It's worth repeating: the far left did.
In its most virulent forms, weaponized racism relies on rhetorical self-indulgences by the far left wherein they entitle themselves to various sophistic means by which they never need provide any actual evidence.
Instead of offering actual evidence of racism, Dyson instead proposes that he can identify "code words" -- coded racism.
Moreover, when Breitbart points out that Limbaugh was a staunch defender of Justice Clarence Thomas, Maher insists that Thomas doesn't represtent "95%" of black people. Dyson objects to Breitbart envoking the "black studies crowd" by referring to it as coded racism.
Dyson seems rather desperate to cut off Breitbart's point at the knees, and with reason: in order to make his argument, Dyson relies on a collectivized notion of race, with a political agenda attached to it.
Dyson further suggests that white supremacy can inhabit black skin -- further inferring that Thomas is such a case.
In other words, because Thomas doesn't share the political agenda championed by the far left -- including, frankly, many X-studies professors of various sorts (black studies, women's studies, etc) -- it's inferred that he, as a black man, is a white supremacist.
Of course, what Dyson is all but outwardly accusing Thomas of is perhaps the most damaging breed of racism -- racism against one's own race. And, just as with his "coded racism", Dyson need not offer any actual evidence outside of Thomas' disagreement with a specific political agenda.
Which, conveniently, will always be their political agenda.
In fact, Dyson's allegations of "coded racism" actually allows him to take any statement he believes he can twist into inferring a racist statement and use it as de facto evidence of racism.
For example, Dyson has entitled himself to the privilege to twist any criticism of President Barack Obama -- an individual black man -- into a broader racist meme in which one criticizes Obama not because there's anything wrong with his policies, but rather because they can't stand to see a black man in charge.
Where Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas -- clearly "running things" as a black male -- falls into this is anyone's guess.
Then, quite comically, as Breitbart gets set to rebut, it's Michael Eric Dyson -- a guest on the show, not a producer, or even its host -- who says "we're out of time".
Naturally, there's a few things that Dyson and Maher wouldn't want Breitbart to bring up -- that Limbaugh's McNabb comments were used out-of-context on numerous occasions, that former black NFL player Eugene “Mercury” Morris would defend Limbaugh on another such occasion, and that Limbaugh's infamous "slavery" comments were wholly fabricated.
There's a reasonw why Dyson wouldn't want such facts to see the light of day: as a black man with a specific far-left-wing political agenda, Dyson has learned as well as anyone that racism is an extremely convenient political accusation. As such, it's individuals like Dyson who have participated in the weaponization of racism -- all in the name of advancing said specific agenda.
The cynicism people like Dyson are breeding on the topic of racism is dangerous and socially irresponsible.
It's to the great credit of western society that we have come to understand the civic threat posed by racism, even if we have yet to fully conquer it. It's to the great discredit of people like Bill Maher, Michael Eric Dyson and Spencer Ackerman that they have decided to risk undermining the western public's understanding of racism by sewing such cynicism.
If they legitimately cared about the topic of racism at all, they would be ashamed of themselves. Of course, that brings one back to a very, very big "if" -- and all the available evidence demonstrates that they really don't care about it at all: they only care about racism so far as they can ideoligically benefit from it.