Advice Goddess Blog
« Previous | Home | Next »

Republican Moron Needs A Vocabulary Lesson
Patrick points to James Evans, head of the Republican party in Utah, who also happens to be a black man, mistakenly getting his panties in a wad at Salt Lake City mayor Rocky Anderson's use of the word "slavish":

"I have a basic right to be offended, when I'm referred to with a slave reference."

Um, but you weren't, nimnuts. The quote was that you show:

"...slavish, blind obedience and deference to a dishonest, war-mongering, human rights violating president."

Which you most likely do.

As Patrick posted in my earlier link to Anderson's amazing speech:

Well, holy hypersensitivity, Batman! Or perhaps this is a lame tactic to distract from the real issue. Rocky Anderson, however, is not buying, calling it "absolutely outrageous and despicable of Mr. Evans to make that accusation."

I couldn't agree more. He could have just as easily described a white man having slavish devotion to the president.

Yes, and a white man (or a person of whatever color) who's intellectually honest and/or intelligent enough to understand the meaning of the word wouldn't have complained.

What do you think? Is Evans 1. that dumb, or 2. that desperate?

Posted by aalkon at September 3, 2006 11:35 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.advicegoddess.com/mt4/mt-tb.cgi/1649

Comments

The Goddess writes:

What do you think? Is Evans 1. that dumb, or 2. that desperate?

I'd go with 2. If it were anything else, then he should have pointed out that he was offended and why, then with class and dignity addressed the main thrust of Anderson's speech. Since he's avoiding the main issue, which is his servile and sycophantic inability to disagree with anything this president does, I can only conclude that this is a desperate and rather transparent ploy. I would still think he's Cochranizing the debate for perceiving racial slurs where none were made, but at the very least he wouldn't exercise his "basic right to be offended" by avoiding the issue.

I also called Mayor Anderson's office (they even have a special mailbox for responses regarding the speech we're discussing), and I complimented him on his masterful speech and his able and capable defense against Evans' charges.

I also told him that if he wanted to make a run for the White House, he's got my vote. I promised I would even forgive Utah for giving us Orrin Hatch.

Posted by: Patrick at September 3, 2006 3:26 AM

It's also right out of the current Republican playbook: use any out-of-context comment or criticism of politics/policies of a person of color to try and paint the Democratic party as racist.

Posted by: deja pseu at September 3, 2006 7:04 AM

Evans is just opportunistic. And as Patrick writes, his not denouncing the main argument of Anderson's speech is reinforcing it. He just brought publicity on himself- and on Anderson.

Posted by: LA Frog at September 3, 2006 9:34 AM

> right out of the current Republican
> playbook

Do you seriously believe that opportunism is a temporary and right-wing phenomenon? Have you never seen it practiced by anyone else, or anyone earlier than the current hour? Excepting this fellow, I mean...

"Cochranizing" is the perfect word. But the first shallow gasp for air for by any political enterprise is an expedience... "Will they have the balls to call my bluff?"

Posted by: Crid at September 3, 2006 9:42 AM

The Democrats haven't been clever enough to be opportunistic...for years. And, actually, I don't think they reach this level of opportunism. There's something especially nefarious and propagandistic about the Republicans. Look at them bringing Clinton down for his sex life. Who cares. Compared to the lies that got us into Iraq, doesn't that start to seem silly -- even to the most died-in-the-wool fundie?

Posted by: Amy Alkon at September 3, 2006 9:44 AM

Believing that Americans can be manipulated through dishonesty flatters the Democratic heart in two ways:

1. They can pretend they haven't been rejected. They're like a teenage boy who can't understand why the prom queen doesn't like "nice" guys such has himself. (Of course nice guys aren't especially nice, they're just milquetoast.) It's easier to pretend girls are cruelly deceived by the football players' height, dynamism, comfort and directness.

2. If gives them hope that through some sort of mechanical adjustment to their rhetoric, they can recover the lead in national politics. Specifically, it authorizes fibbing. 'We can oversimplify and cheat meanings and gloss the history all we want, because Bush *lied*!'

But Kerry was defeated long after the "Mission Accomplished" and "Bush Lied" arguments had been made. If Dems want to double down on them now, I'm sure Mr. Rove would be OK with it.

