Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Bob Etheridge and the political power (or lack thereof) of a gaffe



How badly did Rep. Bob Etheridge hurt his re-election chances?

North Carolina Rep. Bob Etheridge's confrontation on a Washington street with someone trying to videotape him immediately led to speculation that the Democratic incumbent had badly jeopardized his chances of winning re-election this November.

Conservative blogs -- like Red State and National Review's The Corner -- quickly leapt on the episode to highlight the heretofore unknown candidacy of nurse Renee Ellmers.

The National Republican Congressional Committee reached out to Ellmers as well, according to a source familiar with the organization's operations.

Elmers, for her part, told the Charlotte Observer that donations from across the country had flooded into her campaign in the immediate aftermath of the video, adding that the incident "does put a whole different spectrum to who [Etheridge] is."

Maybe. But the history of political gaffes and their impact on the re-election chances of the Member of Congress involved would suggest that while Ellmers will certainly raise more money than she might otherwise have done (she had $5,462 on hand as of mid May) her chances of winning the race won't vastly improve.

The most instructive example from the recent political past is in Minnesota during the 2008 election.

Roughly two weeks before the election, Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R) appeared on MSNBC's "Hardball" and said that then Sen. Barack Obama "may have anti-American views."

A massive controversy ensued, with Democrats casting Bachmann's remarks as a tipping point for voters in her exurban Twin Cities seat. The Democratic nominee -- Elwyn Tinklenberg(!) -- raked in $2 million in the space of a week or so as Bachmann became a sort of poster girl for everything people didn't like about Republicans nationally.

Then she won. Granted, the margin -- 46 percent for Bachmann, 43 percent for Tinklenberg, 10 percent for Independent party candidate Bob Anderson -- was far from convincing. But, considering that Bachmann committed a gaffe of epic proportions two weeks before an election in which Democrats nearly ran the table nationally, the fact that she won at all was considered somewhat stunning.

Bachmann's victory serves as a reminder that context -- particularly the demographic kind -- matters. Bachmann sits in a quite conservative district; President Obama took just 45 percent of the vote while he was carrying the state with 54 percent in 2008. That meant that there was a significant enough chunk of conservative voters to stand by Bachmann no matter what she said about the President.

Ditto for the South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson (R) who caused a national controversy of his own when he shouted out "You lie!" during President Obama's address to a joint session of Congress last fall.

Immediately after the episode Democrats around the country promised that Wilson's outburst would spell his electoral doom and flooded challenger Rob Miller's (D) campaign with donations.

But, conservatives replied in kind -- sending millions in contributions to Wilson. (By mid-May, Wilson had raised $3.9 million for the campaign while Miller had collected $2.3 million -- amazing totals for a House race this far before an election.)

Lost in all the money, however, was/is the fact that Wilson's 2nd district is reliably Republican and that Wilson hasn't dipped below 63 percent in any election since winning the seat in a 2001 special election.

It's that context that should make Democrats feel better about the Etheridge aftermath.

Etheridge has held the 2nd district since 1996 and, prior to that, spent seven years as the Superintendent of Public Instruction -- a statewide post.

While his district is potentially competitive -- President George W. Bush won it by eight points in 2004 -- Etheridge has a demonstrated record of running and winning in elections good and bad for his party.

Also, even Republicans acknowledge that Ellmers is entirely unformed as a candidate -- nowhere near as developed as even Miller or Tinklenberg, who both had some campaign infrastructure to take advantage of the incumbent's slip.

The simple fact is that there are far more occasions when a gaffe slowed but did not stop an incumbent's march to re-election than those where the gaffe caused a loss. (The one notable example in the latter category is Sen. George Allen's "macaca" comment that led to a fundamental re-examining of the incumbent by the state's voters.)

It's far more likely -- at least today -- that Etheridge will fall into the bent but not broken category of political gaffesmanship.

By Chris Cillizza  |  June 15, 2010; 12:16 PM ET
Categories:  House  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama to Nevada for Harry Reid in July
Next: The sound of Sharron Angle's silence

Comments

that video is meesed up he should be fired today

Posted by: dgieseoffice | June 19, 2010 12:22 AM | Report abuse

loser dude

Posted by: dgieseoffice | June 19, 2010 12:20 AM | Report abuse

TomfromNJ1 wrote: "I have to admit that if someone shoved something in my face (and from the first close up, it seems to have been very close)"

Nice spin!

But, the video clearly shows that Etheridge was greeted politely while approaching the boys, was walking past them as he was asked "Congressman, do you fully support the Obama agenda?", and Etheridge turned back and deliberately walked directly into the camera lens, and into the face of the boy as well.

Then, Etheridge violently grabbed the camera phone out of the one boy's hand, so the other kid began taking video too, as Etheridge roughly twisted the boy's wrist, then violently grabbed him by the neck.

Anyone that has watched the videos know those are the facts, and no amount of one sided spin can or will change any of those easily visible facts.

Posted by: Just-Tex | June 17, 2010 8:54 PM | Report abuse

I have to admit that if someone shoved something in my face (and from the first close up, it seems to have been very close), I would probably have grabbed his hand also. Who knows what someone has in his hand? And there was no need for that since he clearly had an accomplice with a camera recording the whole event.

Everyone is saying Etheridge is guilty of a crime. I doubt it. Not only is he innocent until proven guilty, but the young man in question would have to complain and testify. That is not likely since he would have to identify himself. And, if he is on the stand under oath, he would HAVE to answer the question asked and not keep saying he is "doing a project." I find it very interesting that so many people think he was doing some work for a college course. Look at what he does. he clearly keeps repeating that he is doing a project. Any endeavor could be called a project. I would doubt very much that this has anything to do with any academic work.

Etheridge never asked him why he was doing this, he keeps asking "who are you?" That is not a difficult question for most of us and, I dare say, before I would answer a question, I too might want to know with whom I was speaking. But this guy keeps answering a simple "who" question with a "why" answer. Either he is not very bright ot he is trying to avoid the question.

I wonder how many of the people reading this would respond to an "attack" by putting it up on the web rather than filing a police report. No, I think these people got exactly what they wanted, but Etheridge is safe. This guy blotted out his face -- he is most unlikely to give his name much less testify.

This is not unlike the so-called "ACORN expose" where edited pictures showed one thing and left out the majority who throw the poor actors out. When added to the "phone employees" in LA, the "grass root" demonstration in FL at the vote counting in 2000, and even back to the Watergate, one sees s pattern here. It seems that the right does not think they can ever win a fair election on its merits (think I am wrong? notice how they try to make people think that our duly elected president is invalid -- not that they disagree with his views, mind you, but that he is somehoe not our real president) and so they resort to Lee Atwater tactics (and at least he had the decency to recant before he died). They have done things to keep down the vote in some Southern states and I am sure their real objection to ACORN was that these people were getting out the vote.

I hope they do press charges. I would love to have the job of cross examining this young man.

Posted by: TomfromNJ1 | June 17, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Such a violent racist partisan question, "Do you fully support the Obama agenda?"

I have never heard such a hateful question before, unless you include the Helen Thomas/Hezbollah questions she used to ask at the white house press room.

Wow.

Posted by: thelaw1 | June 17, 2010 10:03 AM | Report abuse

Yeah Chris, merely a gaffe, yup! Next time I assault someone and the police come, I will just say it is a gaffe. At this point, the cameraman could be a republican plant, it does not matter.

Why should asking a Democrat if they fully support the Obama agenda be wrong?

Posted by: thelaw1 | June 17, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

In his apology, Congressman Etheridge said, "I have and I will always work to promote a civil public discourse.” Here's a short health care townhall youtube that would seem to refute that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5-FIufRfMM

Posted by: Basil_Cocksure | June 17, 2010 2:34 AM | Report abuse

Still waiting for who the so-called students were.

Posted by: DaveMuckey
_____________________

*** Why? Their identity isn't the issue -- Etheridge's behavior is.

Whoever they were, it doesn't change the fact that a Congressman grabbed a college kid and held him against his will for several seconds ... all because the young man had the audacity to ask Etheridge how he felt about the Obama agenda.

But you and several others in here are so used to playing the game of "attack the accuser," you're missing the obvious: The Congressman had no right to lay his hands on anybody unless his life or property were being threatened.

If you have that kind of proof, by all means bring it forward, but from what I saw, I didn't find either of those boys particularly intimidating.

Posted by: UponFurtherReview | June 16, 2010 11:14 PM | Report abuse

gaffe: A clumsy social error; a faux pas, a social blunder, esp a tactless remark


assault: a violent attack, either physical or verbal

Posted by: rightklik | June 16, 2010 9:08 PM | Report abuse

Cillizza - you can't be serious. Comparing an assault by a bully Congressman to Joe Wilson's "You lie" comment (he was right). If this is the best you can do, you are not just a left wing sympathizer, but an incompetent one at that.

