the right has 4:45 co-opted. And so many in the black 4:47 community, 4:48 if I’m being honest with you, because I 4:51 want to be, believe that you are being 4:53 used as a pawn by the right and that 4:55 you’re a charlatan of sorts. 4:56 He’s not a Republican. So, how do you 4:58 voted? You You said that you’re a 5:00 conservative. 5:02 No, you did. You actually said that uh 5:04 the podcast that you did two weeks ago. 5:06 I said I was a conservative. Yes, you 5:08 did. 5:09 That’s when things took a sharp turn. 5:11 One of the co-hosts, Sunonny Host, 5:13 didn’t waste a second. She came in 5:16 swinging, not with facts, but with 5:17 accusations. 5:19 She called him a pawn, said he was being 5:21 used by the right, and even questioned 5:23 whether he was a charlatan. The 5:24 atmosphere instantly changed. It was no 5:27 longer a conversation. It was a setup. 5:29 She tried to paint him as a 5:30 conservative, even though he openly said 5:32 he wasn’t. She claimed he was paring 5:35 right-wing talking points, even as 5:37 others on the panel, her own co-host, 5:38 stepped in to clarify that he wasn’t 5:40 even a Republican. But the damage was 5:42 already done. The goal wasn’t to debate 5:44 his ideas. It was to discredit him 5:47 personally. Classic tactic. If you can’t 5:49 beat the argument, attack the person. 5:51 To you, my question to you is, how do 5:54 you respond to those critics? 5:59 First thing that’s very important, the 6:01 quote that you just pointed out about 6:04 doing something special for the Negro. 6:06 That’s from the book Why We Can’t Wait, 6:07 that that I just mentioned. Yes. A 6:09 couple paragraphs later, he lays out 6:11 exactly what that something special was, 6:13 and it was the Bill of Rights for the 6:15 Disadvantaged, a broad class-based pop. 6:18 But he also says, “You must include 6:19 race.” 6:21 No, he didn’t. He says it’s Yes, he 6:22 does. 6:23 Okay. Well, everyone can go. Everyone 6:24 should go read the book Why We Can’t 6:25 Wait. Let’s not get sidetracked. I don’t 6:27 think I’ve been co-opted by anyone. I’ve 6:28 only voted twice, both for Democrats. 6:30 Although, I’m an independent. I would 6:32 vote for a Republican, probably a 6:33 non-Trump Republican if they were 6:35 compelling. Um, I don’t think there’s 6:37 any evidence I’ve been co-opted by 6:38 anyone. And I think that that’s that’s 6:41 an ad homonym tactic people use to not 6:43 address really the important 6:45 conversations we’re having here and it 6:47 would be 6:48 better for everyone if we stuck to the 6:49 topics rather than make it about me. 6:52 But I just I want to give you the 6:54 opportunity to respond to the app the 6:57 criticism. 6:57 I appreciate it. There’s no evidence 6:58 that I’ve been co-opted by anyone. I 7:00 have an independent podcast. 7:02 I work for CNN as an analyst. I write 7:05 for the free press. I’m independent in 7:07 all of these endeavors and no one is 7:09 paying me to say what I’m saying. I’m 7:11 saying it cuz I feel 7:12 What made it more surreal was the way 7:14 she twisted his beliefs. He never said 7:16 racism doesn’t exist. He never said 7:19 history should be ignored. What he said 7:21 was that we can fight inequality more 7:23 effectively by targeting poverty. But 7:26 instead of addressing that idea, Sunny 7:28 went straight for character 7:29 assassination, hoping that labeling him 7:32 would shut the conversation down. at the 7:34 anti-racism movement. There are a couple 7:37 of people I don’t even who know who they 7:39 are. Maybe 7:39 Robin D’Angelo. 7:40 Robin D’Angelo Ibram Kendi for instance. 7:43 Okay. Well, there uh you say that that 7:45 is just a form of another form of racism 7:47 and you even say it has a lot in common 7:48 with white supremacy. 7:50 How can you compare those two things? 