The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Busted: Why Is LGF’s Charles Johnson Now Embracing Louis Farrakhan?

Posted on | March 11, 2012 | 46 Comments

When Charles Johnson went wacko and began purging commenters at his Little Green Footballs blog, he purged some of the most clever “Lizards” whose participation had once made LGF a must-read for many. Among the purged were those who formed Diary of Daedalus and The Blogmocracy, which today join forces to expose how CJ’s pro-Obama turn now requires him to become an apologist for the Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan:

“He also has a strong message of responsibility and self-reliance for young African Americans, and that is why [critical race theory proponent Professor Derrick] Bell described him as a hero.”


“Farrakhan does have a positive, empowering component to his message.”

Well . . . OK. Except that in 2007, as the ex-Lizards demonstrate, Johnson condemned the Nation of Islam as “Farrakhan’s hate group.”

What explains this otherwise mysterious turn in Johnson’s view of Farrakhan and NOI? The simplest explanation is that four years ago, LGF was a conservative blog and CJ was expressing views shared by conservatives. Now, LGF is a left-wing site and thus Charles is required — as part of a general effort to defend the Democratic Party — to make excuses for President Obama’s association with Professor Bell, whose praise of Farrakhan is a matter of record. (Blame those “Jewish neoconservative racists“!)

So what Johnson once condemned as a “hate group” must now be praised for its leader’s “positive, empowering . . . message.”

At the time he publicly “parted ways with the Right” in November 2009, Charles Johnson made a big deal of his repugnance at being associated with various unsavory persons, groups and ideas. Yet you see that the logic of his politics now compel Johnson to defend Farrakhan — whom he formerly denounced in Oct0ber 2007, which was about the same time he was beginning his attacks on Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs for supposedly allying herself with unsavory elements in the European counter-jihad movement.

What happened? It’s hard to say, but when I saw the giant compilation of Johnson’s comments about Farrakhan over the years, I noticed something interesting: On April 29, 2008, CJ wrote indignantly that Obama must have known that Rev. Jeremiah Wright “traveled to Libya with Louis Farrakhan and met Muammar Gaddafi.”

However, less than five weeks later, when discussing a photo showing Michelle Obama with Farrakhan’s wife, Johnson replied to Zombie that this was “a big nothing . . . Eh.”

A big nothing? Really, Charles?

Considering how much hell you raised about Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer attending the Brussels conference with figures you deemed disreputable, how about a little consistency in regard to your guilt-by-association games? And now that you find yourself defending Farrakhan in order to defend Obama’s association with Derrick Bell, don’t you see how stupid that whole game is?

Never mind that now. My point is that you can see in this example a clear demonstration of just how quickly CJ’s opinions shifted: In April 2008, evidence of a Farrakhan connection to Obama was something Johnson took seriously. By June 2008, he dismissed similar evidence as “a big nothing.”

Thanks to The Blogmocracy and Diary of Daedalus for bringing these interesting facts about Jazzy McBikeshorts to light.

UPDATE: After all the unwarranted cruelty he dished out on Geller — and me, and Jim Hoft, and Ace of Spades, and everybody else who called him out on it — now Jazzy McBikeshorts wants to complain that he wasn’t quoted accurately:


46 Responses to “Busted: Why Is LGF’s Charles Johnson Now Embracing Louis Farrakhan?”

  1. MrPaulRevere
    March 11th, 2012 @ 7:34 pm

    Your humble correspondent just doing what I can to bust the stupid, the liars, the phonies and people of low character.

  2. King Shamus
    March 11th, 2012 @ 7:37 pm

    I still don’t know how CJ went soooooo far off the rails.  I was never a huge fan, but I’d go to LGF every once in a while.  It seemed like he mutated from basically conservative to hard left in an instant.

    But it’s even goofieer than that.  LGF went from a right-leaning anti-jihadist site to a webpage devoted almost exclusively to pissing on his former friends.  One minute he was cool with most people in the conservative movement, the next minute he was tripping over his ponytail to call everyone in the Right a ‘racist’.

    I just never really figured out a person could turn so quickly and so vehemently against everything he once stood for.

  3. Orde
    March 11th, 2012 @ 7:37 pm

    He is consistently inconsistent (as if his archives do not exist for all to see)  and has given every indication of having had a  breakdown.

  4. Rose
    March 11th, 2012 @ 7:46 pm

    There’s only ONE logical explanation. Green, paper, ex-presidents. Well, ok, and insanity. He’s a “Totalitarian freak.”

  5. robertstacymccain
    March 11th, 2012 @ 7:56 pm

    In a word: Narcissism.

    Other people started succeeding in a field where he had once been near the pinnacle of influence. CJ felt cheated, so he began lashing out at scapegoats.

  6. MrPaulRevere
    March 11th, 2012 @ 8:01 pm

    I think thats spot on. Now compare his reaction in that situation to that of Andrew Breitbart, who celebrated the success of others, had a good time doing it and made himself wealthy and famous in the process.