Posted by: tcon56ny | June 16, 2010 8:45 PM | Report abuse

For those who keep asking why the students don't come forward: PLEASE! THEY DON'T WANT THE LIBERAL MEDIA CAMPED OUT ON THEIR DOOR STEPS AND THE IRS AUDITING THEIR PARENTS!!!! I HAVE STOPPED SENDING EMAIL TO MY DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN AND NO LONGER SEND ANYTHING TO THE WHITE HOUSE. I GREW UP IN CHICAGO AND I KNOW HOW THESE CROOKS WORK. YOU WILL PAY IF YOU COME OUT AGAINST THEM. I'M NOT STUPID AND BETTER SAFE THAN SORRY. THOSE BOYS ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING.

Posted by: etshoney | June 16, 2010 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Still waiting for who the so-called students were.

Posted by: DaveMuckey | June 16, 2010 6:45 PM | Report abuse

The ability to hold in abeyance the criminal law is never a perquisite of political office in the United States. When Ms. McKinney was not charged with assaulting a peace officer, my jaw dropped. Having eluded justice, she chose not to express remorse, but ever increasing arrogance, her ego enlarging as much as her waistline. Fortunately, the voters chose to remove her from office, thereby eliminating about 500 pounds of political pork.

Posted by: Martial | June 16, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Let's see: a left-wing pub, the WaPo, writes a story about the chances of a lefty Dem who physically grabbed a teenager by the arm and then around the neck. Of course, the lefty writer talks about the instances where an incumbent makes a "gaffe" and still wins. Of course, you could lead with Virginia's George Allen losing his Senate seat by referring to a foreigner as "macaca" (monkey). No, WaPo is strictly left-wing so no objective reporting. No wonder their sister pub, Newsweek, is for sale. Wonder when the slanted coverage and falling circulation will catch up with WaPo and it will be up for sale too. Cillizza, maybe you should update your resume.

Posted by: RonKH | June 16, 2010 4:02 PM | Report abuse

An even more interesting discourse on this subject was written by an apparent ancestor of the current Chief Justice. Two paragraphs show the issues at hand:

The offense known as breach of the peace embraces a great variety of conduct destroying or menacing public order and tranquility. It includes not only violent acts but acts and words likely to produce violence in others. No one would have the hardihood to suggest that the principle of freedom of speech sanctions incitement to riot or that religious liberty connotes the privilege to exhort others to physical attack upon those belonging to another sect. When clear and present danger of riot, disorder, interference with traffic upon the public streets, or other immediate threat to public safety, peace, or order, appears, the power of the state to prevent or punish is obvious. Equally obvious is it that a state may not unduly suppress free communication of views, religious or other, under the guise of conserving desirable conditions. Here we have a situation analogous to a conviction under a statute sweeping in a great variety of conduct under a general and indefinite characterization, and leaving to the executive and judicial branches too wide a discretion in its application.

. . .

In the realm of religious faith, and in that of political belief, sharp differences arise. In both fields the tenets of one man may seem the rankest error to his neighbor. To persuade others to his own point of view, the pleader, as we know, at times, resorts to exaggeration, to vilification of men who have been, or are, prominent in church or state, and even to false statement. But the people of this nation have ordained in the light of history, that, in spite of the probability of excesses and abuses, these liberties are, in the long view, essential to enlightened opinion and right conduct on the part of the citizens of a democracy.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=310&invol=296#309

Posted by: Martial | June 16, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse

I know Bob Ethridge quite well having served with him in the NC General Assembly before he became State Superintendent. I have also watched these videos (two of them) several times and I can tell you the only way this man would have reacted in the manner I witnessed was for him to have been provoked. My inference is that as he walked up the sidewalk (looking at his facial expression and his mannerism) he knew he was walking into a "trap." Granted he could have handled the situation better, and I am certain he now knows that; however, when one is in the heat of a campaign and suspects he is walking directly into a set-up, one can momentarily lose his composure. Had the young man identified himself immediately when asked, perhaps this incident would never have happened. (After all, normally when a reporter is getting ready to ask a question with tape rolling, he indeed does identify himself and the agency he represents.) While the video you see may look bad for Bob, I can tell you beyond any doubt, he is not a bad person. Quite the contrary! He is one heck of a great guy and has served his district, his state, and his country admirably for many years. My prediction is he will win this campaign as he has so many others; and continue to do the very fine work for which he is known. Malcolm Fulcher

Posted by: mfulcher | June 15, 2010 7:06 PM | Report abuse

____________

Great guys commit crimes all the time. The key is to try this apparent assault. The students should also be subpoenaed, of course. It is possible they used "fighting words", in which case they might be liable under DC statutes. The relevant supreme court case is fascinating. Here's a superbly written paragraph:

Allowing the broadest scope to the language and purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment, it is well understood that the right of free speech is not absolute at all times and under all circumstances. 2 There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention [315 U.S. 568, 572] and punishment of which has never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem. 3 These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or 'fighting' words-those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. 4 It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality. 5 'Resort to epithets or personal abuse is not in any proper sense communication of information or opinion safeguarded by the Constitution, and its punishment as a criminal act would raise no question under that instrument.' Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 309 , 310 S., 60 S.Ct. 900, 906, 128 A.L.R. 1352.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=315&invol=568

Posted by: Martial | June 16, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Assault is a crime against the person. Representative Etheridge appears to have committed assault, a crime against the person. An apology that does not precede facing a judge is factitious. No man is above the law, not even Congressional representatives.

Posted by: Martial | June 16, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Firstly: The 2 kids' acted with deference, whilst the Congressmen acted like a thug. No matter how downplayed or spinned, it remains a physical aggression which hopefully will be fully prosecuted, and hopefully this thuggish Congressman will be subjected to the utmost severity of the law, as an example due to his unlawful and unbecoming conduct whilst being himself member of a Legislative branch of Government.
Secondly: the man is an overt "friend and supporter of Israel", an entity whose inception was by terrorism, by theft and by genocide, an entity which continues to thrive by terrorism, by theft and by genocide. Israel and its supporters are thugs. They have captured by corruption and threats most of the apparatus of power, from financial to legal, from governmental to international institutions. Supporters of "Israel" have no business to be in the US Government, as they clearly are committing treason, blatantly betray the Constitution, outrageously cause destruction and suffering. The US-America is collapsing due to the shenanigans of these pro-zionist thugs, who conducted the country out of prosperity, into wars for Israel. These thugs must be driven out of Congress manu militari if necessary, and the USA and its citizen would be well advised to urgently stop their bankrupt wars and militarized madness, dump their unsustainable support for this scourge of humanity called "Israel".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw1RNvyL3pI

Posted by: exilem57 | June 16, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Just-Tex,

RE:"Why would either of the kids do that?"

Because in the US of A that is how our justice system happens to work. Silly! I'm sure you knew that!

Accusations on the internet are not worth the electrons that they were generated on. The only way to prove if your "outrage" is fabricated or whether a real crime was committed is have your male "students" become real men and come forward to have their story tested and have an accusation sworn out. We have a justice system and we don't just string people up on edited tapes of unknown provenance just because you point out what we should see in them.

...and Yes, you feel everyone is corrupt except the mystery "students" who were so wronged they disappeared into a Breitbart edited video presentation where their faces are obscured from identification and their story starts and ends.

Let me know when you are ready to escort them to the police and I will be there for you.


Marie

Posted by: mariewilson11 | June 16, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Anyone who knows even a little about drunks can see Rep. Etheridge was smashed in the video. Most people drunk in the middle of their work day are alcoholics. Alcoholics need help and don't make very good custodians of the public trust. View the video, then view the apology. Drunken slob / sober man. Nothing could be more obvious.

Posted by: ronnieroark | June 16, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

"The college boys didn't confront him angrily"
and you know that HOW? Was it Rush or Hannity that told you that?
were you there did you see whether those poor
BOYS were obnoxious and shoved the camera
in his face?
Again in this country if you feel that a crime has been committed you report it to the police and D.A.'s office and allow his defense lawyer to cross examine his accused under oath; unless of course they don't want to be identified as being put up by the local GOP and prefer trying the case before Fox News.

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 16, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

and how many tens of millions did
Huffington waste in his US Senate run?

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 16, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

As a North Carolina resident of the district next door to Etheridge, I can assure you he was in MAJOR trouble before this incident. His previous big donors showed him the door and the electorate has not forgotten his vote for Obamacare! He was shocked when he found no major money coming in and is probably upset because he will be unemployed in November. This article fails to take into account that the VOTERS have changed. This stuff makes me laugh!!!!

Posted by: etshoney | June 16, 2010 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Rather than screaming assault, it's likely that NC voters will dislike how Etheridge acted, but will also dislike how the students acted. Unlike Breitbart, we are not a state that enjoys angry confrontation. Period.