7:52 You anti-racism. You’re comparing it to 7:55 white supremacy 7:57 because they they both view your race as 7:59 a a extremely significant part of who 8:02 you are. So, white supremacists, they 8:05 obviously say we all know what they say. 8:07 Okay. Uh, neo-racists like Rob D’Angelo, 8:10 they say that to be white is to be 8:12 ignorant, for example. Well, this is a 8:14 racial stereotype. And I want to call a 8:16 spade a spade and say this is not the 8:17 style of anti-racism we have to be 8:19 teaching our kids. We should be teaching 8:21 them that your race is not a significant 8:24 feature of you, who you are. Who you are 8:25 is your character, your value, and your 8:27 skin color doesn’t say anything about 8:29 that. 8:29 This wasn’t just debate. This was public 8:32 shaming in real time on national TV and 8:35 the audience was watching it unfold like 8:37 a courtroom drama with Sunny playing 8:39 judge, jury, and executioner. But he 8:42 didn’t flinch. And that made it even 8:44 more dangerous for her because when 8:47 someone stays calm under fire, people 8:49 start to listen. And that’s exactly what 8:52 made the next moment so uncomfortable 8:53 for Sunny. 8:55 That’s actually misrepresenting what 8:56 what Robin D’Angelo’s position is. 8:59 It’s in her book. 9:01 So here we go. Here we go. 9:04 Thank you. 9:04 He laid it out in plain terms. If black 9:07 and Hispanic people are 9:08 disproportionately poor, then helping 9:10 poor people as a class will naturally 9:12 help those racial groups. You don’t need 9:13 to sort by skin color. You sort by need. 9:17 And guess what? That method helps 9:19 everyone who’s struggling, including 9:20 poor white families, poor Asian 9:22 families, anyone at the bottom. Now, 9:25 here’s where it got wild. Sunny tried to 9:28 clap back by saying, “Well, there’s a 9:30 huge wealth gap between white and black 9:32 households, but she didn’t realize. She 9:35 had just made his argument for him. If 9:37 black and Hispanic communities are over 9:39 represented among the poor, then any 9:41 policy aimed at helping poor people will 9:43 still disproportionately help them.” She 9:46 backed herself into a corner, then tried 9:48 to act like she just made a brilliant 9:50 point. The audience clapped, but not 9:53 because it made sense. It was just 9:54 reflex clap when Sunny talks. Even if 9:57 the logic doesn’t track, she called his 9:59 argument fundamentally flawed without 10:02 ever explaining why. It was like 10:04 watching someone lose a debate and then 10:06 just say, “You’re wrong.” Louder and 10:08 louder, hoping nobody notices they’ve 10:10 got nothing left. But the viewers 10:12 noticed and more importantly, the panel 10:14 started noticing, too. A few of them 10:17 stopped backing Sunny’s attack because 10:19 whether they agreed with him or not, 10:21 they knew what just happened. She had 10:23 walked right into his logic and lost. 10:26 Then came the moment where Coleman 10:28 flipped the entire conversation with one 10:30 quiet reference. Martin Luther King Jr. 10:34 He didn’t just throw out MLK’s name for 10:36 show. He cited King’s own words 10:38 specifically from the book Why We Can’t 10:41 Wait. In it, King calls for a bill of 10:43 rights for the Disadvantaged. Not a 10:45 race-based handout, a class-based 10:48 solution. Help the poor because they are 10:50 poor, King said. and you’ll help the 10:52 black community by default because they 10:54 are over represented among the poor. It 10:56 was clear, direct, and backed by 10:59 history. But Sunny wasn’t having it. She 11:01 pushed back hard, claiming MLK wanted 11:04 race-based reparations, quoting a speech 11:06 from just before his death. “You must 11:09 include race,” she insisted. But what 11:12 she left out, and what Coleman calmly 11:14 reminded her, was that even in that same 11:16 book, King spelled out what he meant by 11:18 something special. It wasn’t cash 11:21 payouts based on skin color. It was 11:24 policy that lifts the disadvantaged 11:26 regardless of race. You could feel the 11:28 tension rise. Sunny tried to twist 11:31 King’s legacy to support her view. But 11:33 Coleman came with receipts, paragraphs, 11:36 page numbers. He didn’t need to shout. 