Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Mary Mitchell, Racist Dog Whistles and Telepathic Slur Hurlers!

Chicago Sun Times columnist Mary Mitchell is a mope* - Mary mopes melancholy mad on race (100%) - whitey is bad. Jesus, I hate Whitey too, Mary -Whitey, Gilbert, Beaver, Larry Mondello. You see, it is really hard to take a serious look at race with Mary Mitchell around. Mary Mitchell has devalued race coinage. Plugged nickel journalism.


During the showdown over healthcare reform, some of the members of the Tea Party took off their masks.

Many African Americans had already suspected some of these people are more opposed to the skin color of the man in the White House than they were to the president's political ideology.So blacks were not surprised that the health-care debate went from fear-mongering to blatant obstinacy.

But this is 2010.

We have a black first family.

It was frightening to see the racist behavior -- which we thought was buried -- resurrected during this contentious battle.

Before the critical vote, House Democrats were heckled, cursed and spit on by people who were opposed to the legislation that will reform the country's health system.

Racist Tea Party Members must have been using Racist Dog Whistles and applied the standard White Racist Mental Telepathic Slur Hurl, because there is no empirical evidence whatsoever ( sound bytes/cellphone recordings/first hand accounts/police records of arrests & etc.).

Lost amid the feeding frenzy were a few simple questions that wouldn’t likely have eluded the members of a Basic Reporting class—namely:

1.Other than the claims of a few Congressmen, all from the same party and all on the receiving end of the Tea Party protests, what incontrovertible evidence do we have that any demonstrators yelled racist or anti-gay slurs?
2.Even if we can prove that one or more people in the crowd screamed such epithets, how do we know they had anything to do with the Tea Party? If they exist, has even one of them been identified? Isn’t it also possible, given the white-hot nature of the ObamaCare controversy, that protesters in favor of the bill infiltrated the crowd and shouted slurs in a Saul Alinsky-style attempt to stigmatize the Tea Party?
3.Even if we can prove that several Tea Party protesters yelled slurs, why do the actions of a few members speak for the motives of thousands more, not to mention the movement itself?
Why indeed, especially when the MSM’s First Rule of Covering Islamic Terrorism is that the actions of a few extremists never define the group as a whole?

Moreover, a YouTube video contains no apparent evidence of racial epithets aimed at the black Congressmen as they walk through a throng of Tea Party protesters. In another video of the same event, posted on Politico, columnist Ben Smith asserts that “it sounds like you can hear the n-word at the 9-second mark…though it’s not totally clear.” But even if it were clear, that still wouldn’t answer the question of who said it, which side (if any) he represents, and why we should define an entire movement or political party by the actions of one individual.
Then there’s the matter of an arrest that apparently never was. The Associated Press quoted a Cleaver staffer as saying the man who spat on the legislator was arrested, but as even The Huffington Post admits, Capitol Police say no such arrest occurred.

Unfortunately—or rather, fortunately for the mainstream media and Democrats (pardon the redundancy)—leaders of both the Republican Party and the Tea Party took the bait and did a spot-on impression of the cow in “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” that actually wanted to be eaten. In so doing, they ignored the wry science fiction book’s key advice: “Don’t panic.”

Rather than coolly put off the hostile media by declining comment until the entire story (or non-story) came out, Republicans such as RNC Chairman Michael Steele and House Minority Leader John Boehner, as well as a Tea Party Express coordinator, were quick to employ terms like “reprehensible” and “isolated” and “not a reflection of the movement” in major media interviews.

But to condemn is to confirm.
Keep Mope Alive, Mary!

mope intr.v. moped, mop·ing, mopes
a. To be gloomy or dejected.
b. To brood or sulk. See Synonyms at brood.
2. To move in a leisurely or aimless manner; dawdle.
1. A person given to gloomy or dejected moods.
2. mopes Low spirits; the blues. Often used with the.




Dominick O Maolain said...

You may be overstating your case a little bit, saying that there is NO empirical evidence of these events.

Minority Leader John Boehmer, has made affirmative statements to the effect that such events did in fact occur and publicly dissociating himself from them. The RNC chief himself denounced the behaviour, and acknowledged that it came from the ranks of the protesters even if it does not reflect the official position of the leadership.



Passion is great. But a little caution, too.

pathickey said...

Mayhaps. Far less 'over stated' than t'other.

Dominick O Maolain said...

Fair play.

But leaving aside for the moment the release of the full, complete unabridged saga of what some handful of lone individuals may have thoughtlessly said or done at the protests, I'm not clear why the story would deserve your attention.

You seem to have a really good grasp for graphic design. Nice set up. I've just started a blog and am finding it very difficult to come up with an acceptable layout.

But why did you think that particular story was so important?

pathickey said...

Thanks Dominick,

I am merely the voice of helot - the working stiff voiceless - and I get up at 4AM - this blog is practice for my writing.

As to my sense of design - you are way too kind. My artistic sensibilities, in words of my late artist wife Mary, died at the doorstep of the guy who did Dogs Playing Pool and Poker.