Posted by: Everyman2
______________________


*** Why would any thinking NC voter draw any kind of moral equivalence between the actions of Etheridge and the actions of the students?

The college boys didn't confront him angrily -- they simply asked him a question, even calling him "Sir." If that's your idea of an "angry confrontation," you probably consider "please" an aggressive statement.

On the other hand, we have a public official grabbing a younger, smaller kid with no apparent provocation other than the fact that (1) he asked the Congressman a question and (2) he didn't identify himself by name.

I don't know of any state law, including those of North Carolina, that permit someone to grab and physically restrain another person against his will for simply asking a public official a question and not identifying himself.

But you know your state better than I do, so perhaps you can cite such a North Carolina law that I'm not aware of.

Posted by: UponFurtherReview | June 16, 2010 8:34 AM | Report abuse

nice posturing. You scream that a crime
has been committed but then rationalize
when asked why if these kids are so innocent
they don t go to the police. Why. b/c that is precisely the way our legal system was designed. You alledge a crime has been committed, you report it to the police, you swear out a complaint,the DA screens the complaint and determines if there was probable cause and supporting evidence, an arrest warrant is issued, bond is posted, the defendant's case goes before a grand jury, the defendant is given a trial date and his lawyer gets to cross examine the complaintant and enters his trial with the presumption of innocenence. Apparently the right wants it both ways. They come here and whine that he is a common criminal,
but don't want the kids to go to the police.
Sounds like you have real problems with
the presumption of innocence, cross examination part of our justice system, and fear that the public might actually find out who was behind this stunt.
That attitude sounds real American and
constitutional.

It would be ""irresponsible"" for anyone to pressure those boys to contact the Metro DC police needlessly, considering that heavy handed corrupt fully politicized environment.

what is irresponsible is to scream that
someone is a criminal then rationalizing their refusl to make that complaint to the local authorities,for any alleged offense.


Posted by: leichtman1 | June 16, 2010 8:22 AM | Report abuse

I am also from NC, and there is no question that Etheridge will win re-election. To think otherwise is to misread the political tone in the state (which seems to occur almost equally by the left and right), and to assume that NC is politically similar to, say, South Carolina.

It is not. North Carolina is much more moderate, wealthier, less rooted in the mirage of the confederacy, and a much bigger supporter of the Democratic party in terms of vote share.

Because North Carolinians appear to be comfortable voting for a mix of Republicans and Democrats without giving either party a major stronghold, it seems like a lot of the political shenanigans don't play well down here. Rather than screaming assault, it's likely that NC voters will dislike how Etheridge acted, but will also dislike how the students acted. Unlike Breitbart, we are not a state that enjoys angry confrontation. Period.

Posted by: Everyman2 | June 16, 2010 8:07 AM | Report abuse

Etheridge is right up the road from me here in NC.

His ties in that rural part of NC are long and deep. I think some of his constituents scratched their heads at how rough he was on the video, b/c he's normally a pretty calm guy.

But I guarantee you that folks here like him way more than the punk D.C., paparazzi kid who pushed a camera in his face.

He'll cruise in November. This is an issue that doesn't play for long outside the beltway.

This is what a local columnist wrote, and it captures the tone down here:

"The 'student' wanted to know if the congressman supported President Obama. Etheridge wanted to know who the 'student' represented and ended up grabbing the interviewer’s arm, and then his neck.
In defense of the seven-term legislator, seems the 'student' could have called the congressman’s office and asked for an interview.

Ghost of Common Sense:

Simply, Mr. Etheridge, say 'Yes,' 'No comment' or just keep walking."

Posted by: mypitts2 | June 16, 2010 12:02 AM | Report abuse

mariewilson11 wrote: "Tell the "student" to bring all the tapes and his partner too for a complete telling to the authorities"

Why would either of the kids do that?

So that unionized Metro DC police thugs can escort SEIU thugs to their homes, similar to the incident reported in The Examiner, that occurred a few weeks ago in Bethesda, Md.?

http://tinyurl.com/24rga6j

Thanks, but no thanks.

The police have access to the videos and they can conduct any investigation they're inclined too.

It would be irresponsible for anyone to pressure those boys to contact the Metro DC police needlessly, considering that heavy handed corrupt fully politicized environment.

Posted by: Just-Tex | June 15, 2010 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Hurray for the booze-o-crat. Glad that his felony battery on a college student will not interfere with his paycheck. Time after time, those North Carolina voters prove their intelligence. Well, goll-leee, jeepers, Andy!

Posted by: janouzpoha | June 15, 2010 9:16 PM | Report abuse

In your column referring Bob Etheridge's physical violence as a "gaffe" (a term you also applied to Michelle bachmann's telling the truth), you expose an inability to differentiate between an error in judgment and an intentional criminal offense.
If you wish to advance the notion that Etheridge's violence was not intentionla, you must assert he had dminished mental capacity.
Whether he is a thug or a crazed person, he has demonstrated unfitness to serve.
Your attempt to "spin" this avoids taking a moral stand about whether elected officials may, with impunity, be violent toward respectful youngsters on the street.
As a representative of a major national news organ that was once respectable, you earn shame on your own.

Posted by: ahmhofshi | June 15, 2010 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Imma give Etheridge a pass this time. Too many nut jobs have threatened elected officials of late and the open hostility abounds. I likley would have reacted the same way. As a comparison no less a person than Jody Foster was recently charged with assault after an obnoxious kid kept clicking away after being asked nicley to stop.

Posted by: NotSurprised4 | June 15, 2010 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Just-Tex,

Call me and we can both accompany the "self described student" (you had me with "dressed just like any of the scores of congressional pages" - surely that proves it was a real student on a real academic project not just another costumed Breitbart set up cooked up for the right wing media) to the Police station to discuss the "outrageous abusive unwarranted outburst of physical violence". Tell the "student" to bring all the tapes and his partner too for a complete telling to the authorities so they can decide what to do.

I will go with you cause I am just as outraged that something like this could happen in America and all we have to get full satisfaction is an edited video tape and blogging like yours here.

If anyone can get justice it is someone like you who can tell us over and over again what we saw. I can almost see it your way except I saw the tape alone and I do think something serious happened here. The congressman acted foolishly and aggressively and for this he apologized. There was something else going on and we don't know what it was.

Posted by: mariewilson11 | June 15, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Let's all give Chris a huge A+ for spin, but give him a fat D- on everything else within this report.

Chris is attempting to equate verbal "gaffes" with physical abuse and violence, and that doesn't cut any mustard with reasonable people at all.

We saw the video of the huge Etheridge (he was an aggressive standout scholarship winning basketball player in the day) being politely greeted as he passed, then returning to charge into the face and camera lens of a student, when asked an innocuous question "Do you fully support the Obama agenda?"

We saw Etheridge snatch the cell phone camera from the boy's hand, then manhandle the young self identified student, who's age we can't be certain, but was dressed just like any of the scores of congressional pages we see in DC everyday.

We saw Etheridge twist that youth's arm, then grab his neck, and hold him roughly for 35 full seconds, while angrily demanding to know the youth's names.

And surely Chris must know that bringing up that old George Allen "macaca" smear into this won't help Etheridge either as well.

But while we're still on "macaca", I'll take a moment to remind everyone that Chris seems to have a "macaca" fetish. Go ahead and google it.

Then, while you're still in a curious mood, look up "macaca" too.

What you'll see is that "macaca" is only a pejorative epithet if you're a French speaking colonialist living deep inside Central Africa's Belgian Congo, when used against the native population.

With that being so, the "macaca" smear used against George Allen was a master stroke of unethical political and journalistic propaganda, by the Left and their pals in the media.

The smear that couldn't have possibly survived the light of day to harm Allen's political futures, if the willing Left leaning press didn't so fully participate in the scam.

Reliving that monumental moment of ultimate triumph, participating in falsely smearing a highly qualified potential conservative GOP presidential nominee, must still send a "tingle down" Cillizza's leg.

That explains Chris's "macaca" fetish. And it's clear he's trying to relive that moment in his posts, over and over again.

He's reliving that moment over and over again, even while subtly defending the indefensible.

Like when the enormous Ethridge had a public outrageous abusive unwarranted outburst of physical violence, against a kid with a video phone in his hand.

Daring to ask an innocuous question of an entrenched and powerful leader of the Left...