11:39 He just knew what he was talking about. 11:41 The panel started shifting again. The 11:43 more Sunny tried to argue, the more 11:45 obvious it became she wasn’t debating 11:47 the facts. She was clinging to a 11:49 narrative. And the deeper she went, the 11:51 more people started to question if that 11:53 narrative actually made any sense 11:55 anymore. Now, here’s where it got 11:57 downright awkward. While Sunny kept 11:59 insisting that race should be the center 12:01 of everything, people started noticing 12:04 something off. She was passionately 12:07 rejecting class-based politics while 12:09 sitting there in a Gucci button-down and 12:11 beltworth more than what some people 12:12 make in a week. That detail didn’t go 12:14 unnoticed. In fact, it became a 12:17 punchline across the internet. How can 12:20 you preach about racial struggle and 12:21 fairness while draped in designer labels 12:24 rejecting the exact policies that would 12:26 help all poor people regardless of 12:28 color? And then to make things even more 12:31 ironic, progressive voices, the ones 12:33 you’d expect to back Sunny started 12:35 siding with Coleman loudly. People like 12:38 Anna from the Young Turks came out and 12:40 said, “Look, I don’t agree with Coleman 12:42 on everything, but the man makes 12:44 thoughtful, well-reasoned arguments.” 12:46 She even admitted that his analysis 12:48 challenges her own views sometimes. 12:50 That’s huge coming from someone firmly 12:52 planted on the left. So now the whole 12:55 he’s a right-wing pawn angle, it 12:57 crumbled. If the most liberal 12:59 anti-conservative commentators are 13:01 defending this guy, how can he possibly 13:03 be a puppet for the right? What Sunny 13:06 didn’t realize is that this wasn’t just 13:08 a debate about policy. It was a moment 13:10 where her own credibility started to 13:12 fall apart. She came in thinking she 13:14 could frame Coleman as the outsider. the 13:16 traitor, the sellout. But it was clear 13:18 now she was the one out of step and 13:20 everyone was starting to see it. And at 13:22 that point, even the other women on the 13:24 View had to step in. They weren’t 13:26 jumping to agree with Coleman on every 13:28 point, but they were noticing the way 13:30 Sunny kept dodging his actual argument. 13:33 Every time he spoke about policy, she 13:35 shot back with personal attacks. So, 13:37 finally, they gave him space to talk. 13:40 Not because they agreed, because they 13:41 could see he wasn’t even being allowed 13:43 to finish a sentence. And when he 13:45 finally did, he didn’t defend himself 13:47 with emotion. He didn’t swing back. He 13:50 just laid it out clearly. He’s not a 13:52 Republican, never voted for one, and he 13:54 doesn’t take money from anyone. He runs 13:56 an independent podcast, works as a CNN 13:59 analyst, and writes for an independent 14:01 outlet. That’s it. No donors, no 14:04 political party whispering in his ear. 14:06 Sunny’s entire attack, this whole idea 14:08 that he’s a pawn of the right, collapsed 14:10 right there on the table. Then just when 14:13 it looked like Sunny might try to pivot, 14:15 she dropped one more name. Martin Luther 14:17 King Jr.’s daughter. She said she knew 14:19 her personally. Like that was supposed 14:22 to end the discussion, but it didn’t 14:24 land. It sounded like a desperate flex, 14:26 as if knowing someone famous somehow 14:28 proved her point. The audience could 14:31 feel it. Coleman had shown up with 14:33 facts, logic, and quotes. Sunny had 14:36 shown up with labels and name drops. And 14:39 by now, it wasn’t hard to tell which one 14:41 actually understood the issue. But Sunny 14:44 wasn’t done yet. Still trying to win the 14:46 moment, she brought up another MLK, 14:48 quote, “This time from just before his 14:50 death, saying the country owed something 14:52 special to black Americans because of 14:54 slavery.” Her argument that this proved 14:57 King did support race-based policies. 