|
|
|
March 21, 2010
An "elderly white man" who sounds just like an anonymous commenter....
Yesterday there was quite an uproar over the alleged use of the N-word by Tea Party demonstrators in front of black congressional representatives. This morning I see (via Glenn Reynolds) that Dana Loesch has posted a video of the "incident" which debunks the claim that the N-word was used. (Anyone want to bet whether there will be a retraction?) There's a similar claim (now all over the internet) that an unknown person shouted "Barney, you faggot!" at Barney Frank as he was leaving his office. Naturally, the assumption is being made that this is true, and that the insult came from a Tea Party supporter. I don't know whether anyone has a video showing Barney Frank leaving the building, but that seems to be the only way to debunk anything these days. It is very hard to prove that someone didn't say something. We have only the word of Brian Beutler. Here is his actual account at TPM: ...Early this afternoon, standing outside a Democratic whip meeting in the Longworth House office building, I watched Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) make his way out the door, en route to the neighboring Rayburn building. As he rounded the corner toward the exit, wading through a huge crowd of tea partiers and other health care protesters, an elderly white man screamed "Barney, you faggot"--a line that caused dozens of his confederates to erupt in laughter.Hmmm.... It sounds to me as if there would be a video of the entire incident somewhere. I'd like to see it. The F-word slur draws almost 1400 Google hits so far. Isn't it worth verifying whether this was actually said by a genuine Tea Party demonstrator before indicting the entire Tea Party movement? Is it enough merely to say he's an old white guy? Is Bill Ayers an old white guy too? Regardless of who he is or whether this even happened, over at Salon, the remark has been transformed from a remark by an old white guy into "chants" from a crowd: Also today, according to Brian Beutler of TPM.com, Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA), as he was leaving the Rayburn building, was hit with chants of "Barney you faggot."Anyway, I'm skeptical. This is not to accuse Brian Beutler of lying, because he might be accurately repeating what he heard, but that does not shed any light on whether the old white guy was with the Tea Party movement or whether he was some sort of Fred Phelps style agent provocateur. The only way to know what was said and who he was would be to see some video, and considering the omnipresence of cameras these days, it would not surprise me if the footage of Barney Frank leaving his office turns up. And if we assume that this happened, how on earth is that an indictment of the thousands of decent, ordinary Americans who showed up to protest Obamacare? Is it fair to call them Ku Klux Klanners and bigoted homophobes on the basis of a report that someone said something? Does anyone realize how easy it would be for anyone to just show up and yell "FAGGOT"? On what basis can an assumption be automatically made that this person was a Tea Partier? To illustrate, check out some of these comments to a post titled Teabaggers: "Barney, You Faggot!". Someone named "Tea" says: Tea [http://Bagger] replies:Then there's a comment from "somehowiblamethejews": To be fair, Barney Frank is a faggot.Are these two commenters (and others like them) to be considered "real" Tea Partiers? I don't think they are, but there is no more way to know who they are and what their backgrounds might be than to know the identity and background of the alleged "elderly white man." I am skeptical, and I'll believe it when I see the video. I think that ought to be the rule in cases like this. MORE: Via Dr. Helen, Tea Party activist Jim Hoft reviewed the record and says, No one screamed "n***er." No one screamed "f*ggot." No one was spit on.I'm not holding my breath. AND MORE: Days later, and still no video of this alleged incident has turned up. I think this comment pretty well nails it: I'll say it in this one too. there are video cameras all over these protests all the time, in the hands of both liberal agitators and spies, and the tea partyers themselves. So where is the evidence? Liberal spies are sure to record all of the misspellings on the signs, but when some thing this huge happens, suddenly there are no video cameras around?Odd, isn't it? MORE: My thanks to Sean Kinsell for the link! Sean notes that "Faggot is a short, sharp word that any number of noises at a lively protest might sound like," and adds, How much can we generalize from this, even if it turns out to be true? Given Frank's history of capitalizing on any excuse to feel put upon, it seems wise to reserve judgment.Show me the video. posted by Eric on 03.21.10 at 01:03 PM
Comments
Ciotog17, What exactly do you object to my Stalinist friend? The fact that the Teabagger in question did not use the "N" word? Are you saying that in the name of civility he should have? But I will go along with your theme of civility. I denounce you in the name of our progressive Democrat President Woodrow Wilson who brought Jim Crow to the Federal Government as a courtesy to the KKK who he supported and who supported him. Or I could denounce you in the name of the Republicans in Congress who voted for the Civil Rights act by a greater % than the Democrats of that Era did. Or I could denounce you in the name of Lincoln who freed the Southern Slaves. And in the name of the Republican Party of that era which was forced out of the South by the Democrat's thug Army, the KKK. So in the name of libertarian Americans (who I do not speak for) I have given you choices. Because libertarians believe in choice. What will it be? M. Simon · March 21, 2010 05:56 PM The Pope chanted it. He's an old white guy, and the most likely suspect if you ask me. rhhardin · March 21, 2010 06:10 PM Perhaps an eye-roll, or a sardonic retort, may be among the best ways to respond to the irony of ciotog17's 'remarks'. For someone on the 'left' to complain about a "low level of civility" requires more chutzpa than most people can imagine. As for the incident in question: the Tea Party is a large, wide-tent, movement. There are likely to be a very few who would derisively yell "faggot" at Mr. Frank, just as there are some on the anti-Tea-Party