Posted by: Just-Tex | June 15, 2010 7:50 PM | Report abuse

I know Bob Ethridge quite well having served with him in the NC General Assembly before he became State Superintendent. I have also watched these videos (two of them) several times and I can tell you the only way this man would have reacted in the manner I witnessed was for him to have been provoked. My inference is that as he walked up the sidewalk (looking at his facial expression and his mannerism) he knew he was walking into a "trap." Granted he could have handled the situation better, and I am certain he now knows that; however, when one is in the heat of a campaign and suspects he is walking directly into a set-up, one can momentarily lose his composure. Had the young man identified himself immediately when asked, perhaps this incident would never have happened. (After all, normally when a reporter is getting ready to ask a question with tape rolling, he indeed does identify himself and the agency he represents.) While the video you see may look bad for Bob, I can tell you beyond any doubt, he is not a bad person. Quite the contrary! He is one heck of a great guy and has served his district, his state, and his country admirably for many years. My prediction is he will win this campaign as he has so many others; and continue to do the very fine work for which he is known. Malcolm Fulcher

Posted by: mfulcher | June 15, 2010 7:06 PM | Report abuse

I know Bob Ethridge quite well having served with him in the NC General Assembly before he became State Superintendent. I have also watched these videos (two of them) several times and I can tell you the only way this man would have reacted in the manner I witnessed was for him to have been provoked. My inference is that as he walked up the sidewalk (looking at his facial expression and his mannerism) he knew he was walking into a "trap." Granted he could have handled the situation better, and I am certain he now knows that; however, when one is in the heat of a campaign and suspects he is walking directly into a set-up, one can momentarily lose his composure. Had the young man identified himself immediately when asked, perhaps this incident would never have happened. (After all, normally when a reporter is getting ready to ask a question with tape rolling, he indeed does identify himself and the agency he represents.) While the video you see may look bad for Bob, I can tell you beyond any doubt, he is not a bad person. Quite the contrary! He is one heck of a great guy and has served his district, his state, and his country admirably for many years. My prediction is he will win this campaign as he has so many others; and continue to do the very fine work for which he is known. Malcolm Fulcher

Posted by: mfulcher | June 15, 2010 7:04 PM | Report abuse

To quote the article: But the history of political gaffes and their impact on the re-election chances of the Member of Congress involved would suggest that while Ellmers will certainly raise more money than she might otherwise have done (she had $5,462 on hand as of mid May) her chances of winning the race won't vastly improve.
---------
Put the crack pipe down Mr. Cillizza. Is your argument Eldridge is guilty of a gaffe???

This young man was assaulted by an elected public servant for asking a question. Anyone with one good eye could see that. But that eye must be OPEN.

Well, at least the term "gaffe" is a tad stronger than yesterdays pitiful article describing the crime as a mere "hug".

The only thing worse than the lefts blatant disregard of the truth is that they expect us to believe them.


Posted by: snowy2 | June 15, 2010 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Poll: Should Bob Ethridge Resign After Assaulting Student Film Makers? Poll Here:

http://moronsinchapelhill.com/2010/06/15/poll-should-bob-ethridge-resign-after-assaulting-student-filmakers.aspx

Posted by: moronsinchapelhill | June 15, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

37 has Narcissistic Personality Disorder, as does our other multimonickered spammer.

Posted by: drindl | June 15, 2010 5:36 PM
--------------------------------------------
"You're so vain. I'll bet you think this song is about you. Don't you? Don't you?"

Anything to keep the song going.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

I think drivl finally broke her paste button. She has been reduced to one line insults of others only. What an empty headed loon.

Posted by: Moonbat | June 15, 2010 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Finance whiz

I am beginning to think you are dummer then Ddunce.

It is not necessary to prosecute for a crime to be committed. If a kid shoplifts and doesn't get caught, was it a crime?

If wrangle cheats on his taxes and the corrupt liberals look the other way, was a crime committed?

You are a fool and whoever hires you has a fool for a client.

Posted by: Moonbat | June 15, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

37 has Narcissistic Personality Disorder, as does our other multimonickered spammer.

Posted by: drindl | June 15, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

@leichtman,

If I thought boycotting the site would make 37th go away, I'd be all for it. I think that most readers recognize that 37th is somewhat unhinged. Even zouk listed 37th as a poster who should be banned, because he knows it too. Don't you notice that other conservatives stay away from 37th? He's kind of nutty, and definitely likes to needle others. Right now, he's over on some other thread advocating for a constitutional amendment to ban anchor babies. He does this kind of stuff purposely, I'm convinced, to be as obnoxious as possible, because he LIKES the attention. He'll even love my post.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

I'm afraid that if he had treated me the way he treated that young man in the video that I saw, he wouldn't have to worry about a campaign anymore. Public officials are not above the law, and to question a public official in public is a lawful act. In fact it is the duty of the public to know how their representatives in government feel on all issues. To assault a young person for asking any question in a respectful way is wrong and unlawful. Do we need this kind of person in government? I think not!

Posted by: dickhurley | June 15, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

Personally 12bar I think all of us should boycott this site until 37th goes the way of Jake
we need spirited debate from both sides but I won t deal with 37ths constant racial provocations and spamming of this site
It's obvious that CC tolerates that garbage we should not and just ignoring him is certainly not the answer

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Do 'ya think that 37th failed to notice that Ethridge is white? As Inigo Montoya once said. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | June 15, 2010 4:52 PM | Report abuse

How dare those pesky college kids to have the audacity to ask the good congressman if he supported the president's agenda, especially since it is overflowing with failure and taking care of his political buddies, which the people are finally wising up to..

Posted by: DL13 | June 15, 2010 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Dearest VaMom4,

Can a I call you Mom4?

RE: http://www.youtube.com/user/DCCameraGuy#p/a/u/1/nZKie0Z4kaw

1) "The Congressman approached the young man with the camera, not the other way around."

He was greeted as he walked towards the camera and he stopped where the camera was.

2) "The camera was static, the Congressman was moving toward it."

There were two cameras and both were not static. I'm not sure why this is important to Mom4 or relevant to her concerns.

3) "It was on a public sidewalk on a public street, where no expectation of privacy exists."

That is so true - God bless America!

4)"The young man visible on camera called out a greeting and a question."

That is so true - God bless America!

5)"There is no legal requirement for the young man to identify himself in order to do so. There is no legal requirement for the Congressman to answer."

That is so true - God bless America!

6)It would have been politically expedient, but not required.


Not so sure about the expedient part, but it certainly was not required.

7)Why do posters here demand to know who the young man is? How is it relevant? Would a Latino or Middle Eastern immigrant be forced to identify himself just to ask a Congressman a question on a public street? Why? Because of his complexion? His accent? Or is it only important when the question bothers you?

Mom4 Let me help you with that. No one needs to id themselves to ask a question to a congressman. This in part is why he apologized and, of course, for inappropriately grabbing the person subsequently with undue vigor and continuing to try to get an answer to his question.

Mom4 this video is being used for political purposes. As such, the source and how it might have been manipulated to manipulate voters matters a great deal.

The Congressman had no right to know who asked the question(s) but I can see why he was curious. Look what happened when he got angry and lost control.

a)If this was a class project would it go right to Breitbart, a Republican political operative, for editing or the teacher and/or the police?

b)Wouldn't the student, his parents and the teacher/school be interested in investigating the alleged assault and provide the police with all the tapes for the evaluation? IF he did that he would have to identify himself there and have to answer basic questions. Maybe that would be politically embarrassing if the "project" was only done to try entrap the congressman into making a fool of himself.

c)You are the one that is inserting race, ethnicity and immigrant status into this issue. You are assuming that only because this was a white American "student" he is being mistreated by being asked to come forward and tell us more about what occurred and how they came to be interviewing only this Congressman with two cameras in a quiet street.

Marie

Posted by: mariewilson11 | June 15, 2010 4:49 PM | Report abuse

@leichtman,

I hope you don't go away. I find it relatively easy to skip past 37th posts. They are remarkably similar. Change the outrage of the day, and his posts are carbon copies.

When you don't read them, it's not nearly as disheartening.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse

drindl was right 12bar when he posted
earlier that this site has become a total waste of time

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

"You are being racist here
You think that blacks should not be prosecuted if they have some excuse for their crimes.
Obama said other people did it, so he can break the law.
So apparently it is a race thing.
Obama is not only a liar, he belongs in jail(and then maybe deported.)"37thand0street


EVERYONE PLEASE EXCUSE MY MUSE

37thand0street 37thand0street 37thand0street 37thand0street

HE KNoWNS not the Difference BTW an ACME brand "beep beep beep" racist if YOU will and A PERSISTENTLY OBTUSE one like himself who CAN"T STOP misusing THE TERM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HE TRIES HE IS CHARMING - IT is not his BRAINs that I CHERISH but hIS indomitable SPIRIT: passionate TYPING AND SPACING beyond wHERE reason would lead A common Lipton TEA BAG.