15:00 But Coleman had already addressed that 15:02 earlier. He reminded Herand, everyone 15:04 watching that King defined that 15:06 something special as the Bill of Rights 15:09 for the disadvantaged, which was 15:11 explicitly class-based. Sunny tried to 15:13 twist that quote to fit her narrative, 15:15 but the context didn’t back her up. And 15:18 now, she was starting to look like 15:19 someone who was cherry-picking lines 15:21 while ignoring the full message. 15:23 Meanwhile, Coleman never moved off 15:25 course. He stuck to what King wrote, not 15:28 just what he said in a sound bite. And 15:30 the irony, the exact strategy Sunny was 15:33 pushing, focusing everything on race, 15:35 was eerily similar to how white 15:37 supremacists view the world. Coleman 15:40 didn’t say that lightly. He explained 15:42 that if both racists and so-called 15:44 anti-racists are obsessing over skin 15:46 color, they’re using the same framework, 15:48 just in reverse. One group says race 15:51 makes you inferior. The other says race 15:54 makes you owed something, but both 15:56 refuse to look beyond the color of your 15:58 skin. That was the real mic drop because 16:01 in trying so hard to make race the only 16:03 issue, Sunny was proving his point for 16:05 him over and over again. And the more 16:07 she argued, the more obvious it became. 16:10 At this point, Coleman had already won 16:12 over a good chunk of the room. But he 16:14 wasn’t done. He leaned into the heart of 16:17 his argument. You don’t need race-based 16:19 policies to achieve racial progress. If 16:22 you help the class that’s struggling the 16:23 most, which happens to include many 16:25 black and Hispanic communities, then 16:27 you’re solving two problems at once. 16:30 Poverty and racial disparity. It’s 16:32 practical. It’s fair. And most 16:35 importantly, it doesn’t exclude anyone 16:37 based on their skin color. He even said 16:39 it straight up. If your real goal is to 16:42 lift black and brown people out of 16:44 poverty, then help all poor people. Race 16:47 doesn’t need to be part of the equation 16:49 because it will be addressed 16:50 automatically by focusing on the class 16:51 where inequality lives. But here’s what 16:54 made it sting wasn’t saying this to play 16:56 it safe or avoid controversy. He was 16:58 saying it because to him it was common 17:01 sense. And the fact that Sunny kept 17:03 rejecting it even after making arguments 17:05 that supported it just made her look 17:08 worse. She wasn’t even disagreeing with 17:10 his logic. She was just mad that it 17:12 didn’t center race in the way she 17:14 wanted. By now, it wasn’t even a debate 17:17 anymore. It was a slow unraveling of a 17:19 mainstream idea right there, live on TV. 17:22 And Coleman was doing it with nothing 17:24 more than calm words and bulletproof 17:26 reasoning. But Sunny had one last card 17:29 to play, and it was desperation at its 17:31 finest. She doubled down on accusing 17:33 Coleman of being co-opted by the right. 17:36 You could see the frustration building. 17:38 She had lost control of the narrative, 17:40 and now she was falling back on the 17:42 oldest trick in the book. If you can’t 17:44 beat the message, attack the messenger. 17:46 She called him a pawn, a sellout, even 17:49 questioned his intentions. But he didn’t 17:51 flinch. He calmly replied, “I’ve only 17:54 voted twice both times for Democrats. 17:56 I’m an independent. No one’s paying me 17:59 to say what I say.” And you could feel 18:01 it. The audience knew she had nothing 18:03 left. The other co-hosts started backing 18:06 off. One of them reminded the table that 18:08 Coleman’s work is respected even by 18:10 liberal voices. He writes for 18:12 independent outlets, works with major 18:14 networks, and is known for not falling 18:16 in line with any political side. Even 18:18 some of the most left-leaning 18:20 commentators online had already vouched 18:22 for him. People who disagree with him on 18:24 real political issues still admitted 18:26 that he debates in good