Geraldo Rivera got to talking politics with Josh Zepps during an interview about his role on “The Celebrity Apprentice.” who asked where Rivera falls on the liberal-to-conservative spectrum.
Rivera described himself as “militant moderate.” After pointing out several of his more liberal philosophies, he laid out his “conservative” philosophy, which was, of course, all about social conservatism and had nothing to do with economic policy.
“Hip-hop has done more damage to black and brown people than racism in the last 10 years,” Rivera began. The Fox News contributor then challenged anyone to find “a youngster — a Puerto Rican from the South Bronx or a black kid from Harlem who has succeeded in life other than being the one-tenth of one-tenth of one percent that make it in the music business — that’s been a success in life walking around with his pants around his ass and with visible tattoos…”
Rivera added that the most powerful men in hip-hop are responsible for pushing young minorities too far out of the dominant culture.
OK, Fine. 
He gets stupider every year. It’s so clear that he doesn’t know anything about hip-hop. But Geraldo has never been one to let ignorance get in the way of an opinion
He’s right for the most part. Anytime you foster an exilic culture or tell young people it’s OK to dress, speak, and act in a way that is found to be offensive by the vast majority of your host nation, you’re fostering failure.
I’m not going to hire some sagging, thug wannabe, nor will most employers. I don’t even interview them.
You are entitled to your opinion.
However – I’ve made this point before – conservatives often attack the thing that government can’t really control. Why doesn’t Geraldo attack liberal economic policies like those under Clinton and Obama? Because they work. So he attack hip-hop clothes and saggy pants…
The government has no control over most of what conservatives complain about.
Huh? Liberal economic policies don’t work…and neither do more and more people in America under those policies.
Over the long term, they definitely work. In 2009 – before Obama had even passed a law – the deficit Bush left Obama was 1.4 trillion.
The most recent deficit is $486 billion, according to sources including this one by U.S. News and World Report: http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2014/10/08/deficit-hits-new-low-under-obama
By the standard unemployment statistic – U3 – unemployment is down to 5.7 percent – the lowest level in 14 years, according to sources such as ABC News:
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/applications-us-unemployment-aid-plummet-283000-29072628
The stock market is also up.
I will say that there are other measurements of unemployment such as those that measure labor participation and marginally attached workers, and those still do need improving.
But by the standard definitions, the economy is coming back from the financial crisis of 2007-2008.
The biggest problems with your deficit assertion is that the POTUS doesn’t have anything to with it, especially Obama who’s never had a budget passed and only one voted upon; and that the annual deficit didn’t drop until the GOP took control of Congress.
As for unemployment – The U3 figures are now meaningless. We’ve now got so many permanently unemployed that millions of just fallen off the chart.
Right…and I suppose you will give the Clinton budget SURPLUS credit to the GOP…
With all due respect, people don’t think long term. It takes a while to turn the economy around from the Bush financial crisis of 2007-2008.
Obama and Clinton had good policies of steady growth and no expensive wars that break the budget….