Posted by: mariewilson11 | June 15, 2010 4:40 PM | Report abuse

"so if someone is murdered, and the dead person doesn't report it, it was never a crime in the first place"


try prosecuting that case with your local
DA jerk. right the dead person didn't report it how cute. how about the police,the local D.As, how about these thug kids what is their excuse? likely they don't want the DA or a Defense lawyer to cross examine them and tell us who orchestrated their stunt. Can understand why.

again legal procedures are ignored by GOP radicals here. why not just do away with
the criminal judicial system altogether.
If you are a D just turn yourself over to
37th and blimpy, they are the judge, jury,
prosecutors and executioners.

and by the way if someone is dead and murdered
that does not make someone guilty of that murder in this country or under the US Constitution, and certainly not if neither
the local police dept nor D.A. decides to
prosecute. That is a little too complicated for your simpleton brain to understand.

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

@leichtman,

If you want to go crazy, read 37th posts. If you are looking for sense, proportion, logic, consistency or fairness, look elsewhere. He interchanges fact and opinion all the time, and seems not to know the difference. He has an exaggerated sense that he has to defend conservatism all by himself. Kind of a Don Quixote complex.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Due Process, Presumption of Innocence, Burden of Proof, legal concepts the GOP cannot
even comprehend unless one of their's is in legal trouble.

They claim they love the constitution but they support candidates who want to plant explosives
on the border, circumvent the 18th and 14th Amendments w/o Constitutional Amendments or passage and now refuse to follow standard
prosecutorial practices.

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

making no impression in the polls
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Exxcept for all those polls about Obama at the nadir, Repubs at the pinnicle, the R v D preferences and just about every poll in the country. Yeah except for THOSE.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

first of all its not a crime since your thugs
refuse to report it to the DA.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
so if someone is murdered, and the dead person doesn't report it, it was never a crime in the first place.

there is simply no way you are really a member in good standing of any Bar. Except maybe the one with the free drinks.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Now, 37th--he's a little different. He wants to broaden out the charges. It's not just assault--OH NO, it's RICO, attempted murder, slander, libel and escape from a mental institution, for Etheridge. By the time 37th is done, he'll have written a whole new criminal code.
-----------------------------------
How could I forget? NO, it's a violation of the mystery boys' CIVIL RIGHTS!

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

presumption of innocense

always laughing at finance whiz attempt at english

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

You are right George Allen saying 'macaca' which seems to be: macaques; rhesus monkeys. The etymology of the slur meaning seems dubious. In any case, yes, calling someone a name (except for Sara Palin) is much worse than a physical assault.

Posted by: dtd41 | June 15, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Just the latest in a long string of hyperventilating posts about a manufactured issue.

Sestak's job offer. Yawn. Romanoff's. Yawn. The guy whose name already escapes me and the VN war experience. None of them lasting more than a few days, making no impression in the polls, but trumpeted here almost as though the matter or something.

If this paper were sold in supermarkets it would be at the checkout stand, alongside Star and Enquirer.

This is GOSSIP, Cillizza, GOSSIP.

Posted by: Noacoler | June 15, 2010 4:15 PM | Report abuse

I am being a racist b/c I point
out that Meg Whitman assaulted
an employee?

you are truly certifiable

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 4:13 PM | Report abuse

again Vamom and 37th are 2 peas in a pod.
-------------------------------------
They're alike in that they don't care about consistency.

Where they are different is rather amusing. VAMom wants to escalate the incident by pretending it is a different incident. One involving a Republican and a burqa wearing woman. And the Republican grabs the burqa woman by the throat. And throws her to the ground. And has his way with her. Then, we'd be even more outraged (if that's possible).

Now, 37th--he's a little different. He wants to broaden out the charges. It's not just assault--OH NO, it's RICO, attempted murder, slander, libel and escape from a mental institution, for Etheridge. By the time 37th is done, he'll have written a whole new criminal code.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

first of all its not a crime since your thugs
refuse to report it to the DA. Do you understand that or is that above your pay grade?

Hypocrisy. You demand that Etheridge immediately resign, again ignoring basic
concepts like due process and presumption of innocense and your answer about Whitman's
attack on an employee, SILENCE.

your hypocrisy shines through. Its truly pathetic that you rationalize and cannot
even comprehend that fact. in reality you
are a total waste of time.

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Leichtman


You are being racist here

You think that blacks should not be prosecuted if they have some excuse for their crimes.

Obama said other people did it, so he can break the law.

So apparently it is a race thing.

Obama is not only a liar, he belongs in jail (and then maybe deported.)

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | June 15, 2010 4:07 PM | Report abuse

leichtman


Just because one person robs a bank - and gets away with it - that doesn't mean everyone else can do that - and claim they should not be prosecuted

That APPARENTLY IS OBAMA'S POSITION ON HIS CRIMES


Obama's people say - since other administrations may have commited the same crime (without giving any details) - THEN OBAMA IS FREE TO COMMIT CRIMES.

That is NOT HOW THE LAW WORKS.

OBAMA SHOULD BE PUT ON TRIAL FOR OFFERING PEOPLE JOBS IN EXCHANGED FOR DROPPING OUT OF FEDERAL ELECTIONS


AND IF HE DID IT MORE THAN ONCE, IT IS RICO


You have no credibility - not even when you have a video of a democrat assaulting someone, you have an excuse.

A CRIME IS A CRIME.

If you do not understand that, you have no judgement - your opinions are ALL FLAWED.

AND YOU SHOULD NEVER GIVE AN OPINION AGAIN - BECAUSE YOUR THINKING IS SO FLAWED YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME MENTAL DISABILITY.


You probably belong in an institution

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | June 15, 2010 4:02 PM | Report abuse

again Vamom and 37th are 2 peas in a pod.
A very wealthy GOP candidate slugs an
employee and trys buying her silence with
a $200,000 payoff and that is just dandy;their response, SILENCE.
The sad point is that they can't even understand their hypocrisy nor answer why these thug operatives just like Segretti
O'Keefe and Atwater refuse to go to the DA.
Its perfectly obvious why they refuse. They want neither their identity nor the GOP's involvement disclosed. Thought that Watergate and the New Hampshire phone jammers taught the GOP something; obviously not.

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 4:00 PM | Report abuse

@leichtman,

Ms. Whitman has just contributed another 20 million to her campaign, so it would be bad timing indeed, if 37th had to demand her resignation. ANOTHER reason why Meg Whitman deserves to be Governator-ette of California.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

so your answer 37th which we have known
for a long time is that Ms. Whitman need
not quit her race; why she has a lot of money and is a R. nuff said.

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Final comment and I'll wrap this up (ignoring that liechtman1 mental giant):

Had a Congressman from another political party been asked the same question on the same public sideway beside the same public street by a person (presumably a woman) dressed from head to toe in black cloth, with only her eyes exposed, would he have DARED to demand that she identify herself? How long would it take for the Washington Post and liberal posters here to express self-righteous indignation at the impertinence of such a public servant? And suppose he had grabbed her wrist and then her throat? How long before CAIR and the Washington Post would be demanding his resignation?

Posted by: VaMom4 | June 15, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Every American has the RIGHT TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES


That is in the Bill of Rights.


What Etheridge did was A CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION.

In addition to assault and battery.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | June 15, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

I am curious if ANY R here attacking
Etehridge in every single post can
even comprehend that their refusing to even criticize Meg Whitman's physically assaulting an employee and then trying to buy her silence
with a $200,000 payoff, is hypocrisy of the worst kind. And how will you feel when you learn that their stunt was likely orchestrated
by their local GOP?

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Since when is assault a gaffe?

Posted by: seraphina21 | June 15, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

So the kooky liberal hypocrites demand that anyone who wants to ask a simple question to a congressman in the street present acceptable ID.

however, if a policeman in AZ observes someone committing a crime, they are not allowed to ask for ID.

Hmmmmmm.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 3:35 PM | Report abuse

37th

If you are not calling for Whitman to resign(drop out), you are a hypocrite..

incidentally you have not asked you
have DEMANDED that every D officeholder
including the POTUS resign so you have
zero credibility.

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse


"We are completely in the bag for Barry the incompetent boob Obama, and will never play the story straight if it involves a Democrat politician."

Your Editorial Staff

Posted by: screwjob16 | June 15, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Let me get this straight, the columnist is comparing, in his opinion, what were verbal gaffes to Mr. Etheridge's use of physical means against a college student who had the nerve to ask the congressman the tough question of whether he agreed with the "Obama agenda." The level of spin on this story is truly becoming amazing.

Posted by: MarkE3 | June 15, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Leichtman


You have to be even-handed, otherwise you have lost all your credibility -


Forever.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | June 15, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

37th

If you are not calling for Whitman to resign, you are a hypocrite..

