Fox News Fans Get Racist in Response to Cute Video

What happens when a really cute video of a young boy complaining hilariously to his mother about getting an impending baby brother or sister goes viral on the internet? Well if that video is posted to the Fox News Facebook page, a whole bunch of people go full on racist, claiming the family must be on welfare and is taking their tax dollars by having so many children. Here’s the video:

httpv://youtu.be/hmQN95ROBcI

And here are some of the responses from Fox News viewers:

FoxNewsRacism

Reality: Both parents are in the U.S. military. And what do you wanna bet some of those racist jerks just love 19 Kids and Counting? If it was a white family in the video, not a single one of them would have jumped to the conclusion that they must be on welfare. But black = welfare in the minds of right wingers.

POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • D. C. Sessions

    Well, they’re half-right about one thing: with both parents in the military, chances are that they are on “welfare,” or at least SNAP. Most of our troops are, after all.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    Both parents are in the U.S. military.

    Which does not mean that they don’t depend on food stamps.

    Tune in next week for more News the Recruiters Won’t Tell You®!

  • Pierce R. Butler

    D.C. Sessions beat me to it @ # 1 – what can I say but, “Oh, Snap!”

  • tbp1

    Personally, I concur only to the extent that I don’t think any couple should have more than two kids, given the state of the world, even if they are as rich as Croesus. In fact, since kids of wealthy parents inevitably consume more resources, maybe even especially rich people should limit the number of offspring.

  • http://www.electricminstrel.com Brett McCoy

    How old is that kid? He’s really bright. I love it when he says “It’s exasperating!”

  • Michael Heath

    The first comment post by Donald G. Socks seems to good to be true; perhaps it’s a godwin.

    Being a weekly reader of the WSJ comment section argues against my being skeptical above. Commenters there regularly turn good news into a indictment of President Obama where they use a perjorative to reference him rather than his title and name.

  • dingojack

    MH – you mean ‘Donald G. Socks’ might be — a sock-puppet!

    Oh Noes. Tha Horrar, Tha Horrar!! eleventy-one !!

    @@

    DIngo

  • Alverant

    What are those cons complaining about? In twenty years time when they get their massive hardon for another war there will be another brown person to put into the military to treat as cannon fodder as they play armchair general while pretending they’re supporting freedom and liberty.

    /s

  • http://twitter.com/#!/TabbyLavalamp Tabby Lavalamp

    That second comment by “Donald G. Socks” is priceless, as it appears he understands she’s in the military. “Welfare/service it’s about the same.it’s still my tax payer money…screw you until she earns her own money and stops living off my dime.” Support the troops!

  • http://www.ranum.com Marcus Ranum

    Both parents are in the U.S. military.

    See?! Those people criticizing are SOFT ON TERROR.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    AND THEY TOOK THAT VIDEO ON THEIR OBAMAPHONE!!!

  • D. C. Sessions

    D.C. Sessions beat me to it @ # 1 – what can I say but, “Oh, SNAP!”

    Bolding to call attention to the awesomeness of the reply — caps because.

  • loren

    The Facebook page for “Donald G. Socks” is no longer active, but for the moment it’s still cached in Google. He lists his interests as “White People”, “Aryan Brotherhood”, and “The Confederate States of America.”

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:X1eBaRxSivoJ:https://www.facebook.com/donald.socks.3%3Fhc_location%3Dtimeline+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

  • sugarfrosted

    If they’re both in active duty they’re part of Romney’s 49%, since military members on active duty are exempt from income tax.

  • sugarfrosted

    @tbp1: One could argue that them having more kids causes their resources to be split more thus the wealthy should have more kids than anyone else.

    See also: Feudalism

  • Childermass

    One military paycheck might mean a family in poverty, but usually two does not. According to the article cited in the second comment above, they would get as new recruits $20K plus housing/food allowance. So clearly they get at least $40K plus allowance. I very much doubt that they are both new soldiers, so they are probably getting a whole lot more. So I think we can lay the idea of this being an EBT card family a rest.

    Why are right-wing fanatics so stupid to think that anyone would get a child to get welfare anyways? Even a neglectful parent probably has to spend more on their kids than welfare provides, and the evidence I see strongly suggests that the kids here are not even remotely neglected. Indeed the son is clearly bright and has a strong vocabulary for his age.

  • leni

    I love it when he says “It’s exasperating!”

    Lol me too.

    But to be honest that’s what I think every time I see the Duggars. Admittedly my reaction is way less cute than that kid’s.

  • David Eriksen

    sugarfrosted @ 14

    If they’re both in active duty they’re part of Romney’s 49%, since military members on active duty are exempt from income tax.

    Where on Earth did you get that idea? A portion of my benefits are untaxed but we’re only completely exempt when we’re in a war zone. It is highly unlikely that both of them would be deployed at the same time so at least one of them will always be paying income tax.

  • steve84

    Don’t forget the military’s socialized, government-run health care system

  • Alverant

    @sugarfrosted #15

    Not really. There comes a point in which one becomes so rich the impact of another child for the family budget to support is hardly felt. It really only matters when it comes to inheritance and the children decide that dividing Dad’s wealth N-1 ways is better than dividing it N ways. That was another problem with feudalism. There’s a reason why it starts with “feud”, a word meaning “fight”.

  • shay

    “f they’re both in active duty they’re part of Romney’s 49%, since military members on active duty are exempt from income tax.”

    Is this a recent development? Because we filed/paid taxes every year while we were still with Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children (1979-2000 for me, 1977-2003 for the spousal unit).

  • busterggi

    Hmmm… have these folks ever heard of the Duggars?

    BTW, Faux fans don’t get racist, they came that way before they found Faux.

  • http://www.facebook.com/den.wilson d.c.wilson

    Alverant@20:

    Most feudal societies didn’t divide up Dad’s wealth amongst all of his kids. Everything went to the eldest son. Since daughters were usually married off in order to form political/military alliances, younger sons were always a problem. Fortunately, the Church was happy to take them as bishops.

  • lorn

    The kids look to be clean and their clothing, and what I can see of the vehicle, looks to be in good condition. The boy seem well educated and articulate for his age and he has clearly been exposed learned discourse and language. Even if he isn’t quite old enough to use it all. My impression is the people have a decent income and are doing a pretty good job of raising healthy and happy kids. No mean feat these days.

    As far as family planning goes the kids look to be fairly well spaced with some years between them, which is smart. Three kids doesn’t seem like an egregious deviation from the two child ideal. Particularly when they are doing such a good job.