  7. Modern Comments
    March 11th, 2012 @ 8:14 pm

     Yeah, that’s my thing.  When I became a conservative, the process took a long time before I completely eschewed liberalism.  It wasn’t like one day I woke up and was WHAM! conservative.

    This whole LGF thing baffles me.  Especially since he was so conservative before.  What the heck happened?

  8. smitty
    March 11th, 2012 @ 8:30 pm

    I’m figuring money or madness.

  9. smitty
    March 11th, 2012 @ 8:30 pm

    Whoops, should have read your comment before saying essentially the same thing above.

  10. Adjoran
    March 11th, 2012 @ 9:02 pm

    I don’t think CJ’s meltdown was for a financial motive.  He impressed me as the sort who felt the money would come in because of who he was and how wonderfully brilliant he was, no matter what subjects he covered.

    Remember, even in his conservative days he was very hostile to religion, especially the religious right and any hint of creationism or intelligent design would make him go ballistic.  And he started banning people for disagreeing around then, too.

    For whatever reason, once he had decided all the European resistance to radical islamism was from neo-nazi groups (odd, since the Nazis and muslims were solid allies in WWII and Mein Kampf is still a big seller in the Arab world), he found he was labeling anyone who agreed with any of those stances (against radicals, sharia, etc.) had to be racist.
    Well, if you’re going to be screaming “racist!” all the time, you can’t very well be conservative.  So he flipped.  I think he honestly believed everyone else would flip with him, due to his personal awesomeness.  When we didn’t because he isn’t, he struck back, and he’s still flailing at his enemies today – although instead of being in the top 40 of blogs, he’s around 93,000 or so with no bullet.

  11. Bunk X
    March 11th, 2012 @ 9:07 pm

     You can’t buy your way into sanity.

  12. M. Thompson
    March 11th, 2012 @ 9:38 pm

    Used to read LGF daily, but never commented.  When he started attacking people for guilt by association, I started to stop.  Perhaps he’ll find out that being friendless sucks.

    I doubt it, though.

  13. King Shamus
    March 11th, 2012 @ 9:50 pm

    See, then his conservatives ideals were awfully convenient.

    I get ambition.  I get jealousy.  But if you’re right–and I think you are–then CJ takes that shit to a whole ‘nother level of douchebaggery.

  14. Jacobus
    March 11th, 2012 @ 9:51 pm

    I think you’re absolutely right Robert, but with one more element in the
    mix – his tendency to be a control freak.  Check out the bio (near the
    bottom) of the first column that describes Charles in 1986.

  15. JeffS
    March 11th, 2012 @ 10:27 pm

     More likely, CJ couldn’t score with any conservative chicks.  They’re far more choosy. 

  16. Skul
    March 11th, 2012 @ 10:29 pm

    The porky pedal-pumping pundit does not like having his pigtails dipped in ink.

  17. The Osprey
    March 11th, 2012 @ 11:17 pm

    There are any number of things that could have been resposible for Chucklebuck’s breakdown…the failure of his business venture with his brother…a tragic bicycle accident which lead to bloating and irritability from overperscription of Prednisone, the death of his mother, his failure at partnership with Pajama’s Media,  etc. etc. etc….  all I know is, about 2007 the guy began to become seriously whacko.  He really became unhinged when Pam Geller and Robert Spencer  started engaging the European Anti-Jihad. It really shocked me the depth of his hostility toward them over that.  

  18. The Heartlander
    March 12th, 2012 @ 12:06 am

     I didn’t know about the things in his past you just mentioned. Those go a LONG way toward explaining things. Sometimes when too much loss/tragedy hits a person in too short a time interval, they just crack.

  19. AngelaTC
    March 12th, 2012 @ 12:07 am

    What I can’t figure out is why he rates so many mentions here.  Are you two the only guys still reading him, or what?

  20. MrPaulRevere
    March 12th, 2012 @ 12:19 am

    Breitbart’s enduring legacy is that he taught us menadacious buffoons need to be exposed whenever they spout such rubbish. No quarter, not now not ever.

  21. Jack Reno
    March 12th, 2012 @ 2:24 am

    “Farrakhan does have a positive, empowering component to his message.”
    The only empowering component of Farakhan’s message to Johnson would be Farakhan’s choad.

  22. Jack Reno
    March 12th, 2012 @ 2:26 am

    “I get ambition.  I get jealousy.  But if you’re right–and I think you are–then CJ takes that shit to a whole ‘nother level of douchebaggery.”

    Once you get the long, lingering aftereffects of amphetamine addiction you get it all.

  23. It Made Me Laugh « Tacky Raccoons
    March 12th, 2012 @ 3:06 am

    […] can’t explain it all here, but it has to do with Andrew Breitbart, this, and some other things I am involved with elsewhere just for […]

  24. Adjoran
    March 12th, 2012 @ 3:26 am

     Unfortunately, CJ’s take on Farrakhan precisely mirrors that of the MSM – they acknowledge his wacko anti-Semitic and racist views, then always point out his “positive message of accountability” as if there are good ways to hate Jews and whites.