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Stick to the facts: The Congressman approached the young man with the camera, not the other way around. The camera was static, the Congressman was moving toward it. It was on a public sidewalk on a public street, where no expectation of privacy exists. The young man visible on camera called out a greeting and a question. There is no legal requirement for the young man to identify himself in order to do so. There is no legal requirement for the Congressman to answer. It would have been politically expedient, but not required. (The audio portion suggests that the young man is an American. Perhaps Etheridge thought he was a Canadian and therefore undeserving of an answer.) The assault occurred when Etheridge struck the camera. The battery occurred when he grabbed, choked and shoved the young man. Why did Etheridge need him to identify himself? Why do posters here demand to know who the young man is? How is it relevant? Would a Latino or Middle Eastern immigrant be forced to identify himself just to ask a Congressman a question on a public street? Why? Because of his complexion? His accent? Or is it only important when the question bothers you?

Posted by: VaMom4 | June 15, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Stick to the facts: The Congressman approached the young man with the camera, not the other way around. The camera was static, the Congressman was moving toward it. It was on a public sidewalk on a public street, where no expectation of privacy exists. The young man visible on camera called out a greeting and a question. There is no legal requirement for the young man to identify himself in order to do so. There is no legal requirement for the Congressman to answer. It would have been politically expedient, but not required. (The audio portion suggests that the young man is an American. Perhaps Etheridge thought he was a Canadian and therefore undeserving of an answer.) The assault occurred when Etheridge struck the camera. The battery occurred when he grabbed, choked and shoved the young man. Why did Etheridge need him to identify himself? Why do posters here demand to know who the young man is? How is it relevant? Would a Latino or Middle Eastern immigrant be forced to identify himself just to ask a Congressman a question on a public street? Why? Because of his complexion? His accent? Or is it only important when the question bothers you?

Posted by: VaMom4 | June 15, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Stick to the facts: The Congressman approached the young man with the camera, not the other way around. The camera was static, the Congressman was moving toward it. It was on a public sidewalk on a public street, where no expectation of privacy exists. The young man visible on camera called out a greeting and a question. There is no legal requirement for the young man to identify himself in order to do so. There is no legal requirement for the Congressman to answer. It would have been politically expedient, but not required. (The audio portion suggests that the young man is an American. Perhaps Etheridge thought he was a Canadian and therefore undeserving of an answer.) The assault occurred when Etheridge struck the camera. The battery occurred when he grabbed, choked and shoved the young man. Why did Etheridge need him to identify himself? Why do posters here demand to know who the young man is? How is it relevant? Would a Latino or Middle Eastern immigrant be forced to identify himself just to ask a Congressman a question on a public street? Why? Because of his complexion? His accent? Or is it only important when the question bothers you?

Posted by: VaMom4 | June 15, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Leichtman


You have to be even-handed, otherwise you have lost all your credibility -


Forever.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | June 15, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

*** Here are my responses to selected portions of BobSanderson's post:
______________________________

2)He is shown then grabbing one person by the wrist and then the neck while continuing to repeatedly ask the same basic question. He receives only a vague answer.

*** What difference does it make whether he received a vague answer, no answer at all or an answer that was longer than "War and Peace"? No Congressman has the right to get physical with an average citizen for simply asking a question that he doesn't want to answer.

* * *

3)The supposed "students on a project" with two video cameras were not and have not been identified. Their faces are not visible throughout. The purpose of their "project" is still unknown as is their "school".

*** So what? Is it your premise that a Congressman has the right to physically restrain an average citizen for (1) not identifying oneself, (2) not being forthcoming about one's project, and/or (3) not identifying one's school?

* * *

3)In the interim, it is only an edited video that Republicans can cherish and look at during lonely moments in their day and say macaca every now and then to soothe themselves.

*** I'm sure ACORN officials gave themselves the same smug pep talk in the first few days after their employees were caught on film promoting kiddie prostitution.

Posted by: UponFurtherReview | June 15, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Stick to the facts: The Congressman approached the young man with the camera, not the other way around. The camera was static, the Congressman was moving toward it. It was on a public sidewalk on a public street, where no expectation of privacy exists. The young man visible on camera called out a greeting and a question. There is no legal requirement for the young man to identify himself in order to do so. There is no legal requirement for the Congressman to answer. It would have been politically expedient, but not required. (The audio portion suggests that the young man is an American. Perhaps Etheridge thought he was a Canadian and therefore undeserving of an answer.) The assault occurred when Etheridge struck the camera. The battery occurred when he grabbed, choked and shoved the young man. Why did Etheridge need him to identify himself? Why do posters here demand to know who the young man is? How is it relevant? Would a Latino or Middle Eastern immigrant be forced to identify himself just to ask a Congressman a question on a public street? Why? Because of his complexion? His accent? Or is it only important when the question bothers you?

Posted by: VaMom4 | June 15, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

LEICHTMAN


If you are not calling for Etheridge to resign, you are a hypocrite

If he was a Republican, you would been screaming - saying he was a horrible guy - and he should get out of office right away


Posted by: 37thand0street | June 15, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse


We all know why he will survive... Because the media is biased... If this was a Republican hearings would already have been scheduled and Reid and Pelosi would have already demanded his resignation...

This is what is wrong with the "media"... They are all stooges for the left...


Posted by: 2010Rout | June 15, 2010 3:22 PM | Report abuse

President Barack Obama’s weekly approval rating is at an all-time low for his presidency, according to the Gallup Poll, and it is especially low among those 65 or older, those who are married, and those who attend church every week. During the week of June 7-13, 46 percent of those surveyed told Gallup they approved of the job Obama was doing as president, while 46 percent said they disapproved. In its analysis of the poll results, Gallup points out that equals the lowest weekly approval rating Obama has received since his inauguration.


the natural result of letting Obama be Obama.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

The grossly misleading, full-color propaganda brochures that the Obama administration has been sending out to seniors at taxpayer expense don’t seem to have swayed many minds — at least not in the direction that the administration would want. For the 4th straight week, Americans favor repealing Obamacare by a margin of more than 20 percentage points, according to Rasmussen’s poll of likely voters. This week, 58 percent of Americans favor repeal, while only 36 percent oppose it. Among seniors, the direct targets of the disinformation campaign, support for repeal is actually up from last week.

Poor inept berry. his sole accomplishment in life, no good according to the people it was supposed to help.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

"Gestapo moment"


What is the right's continuing infatuation with the Nazis and Nazi imagery? Yes, they were a far right wing group that was temporarily successful in world conquest but I have to say it didn't end well for them. If I was a budding Republican fascist I would use other terms.

Posted by: BobSanderson | June 15, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Looks like a Gestapo moment to me, after all the handwringing by Democrats about the Arizona immigration law. This Congressman should be prosecuted for assault, and censured by the House. Our Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves! This guy has no right, further, to know the names of his questioners. His right was simply to walk on without responding. If the kids interfered with his progress on a public street, THEY'D be the ones in trouble.

Posted by: Craigskeet | June 15, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

All these one liners:
"ain't it awful"
"if it was a Republican..."
"shows what liberals are REALLY all about"
and
"I'd beat the living hell out of Etheridge"

See, they don't even have to post. It all falls into one of the four categories above.

Posted by: 12BarBlues
_______________________


*** Whereas Democrat reactions to the incident fall into one of the following four categories below:

1. "THAT'S no big deal!"

2. "The kid deserved it for not telling the Congressman his name!"

3. "Who cares if Etheridge assaulted a student in a public place for asking a tough question? What REALLY matters is whether the kid belonged to some subversive conservative organization!"

4. (ANY OTHER IRRELEVANT DEFLECTION MEANT TO TAKE THE FOCUS OFF ETHERIDGE, SUCH AS YOUR POST.)

Posted by: UponFurtherReview | June 15, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

A Macaca Moment: Remedial Class Version 2.0


One more time for the angry bloggers here as to why the word Macaca was important for George Allen and why this is NOT the same type of situation for Etheridge.

1)Macaca was an ugly racial slur used by a Southern white Senator against a person of color at a public campaign rally in a close election.

2)It was video taped and widely distributed because of the open nature and rarity of the offense.

3)The insulted individual came forward, was interviewed and explained what he was doing there and how he felt about the incident.

4)Allen first lied by saying he spontaneously made the term up, then lied when he said that he didn't know what it meant and when all else failed and it was not going away he finally he apologized.

Does any of that need any explanation in this day and age?

Etheridge, alternately, became angry for unknown reasons on a quiet street when asked a seemingly simple question by at least two videographers.

1)In an edited video he is presented being a asked only one question and then angrily asking them back to id themselves.

2)He is shown then grabbing one person by the wrist and then the neck while continuing to repeatedly ask the same basic question. He receives only a vague answer.

3)The supposed "students on a project" with two video cameras were not and have not been identified. Their faces are not visible throughout. The purpose of their "project" is still unknown as is their "school".

4)Etheridge recognized how inappropriate his behavior was and apologized clearly and honestly within hours.

5)Nothing further was heard from the supposedly aggrieved "students", their "teacher" or anything about this "project".

I would like to see the entire unedited video from everyone that was on site during that confrontation. I am still curious why there is a mystery here on the part of these so called students?