faith. Sunny had 18:28 tried to throw mud on his name, but none 18:30 of it stuck because instead of 18:32 unraveling under pressure, Coleman stood 18:35 even taller. His point had been simple 18:38 from the start. fix the root problem, 18:40 poverty, and you help everyone. Race 18:42 doesn’t have to be weaponized to do 18:44 good. But if you insist on making race 18:46 everything, then you’re not solving 18:48 inequality, you’re just flipping it. And 18:51 then came the part that left no doubt 18:53 about what this whole showdown was 18:54 really about. Holman turned his focus to 18:57 the anti-racism movement, the one that’s 18:59 been pushed heavily in recent years by 19:01 authors like Robin D’Angelo and Ibram 19:03 Kendi. the movement that claims to fight 19:05 racism by constantly centering 19:07 everything around race. But here’s what 19:09 he said. This version of anti-racism is 19:12 just racism wearing new clothes. He 19:14 pointed out the uncomfortable truth. 19:16 Both white supremacists and today’s 19:18 anti-racists believe race is the most 19:21 important thing about a person. One 19:23 group says white people are superior. 19:25 The other says being white makes you 19:27 guilty, privileged, or ignorant by 19:29 default. Either way, it’s a racial 19:31 stereotype. Either way, you’re judging 19:34 people by skin color. And Coleman wasn’t 19:37 afraid to say it out loud. That’s still 19:39 racism. Then he quoted directly from 19:42 D’Angelo’s own book. To be white is to 19:45 be ignorant. That’s not equality. That’s 19:48 not justice. That’s a racial smear. And 19:51 it’s being taught to kids under the 19:52 label of progress. He didn’t make it up. 19:56 It’s right there in print. But the 19:58 moment you criticize it, people like 20:00 Sunny call you a traitor. And here’s 20:02 what made the audience sit up. Coleman 20:04 wasn’t ranting. He was warning. This 20:08 movement, he said, is repeating the same 20:10 logic used by racists in the past, just 20:13 in a reverse direction. And if we don’t 20:16 see that, we’re not moving forward. 20:18 We’re going in circles. At this point, 20:20 the tension on set was thick enough to 20:22 slice through. Even Whoopi Goldberg, who 20:25 rarely hides her emotions, looked 20:26 visibly fed up with how Sunny kept 20:28 doubling down. You could see it in her 20:31 face, the eye rolls, the heavy size. She 20:34 wasn’t siding with Coleman, but it was 20:36 clear she was done with the nonsense. 20:38 Done with Sunny’s long- winded detours, 20:41 the personal digs, the refusal to 20:43 actually engage with the core argument. 20:45 And then Coleman dropped one last truth 20:47 bomb that sealed the entire discussion. 20:49 He reminded everyone of the core message 20:51 of Martin Luther King’s I have a dream 20:54 speech, that people should be judged by 20:56 the content of their character, not the 20:58 color of their skin. That wasn’t just a 21:00 poetic moment. It was the entire 21:02 foundation of the civil rights movement. 21:04 And somehow the same people who praise 21:06 King now want to tear down that message 21:08 in the name of justice. He explained 21:11 that anti-racism today has stopped being 21:13 about equality and has turned into a new 21:16 form of discrimination, a philosophy 21:18 that teaches people to see skin color 21:20 first and everything else second. And 21:23 that, he said, is exactly what King 21:25 fought against. The crowd didn’t cheer. 21:28 The panel didn’t clap, but everyone knew 21:30 exactly what just happened. Coleman 21:32 didn’t just hold his own. He flipped the 21:34 entire conversation calmly, clearly, and 21:38 without a single insult. If you enjoyed 21:40 this video, don’t forget to hit the like 21:42 button and subscribe to this channel. 21:44 Also, drop your thoughts in the 21:45 comments. See you on the next one.
  • GMA3 personality Eva Pilgrim to replace Deborah Norville on Inside Edition, leaves ABC after nearly 10 years

Follow Us s

Category Name

Category Name

Category Name