  25. Adjoran
    March 12th, 2012 @ 3:33 am

    Some of it is akin to the inability to turn away from a train wreck.  And people have long shown fascination with the archetypical character who rises from rags to riches, only to destroy his own success with what Poe termed “the Imp of the Perverse,” throwing it all away for nothing.

    The desperate attempts of a fallen idol to cling onto relevance is likewise worthy of pitying observation.

    Schadenfreude is in there a bit, as well, just so CJ can point out the Nazis spoke German, too.

  26. Winston
    March 12th, 2012 @ 4:15 am

    Chuck Johnson is a douchebag brain-dead liberal.

  27. flipping website
    March 12th, 2012 @ 4:30 am

    so many mentions here. geezzz

  28. K-Bob
    March 12th, 2012 @ 5:35 am

     Bad dog.  No bullet.

    That recap is the way I remember it, too.  I used to post links there, and comment.  He did a great job programming the site, for the time.

    Stacy captured the essence of the “flipped perspective.” It’s like what they call a “phase change” in physics and process theory.  Once the perspective flips, a cascade of things goes with it.  Next CJ will be claiming he always was for communism, just not the Soviet version. Or something.

  29. K-Bob
    March 12th, 2012 @ 5:37 am

     I believe we cannot rule out mental illness, or at least, some “condition” that he labors under.

  30. K-Bob
    March 12th, 2012 @ 7:02 am

     Some people get fixated on a concept.  For example, a lot of people on the right who want Santorum to lose seem awfully fixated on his endorsement of Arlin Specter.  It’s like a monomania, where they are determined that he cannot possibly be a conservative at all, just for that one thing.

    Now imagine that fixation amplified by a potential challenge to your intellect, however small.  To the insecure types, suddenly the challengers must be defeated, in order to regain their perceived “standing.”

    That’s where CJ is now.  If it gets worse, he becomes Olbermann.

  31. Bob Belvedere
    March 12th, 2012 @ 7:27 am

    ‘Vaulting Ambition’ always sells.

  32. Charles Johnson
    March 12th, 2012 @ 12:15 pm
  33. Charles Johnson
    March 12th, 2012 @ 12:16 pm
  34. andycanuck
    March 12th, 2012 @ 12:28 pm

    It’s because Chuck is being influenced by numerology especially when Chuck’s number ends up being zero no matter what numeric values you assign to the letters of his name.

  35. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    March 12th, 2012 @ 1:56 pm
  36. Bunk X
    March 12th, 2012 @ 4:40 pm
  37. Bunk X
    March 12th, 2012 @ 4:43 pm

     spam link

  38. firefirefire
    March 13th, 2012 @ 10:15 am

    Charles Who?

  39. SamIam9
    March 13th, 2012 @ 10:08 pm

    I go with alien or demonic possession.

  40. Kranky One
    March 13th, 2012 @ 10:25 pm

    The enema of my enema is … what?

  41. Lewis
    March 14th, 2012 @ 12:20 am

    LGF was an almost everyday read for me from mid 2003 ’til 2005.  He didn’t all of a sudden go nuts in 2009, or even in 2008.  His madness had been growing since at least 2007, 2006 probably even.  Diary of Daedalus (linked above) is a good resource to chart his descent into madness; you might also consider Googling for “LGF Banned and Blocked” (full disclosure: I get a brief mention somewhere in there, if you look hard enough).

  42. Brian Cates
    March 14th, 2012 @ 12:57 am

    I posted there as ‘manofaiki’ from around 2003-2007 when I had my ass unceremoniously banned for disagreeing with Chuckles about evolution.  I was ready to go by then anyway because it was becoming apparent the guy can’t handle people disagreeing with him.  He wouldn’t even attempt to argue his position many times, it was ‘oh you disagree? BANNED!’  That’s when a lot of people up and left.  

  43. Brian Cates
    March 14th, 2012 @ 12:58 am

    So you won’t let anybody who disagrees with you post on your own site, but you’ll come over here to snark at them?  You’re a loser, Charles.  

  44. Pervygrin
    March 14th, 2012 @ 3:46 pm

    I once sent him an email saying that while he clearly stated  his reasons for parting ways with the right, he never explained why he was now cozying up to the left that he used to excoriate.  So I asked him why he did that.  Needless to say, he did not respond.

  45. Mr. C
    March 15th, 2012 @ 5:54 am

    Fuck you, Charles.

  46. Dracon
    March 16th, 2012 @ 9:34 am

    Just for the general point, and if you want to make this little bastard scream, post this large and in capitals at the top: Charles Johnson is praising the man who ordered Malcolm X killed.

      Got that?  Want me to say it again?  Charles Johnson is praising the man who suborned the murder of one of black America’s moral heroes. 

      Do you care to imagine what this guy would say if it were someone else?