The only angry people left now are Republican bloggers that want to crucify someone who apologized appropriately, clearly and promptly for a minor event.

Some points to remember:

1)Only bloggers have accused Etheridge of assault and, interestingly, the supposed "student" who is the only one that can make a legal charge before authorities has not made that charge. He just disappeared.

2)It is not assault until they identify themselves, make the charge, have it investigated and have success in court.

3)In the interim, it is only an edited video that Republicans can cherish and look at during lonely moments in their day and say macaca every now and then to soothe themselves.

The press will cover it if more relevant details are known but, till then, it is not anything like a macaca moment.

Posted by: BobSanderson | June 15, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

I must agree. anyone who refuses to show proof of identity at any time must be throttled and collared.

We could begin with every illegal immigrant and finish with The One who's birth certificate, passport and most other records are missing.

some one ought to send Etheridge over to the WH to do his Daltry imitation:

Who are you? Who? who?

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Moore's camermen were standing away from the
Congressman and not shoving their hands
and cameras in the Congressman's face.
Again if these poor innocent boys did
nothing wrong why haven't they shown up at the DC DA's office.

Simple: they don't want their identity,
who paid them or orchestrated the stunt revealed. By the way did that R Congressman
ask Moore WHO ARE YOU AND WHO SENT YOU HERE?

more hypocrictical faux R outrage. Whitman assaults an employee pays her off $200,000 and that is quite alright with the R hypocrits utter silence.

Incidentally it took close to a year to unravel the New Hampshire GOP phone jamming incident before those GOP operatives were sent to jail.

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Violence Total

Tea Party 0

Democratic Members of Congress 1


This discussion is over - everyone who said anything about the Tea Party should eat their keyboards


And for the Gulf Oil Spill

Obama was responsible to fix the Minerals Management Service - he said he would in 2009 - and Obama did a year-long review WHICH INCLUDED THE SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES WITH OFFSHORE OIL RIGS.

OBAMA DID NOT MAKE SURE THE SAFETY INSPECTIONS WERE DONE CORRECTLY.


DIRECT RESPONSIBILITY


Incompetence - it is about time that the people who voted for Obama took responsibility for GIVING A JOB TO AN INEXPERIENCED AND UNQUALIFIED PERSON

Pretty simple.


Bob Etheridge should be thrown in jail and expelled from Congress - any democrat who does not agree has LOST ALL CREDIBILITY FOREVER


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | June 15, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Al Gore's split from wife Tipper after 40 years of marriage was a shock to everyone who thought theirs was the ideal marriage. Now Star can exclusively reveal that the former Vice President was having an affair with Larry David's ex-wife — for the past two years!

Just another in the long line of cheatin' lyin' fraudster Libs. Are there any who are not? Any at all?

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

I wish I could vote for Etheridge twice. Who knows how many times he had been bothered by these annoying junior wingnuts before this incident - perhaps even on that same day. The kid would not say who he was, who he represented, etc.

Posted by: Jihm | June 15, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Take The Poll:

Should Bob Ethridge Resign After Assaulting Student Filmakers?


http://moronsinchapelhill.com/2010/06/15/poll-should-bob-ethridge-resign-after-assaulting-student-filmakers.aspx

Posted by: moronsinchapelhill | June 15, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

I smell a drudge link today.

Translation from moonbatt:

Why isn't everyone fawning over Obungler today and praising me for my cutting and pasting work?

there are so few of you TOTAL loons left drivl. Even Ped seems to have fled for higher ground, leaving the stench of his sewage behind to rot. Of course, finance whiz has become prolifically stupid of late. Maybe she could lick your boots.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

What's so ironic is that if the Fix hadn't run this thread today, there wouldn't be the carpet bombing of one liners. And the Perpetually Outraged blame the Fix for "covering" for Etheridge.

What a racket. I'll bet the Fix and the other blogs have a reciprocal arrangement to drive up their hits.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 2:47 PM | Report abuse

It used to be that politicians could engage in their corruption, sexual antics, etc away from the public view. Now, we can all see the arrogance and elitism so endemic within these shallow craniums. They really do think that they are better than the poor serfs who elect them.

And the MSM wonders why the American public is discontented, outraged and REALLY PI$$ED OFF.

Posted by: apberusdisvet | June 15, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Michael Moore, with two cameramen, walks up to a Republican member of the U.S. Congress on the street and asks him if he intends to "follow the Bush Agenda." Republican Congressman tells Moore, "No comment." Washington Post publishes story on rude treatment of Michael Moore by arrogant Republican. Two young men in business suits holding small video cameras ask Democrat Congressman on street if he will "follow the Obama Agenda." Congressman grabs camera, grabs kid's wrist, puts kid in chokehold and shoves him away. Washington Post publishes story on rude treatment of Congressman by two young men in business suits. Surprise, surprise.

Posted by: VaMom4 | June 15, 2010 2:42 PM | Report abuse

drindl you are unfortunately right

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 2:42 PM | Report abuse

drindl, if there were a Drudge link, there would be way more comments from random conservatives who pop in to rant and then disappear, never to be seen again. I'm thinking there's another right-wing website fixated on how the media is full of evil liberals who practice witchcraft that periodically links to the Fix; posts occasionally see influxes of rants against the media that aren't large enough to be Drudge-related. But heck if I can tell you what it might be.

Posted by: GJonahJameson | June 15, 2010 2:42 PM | Report abuse

After waiting for over four weeks while the Obama Regime dawdled, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal has ordered the National Guard to go ahead and begin construction of sand barriers to protect the Louisiana Coast from oil.

In essence, he is daring the regime to shut him down, and daring the environmentalist whackos to sue him.

This is what leadership is. Leadership is taking action and getting stuff done. It's not whining about the problems you "inheritied," conducting seminars, or loudly proclaiming that you're looking for an ass to kick. And leadership entails the risk that your chosen course of action might not work.

Failure is always the risk of taking action, but it is the inevitable consequence of inaction in the face of crisis.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

If the Drudge Sludge shows up, I'm outa here for the day.

All these one liners:
"ain't it awful"
"if it was a Republican..."
"shows what liberals are REALLY all about"
and
"I'd beat the living hell out of Etheridge"

See, they don't even have to post. It all falls into one of the four categories above.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

He's just a typical liberal politician - thinks he's better than everyone - likes to pick on people. I've had similar responses from liberals - nothing physical.
For once, I'd like to see a congressman get up and call for term limits, end of preferential treatment to unions, illegals, welfare, etc. See the libs whine and cry.
It's nice to dream once in awhile. I wish I had been there when he assaulted that kid. I'm a little bigger and older.
Check out the video of that guy attacking a member of the tea party (a female) at a tea party rally. Same kind of bully tactics.

Posted by: rknapp0205 | June 15, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

I smell a drudge link today.

Figures.

"Today on G. Gordon Liddy’s radio show, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) discussed Arizona’s new anti-immigration law and claimed President Obama’s criticism of it demonstrates “that he has a default mechanism in him…that favors the black person.”


One nutbag on another nutbags's show. Wonder if they ate rats for lunch?

Posted by: drindl | June 15, 2010 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Since when was a physical assault considered a gaffe ?!?! Since the liberal leftist media will rationalize ANYTHING for political purposes...

Posted by: SirLoinofBeef | June 15, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Bachman's "gaffe" as you put it was not an assault on a private citizen asking a Public Servant a question. Big difference.

Posted by: LMW6 | June 15, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Patriot3 | June 15, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

So apparently, if committed by a Congressman, assault and battery now falls under the category of a "gaffe". If this had been a REPUBLICAN Congressman, I think the story would be different.

Posted by: re5212 | June 15, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

zouk also predicted that McCain would win in a landslide.
No one believes Rasmussen, especially considering that Fox,PPD, and ABC show just the opposite, so apparently Fox is in the bag for the Ds and they believe that the GOP radicals are sinking like a stone.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/generic_congressional_vote-901.html

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

You write: "It's far more likely ... that Etheridge will fall into the bent but not broken category of political gaffesmanship."

Of course it is!

That's because major newspapers like the Post will cut him a break and let the story slide instead of hammering it the way they would if Etheridge were a conservative.

Meanwhile, no video evidence is necessary for the Post to report that Tea Party protesters yelled racial slurs at black Democrat Congressmen. If a Democrat says he heard the N-word, then by golly that's verification enough for your newspaper!

Welcome to 21st-century journalism, or what's left of it.

Posted by: UponFurtherReview | June 15, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

THanks, bsimon. Managed to find your post in there.

Posted by: DDAWD | June 15, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Republican candidates now hold a 10-point lead over Democrats on the Generic Congressional Ballot for the week ending Sunday, June 13. That ties the GOP's largest ever lead, first reached in April, since it first edged ahead of the Democrats a year ago. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 46% of Likely U.S. Voters would vote for their district's Republican congressional candidate, while 36% would opt for his or her Democratic opponent. A week ago, Republicans led 44% to 36%.

