Cross-posted from Mike Malloy
Every pundit from Fox "news" to Al Jazeera has weighed in on the Michael Brown killing in Ferguson, Mo. Those of the Murdoch variety have leaned toward the defense of officer Wilson, which is expected. But the vilification of Michael Brown, who was unarmed and shot dead in the street, has been vicious, even by Fox standards. And the justification of his murder by Fox special correspondent Ben Stein is particularly disturbing. Stein is no bubble-headed bleach-blonde. He has some conservative cred.
Stein takes umbrage at the concept that Brown was unarmed. The way Stein sees it, Brown was armed by his size and weight, if not his attitude. He was a big kid, and therefore he had a built-in weapon that, apparently, was threatening enough for officer Wilson to fire at least half a dozen bullets into his body.
This is how TPM reports the story:
"Conservative pundit Ben Stein appeared on Newsmax on Tuesday to discuss the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., and challenged the use of the term 'unarmed' to describe Brown.
"Stein was discussing the shooting with host Steve Malzberg and said the use of the term 'unarmed' to describe Brown, who was 'apparently on marijuana,' was akin to 'calling Sonny Liston unarmed or Cassius Clay unarmed.'
"'He wasn't unarmed,' Stein said. 'He was armed with his incredibly strong, scary self.'
"Later, when discussing Attorney General Eric Holder, Stein made a guttural noise and said Holder wasn't concerned about there being a fair trial, aiming instead for a 'lynching jury.'
"'It's a very sad state of affairs,' Stein said. 'I mean it used to be, there was a time ... when lynchings of African Americans were not that incredibly rare. Now the lynchings are the police and it's just an outrage.'
"Stein finished by claiming that in Brown's case, as well as Trayvon Martin's, 'it's the very large, so-called victim attacking the policeman who winds up dead.'
"'I mean if they didn't just, would not attack the policeman, if they would just talk to the policeman in a reasonable way instead of attacking the policeman, nobody would be dead,' Stein said."
Uhm, okay. Did everyone know Stein witnessed the crime and can attest that Brown "attacked" Wilson? Even if true, wouldn't one bullet, say in his leg, been sufficient to stop the assault? Or is it Stein's assumption that Brown was such a "Big Scary" bear of a guy that it took round after round to fell him?
And Trayvon? Excuse me, but was Zimmerman a police officer? Was Trayvon a "Big Scary" black guy, too? Those must've been some scary Skittles. And what the heck does the Trayvon murder have to do with Michael Brown, anyway? Maybe Stein has a (typical) hard time telling them apart.
Stein's a little fella, most men probably frighten him. Fortunately, Stein is only armed with his pasty white, monotonous doughy self...