side who would use epithets like "racist" or "homophobic" or "goose-stepping" to label Tea Partiers, or who would insult their opponents' intellect or reputation. My observation is that the percentage of the former in the Tea Party movement is both much smaller than the percentage of the latter among anti-Tea-Party types, and that they also are less well tolerated by their compadres. CBI · March 21, 2010 06:10 PM In all of this, the admission that the Capitol police were "overwhelmed" by the protestors warms me to the cockles of my heart. Phelps · March 21, 2010 10:09 PM Not Stalinist my friends. Just anti-fascist. I choose, since I have free choice, to stand with Barack Hussein Obama, the only true American president, being the embodiment of a melange of all our ancestors, from a plethora of American heritages, the proverbial melting pot incarnate, who has said that the only tent that matters, the tent of our glorious American democracy, is much bigger than the tattered and flyspecked Tea Party tent you claim is so vast, because the American tent has room for black people and white people, Hispanics and Asians, native Americans and immigrants, people of all genders, sexual persuasions, religions, irreligiosity, political opinions and whatever it is that Sarah Palin has that corresponds to political opinions. I had the misfortune of being in Washington D.C. for the Sept. 12 rally. (I came to pay my respects on 9/11 at the Pentagon). I could not avoid the Teabaggers; they were camped outside my hotel, littering. Those who were not ovine or bitter seemed like LaRouchies or Ku Kluxers without sheets to me. Frankly, I didn't much like them in their former guises as LaRouchies or KKKers, so just hanging Lipton bags from their hats wasn't going to smarten up their appearance much as far as I am concerned. (Note to Teabaggers: Read your history. The original Boston Tea Party was a protest AGAINST tea importation duties, not a chance to celebrate the drinking of tea, so you might want to ixnay on the eabagtays). Everybody knows that just because Michael Steele is a Republican, that doesn't mean the Republicans welcome black people or advocate for them. To the contrary! Ever since Nixon's "Southern Strategy", the GOP has been the party of racist oppression in this country. Show me the 12 percent (or more) of Tea Partiers who claim African American heritage, or the 20 percent of Latino heritage, or the equal amounts of membership corresponding to the nation as a whole, and I will withdraw my charges. But all I saw was a bunch of scared and ill-informed white folks mouthing inchoate deprecations and veiled threats that something would have to be taken back — by force if necessary. You can lie all you want, but you cannot change history: this is how the Nazis came to power in 1920s Germany. By God and St. Sheila Jackson Lee, it will not happen here. We can stop it: Yes we can! and yes we will! You misquote me slightly. I wrote: If the teabaggers don't wish to be tarred and feathered for their complicity in contributing to the low level of civility in the current debate, let them loudly and without DELAY excoriate the perpetrators of such vileness and start treating their political opponents with the humane decency this commenter now prays for on their behalf. Otherwise let us judge them by their works and decry them for what they are: intolerant, racist, homophobic, goosestepping fearmongers and thugs of low repute and lower intellect. [emphasis to the correct word added] Don't see a lot of excoriation of perpetrators going on here; just the same old left-bashing. The feathers arrive next week and the tar is already bubbling. Get on it, righties, or you'll own the label because you earned it. As the debate has continued, I have come to the conclusion that if the rightists want to emulate the civil disobedience of the civil rights activists of the 1960s, they must be made to suffer the consequences of their disobedience. When they break the law, they should go to jail. When they advocate treason or revolution, they should be prosecuted. When they threaten maliciousness or violence, they should be arrested. When they foment racism or sexism, they should be shouted down and called out on it. When they manufacture "liberal threats" as the Richmond police have said Eric Cantor did last week, they should be laughed at heartily. As we all did. Ciotog17 · March 29, 2010 02:41 PM "excoriate the perpetrators"? If you can show me one, I'd be the first to excoriate him. It's rather tough to "excoriate" an unidentified nameless, and possibly imaginary person, such as the "elderly white man" who could have been anyone, or no one. But anyway, I hereby excoriate the unidentified elderly white man, whether he exists or not, and whether he used the F-word or not. I suspect that's not good enough though. There's no pleasing everyone -- especially people who think that the Nazis came to power in 1920s Germany by doing what the Tea Partiers are doing, which is protesting government health care. Actually, the Nazis came to power in the 1930s, and they loved government health care. http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/national-health-care-medicine-in-germany-1918-1945/ Eric Scheie · March 29, 2010 03:58 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
March 2010
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2010
February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• Under The Spreading Chestnut Tree
• Going Galt with Rolls Royce Rice! • "Humane liberalism" that makes Vladimir Putin look kind • The final abolition of charity • Senate Operations • I demand to see the AP's list of invisible and inaudible "tea party activists"! • Local news that's not local news yet? • Left out of the framing • Emmanuel Speaks • Forces Of Drug Prohibition Won Big
Links
Site Credits
|
|
If the teabaggers don't wish to be tarred and feathered for their complicity in contributing to the low level of civility in the current debate, let them loudly and without day excoriate the perpetrators of such vileness and start treating their political opponents with the humane decency this commenter now prays for on their behalf. Otherwise let us judge them by their works and decry them for what they are: intolerant, racist, homophobic, goosestepping fearmongers and thugs of low repute and lower intellect.