Hitchens last month: "The United States is in Iraq for its own interests, to ensure that a major state with a chokehold on a main waterway of the global economy is not run by a barbaric crime family or by its fundamentalist former allies and would-be successors. But it is also there to release, and not repress, the numberless latent grievances of Iraqi society. And—something surprisingly forgotten by many who fetishize the United Nations—it is there under a UN mandate for the democratization and reconstruction of the country."

Remember, the USA & CIA materially assisted Saddam throughout his rise to power: This was always our problem.

Also, Clinton wasn't 'brought down'.

Posted by: Crid at September 3, 2006 11:30 AM

"There's something especially nefarious and propagandistic about the Republicans."

Yes, and that's what makes them so damn effective. Again, where are the Democrats? We're nine weeks from a particularly important election, and I don't hear much from them [apart from the unusal Anderson]. But I hear a lot of noise from the GOP.

I don't think it's just lack of exposure in the media, because the latter have been turning their coats lately. I hate to think/write this, but if the Dems lose in November, they will have deserved it.

Posted by: LA Frog at September 3, 2006 11:36 AM

Crid: Hitchens used to be a smart pundit, but he's gone cuckoo since he lost a dear friend on 9/11. Though I empathize with him, and denounce 9/11 forcefully, his fundanut rambles have completely undermined his credibility.

Posted by: LA Frog at September 3, 2006 11:44 AM

Thanks for posting that, LA Frog. I didn't know. I've been puzzled for quite some time at how he seems to be so unhinged in his defense of the Iraq campaign.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at September 3, 2006 11:49 AM

> that's what makes them so
> damn effective

See #2, above. 'The problem isn't that I spend all my time building model airplanes and, um, 'watching TV' alone in my room, instead of challenging myself and learning how to deal with others on the football field... The problem is pretty girls are stupid! Yeah! Yeah, they're stupid, so I have to learn to tell the perfect lies!'

> if the Dems lose in November,
> they will have deserved it.

They've earned it each time.

> Though I empathize

You have a feminine fascination with interiors.

> fundanut rambles

If secular thinking has stronger champion, share his name.

Posted by: Crid at September 3, 2006 11:57 AM

LA Frog:

Yes, and that's what makes them so damn effective. Again, where are the Democrats? We're nine weeks from a particularly important election, and I don't hear much from them [apart from the unusal Anderson]. But I hear a lot of noise from the GOP.

Unfortunately, the Democrats seem to be depending on Bush's unpopularity to win in November. It's a shame, really, because it doesn't matter how badly the Republicans do. If the Democrats continue to be so quiet, Republicans will continue to be elected, because people will quickly forget there's an alternative. The Democrats need to pin their hopes on something other than Bush's falling poll numbers.

Posted by: Patrick at September 3, 2006 1:20 PM

Though I don't know about Evans specifically, most conservative black commentators constantly go on and on about how blacks need to get over whining about racism, take responsibility, and pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.

His behavior here totally goes against that.

Posted by: LYT at September 4, 2006 2:29 PM

expedience is job one.

Posted by: crid at September 4, 2006 5:07 PM

How 'bout the guy who resigned a few years ago because of all the hoopla that arose when he said that the mayor's office was being "niggardly" with their funds. People are f'ing idiots.

Posted by: Anne at September 5, 2006 11:35 AM

The man you're referring to (in sexticate) is David Howard, who was Head of the Office of Public Advocate for the mayor of D.C., Anthony Williams. Eventually, due to the public flak that arose from his use of a perfectly legitimate English word, he resigned. As Tony Snow would say, he was pressured into resigning by people who "actually demanded that he apologize for their ignorance."

The story has something of a happy ending, however. The Mayor asked Howard to rescind his resignation, and he rejoined the staff, albeit in another position.

For the record, the word "niggard" has absolutely nothing to do with the word "nigger," either in origin or in meaning. The word "niggard" is derived from the Swedish "nygg" and it means "miserly." The word "niggard" also antedates "nigger" by a good 200 years.

Posted by: Patrick at September 6, 2006 2:15 AM

Duplicate posts removed.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at September 6, 2006 6:53 AM

Leave a comment