Libs sinking like a stone. Just let berry make a few more empty speeches and the deal will be sealed.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Bob Ethridge is deeply loved and tremendously admired in NC. We will continue to support him, because he always has done what is best for us in NC. He votes for our best interests, and we will continue proudly to vote for him.

Posted by: jsthrift | June 15, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

and we presume that all this faux outrage
will be similarly expressed against Meg Whitman when she attacked an employee at her workplace, right?

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

@ken in pasadena,

Here's how you can make money on your prediction. Go to Intrade, buy contracts on the chance of Republicans taking control of the House. Chance right now is only 46%. Contract goes to 100 under your scenario, you make money.

You know, put your money where your mouth is.

http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/contractSearch/index.jsp?clsID=3&grpID=9620#

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

"That David Vitter maintains a lead over Charlie Melancon is a significant moment in our nation's politics. Just as only Nixon could have gone to China and only Clinton could have reformed welfare, so too can only a family-values, conservative break down that barrier preventing politicians from openly cavorting with prostitutes."

Actually, it simply proves that people who spout talk about 'family values' are just for the most part lying hypocrites.

Posted by: drindl | June 15, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Could Fiorina and Boxer Be Tied?


I think we’ll know very soon if this CrossTarget poll of the California Senate race is an outlier, or whether Carly Fiorina has gotten enough of a bump from her primary win to make this a neck-and-neck race with Barbara Boxer.

Boxer 46.5%

Fiorina 47.0%

Undecided 6.5%

Rasmussen had Boxer by 5, but the incumbent’s lead has been pretty marginal in most recent polls: 6, 3, 9, 4, 7, 1.

And if Barbara Boxer really is in trouble… well, the Democrats had better run and hide in the rest of the country

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

If this loser goes down in a heavily Democratic district, that means the Republicans will be able to pick up 60 to 80 seats this fall. A revolution coming soon.

Posted by: kenpasadena | June 15, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I am donating $50,000 to Elmers. I swear to God and to my mother's grave.

Posted by: kabalen | June 15, 2010 2:09 PM
-----------------------------------
Right. Drop back and post proof. BTW, isn't it spelled "Ellmers"?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

I don't give f%$k who Etheridge is. If he had done what he did to that poor kid, I would have kicked his ass and broke his arm. He is an embarrassment to his family and country.

Posted by: kabalen | June 15, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

that is really special;we are impressed

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

The Washington Post Watches Bob Etheridge and Yawns

June 15, 2010 9:04 AM By Jim Geraghty

The Washington Post, the newspaper that mentioned “Macaca” in approximately 100 articles, op-eds, editorials about the 2006 Virginia Senate race between George Allen and Jim Webb, watches the video of Rep. Bob Etheridge, North Carolina Democrat, physically assaulting a questioner and concludes it warrants three paragraphs on page C3, in the Reliable Source gossip column.

The opening sentence? “So what really happened when Rep. Bob Etheridge ran into a couple of self-described ‘students’ on the streets of D.C. last week?”

David Weigel, who used the term “hug” in his initial report on the altercation and has been receiving furious e-mails since, is cited; the Post should have let him write an actual print story on this. In this news nugget, there is little or no description beyond ‘grabbing the wrist’ of one of the young men.

This is not even bias anymore; this is information management, designed to ensure those who pick up the print version of the Post never encounter what the blogosphere is buzzing about

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

I don't give f%$k who Etheridge is. If he had what he did to me, I would have kicked his ass and broke his arm. He is an embarrassment to to his family and country.

Posted by: kabalen | June 15, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Rep. Michelle Bachmann's comments about Obama is completely different from that of Etheridge. Etheridge actions are worst of a kind. What Rep. Bachmann is said by millions of Americans. Etheridge is quite different on the contrary. You do not find someone everyday doing what Etheridge did, espcially to yound kid. I am donating $50,000 to Elmers. I swear to God and to my mother's grave.

Posted by: kabalen | June 15, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

More cutting and pasting from zoukie/bumbling/moonbat/rivl/brigade... what a surprise. not.

Posted by: drindl | June 15, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Not a smart move on the congressmans part. He should have kept moving and not stop to engage these kids.... The BIG mistake and the one that will make a difference from other "gaffes" is that he put his hands on the kid....This was not just a 'back and forth' Imagine if one of those kids did what he did... /see video/ They would HAVE been arrested....The congressman will not survive this unless he is in a Progressive district in which case, everyone is electable if they "think right"...

Posted by: james_m_reilly1 | June 15, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

"These days, some longtime Independent American Party members feel bitter about the arc of Angle's career.

Christopher Hansen, brother of party founder Daniel Hansen and himself a former chair of the party, tells TPM that "I think Sharron in her heart is a very good person." But he remains upset that "she decided to go over and join with the fascist Republicans."

"The national Republicans are going to come in here and teach her how to be a good Republican stooge," he predicts. "She'll just be another dyed-in-the-wool stooge Republican."

LMAO

Posted by: drindl | June 15, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Of course BP was responsible for the spill. Crazy muslims were responsible for 911. High winds and rain was responsible for flooding in NOLA. Iranian students were responsible for kidnapping Americans.

That is not the issue. It is the reaction to the calamity. On that measure, poor inept Obungler has fallen very short. Community organizers do not make effective decisions it seems. We knew this when he dithered with even choosing a dog. It extends to every aspect of Odumbo's life. At the base, it is a trust in big government that is totally misplaced. Once and for all - they mess things up worse than total inaction.

applebaum

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

We knew this when he dithered with even choosing a dog.
--------------------------------
You did, did you? All about choosing the dog? And dithering? Well, that just about says it all, doesn't it?

True story: I used to play pinochle with this guy. Everytime someone laid down a card, he'd say "well, THAT really tells the story". Starting with the first card. Of course, all that insight didn't seem to help his game.

Bwahaha!!!!!!!1

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Sharron Angle even a bigger nutcase than you thought:

"The key to understanding Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle may be the fact that she has not always been a Republican.

For at least six years in the 1990s before she held statewide elective office, Angle was a member of the little-known Independent American Party, a right-wing party that combines elements of Ron Paul's doctrinaire libertarianism -- pro-gun, anti-tax, anti-bureaucracy, pro-states' rights -- with Christian social conservatism and fear of the "North American Union" and other forms of "global government." The small party attracted considerable controversy in 1994 when it took out a newspaper ad titled "Consequences of Sodomy: Ruin of a Nation," which suggested HIV could spread through the water.

Three members of the Independent American Party tell TPM that Angle was an active member of the party in the 1990s. They say she only left the Independent American Party and became a Republican out of political expediency when she decided to seek a seat in the state assembly, to which she was elected in 1998.

"It was because she wanted to run for office. And it was difficult for members of our party to get elected at that time," Janine Hansen, executive director of the Independent American Party, tells TPM. "

I wonder why that might be?

Posted by: drindl | June 15, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

"what do you think about Bachmann's fit for her district? ... I think Bachmann is a lot more backwards than the constituents of a 45% Obama district."

Her fit? 'Close enough'. Yes, she's far right, but so is much of her district. Particularly when a Bob Anderson gets 10% (he's running again), Bachmann is pretty safe. If she holds on to the 46% that voted for her last time, the DFLer (Tarryl Clark) has to eat into the Anderson vote. It may be possible for her to get 30% of those voters to support her instead, but its not clear 1) that's her intention or 2) how to reach tose voters.

Posted by: bsimon1 | June 15, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Of course BP was responsible for the spill. Crazy muslims were responsible for 911. High winds and rain was responsible for flooding in NOLA. Iranian students were responsible for kidnapping Americans.

That is not the issue. It is the reaction to the calamity. On that measure, poor inept Obungler has fallen very short. Community organizers do not make effective decisions it seems. We knew this when he dithered with even choosing a dog. It extends to every aspect of Odumbo's life. At the base, it is a trust in big government that is totally misplaced. Once and for all - they mess things up worse than total inaction.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

"I just wish it had been a pregnant woman. "

cowardly and infantile rightwingers, what a surprise.

Posted by: drindl | June 15, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

I doubt something like this is going to sink an incumbent in a district that is less than competitive. If a voting majority of Etheridge's constituents tack Democratic -- as his easy re-elections would suggest they do -- a bunch of them are secretly saying right now, "Man, I would have liked the chance to pimp-slap one of those camera-wielding Republican operatives myself." And lest you think I'm condemning Democrats here, make no mistake, were, say, Joe Wilson to headbutt a College Democrat with a digital camera and some loaded questions, a bunch of his constituents would be secretly cheering him on, too.

If people are already significantly inclined to support one candidate, they'll be just pleased as punch if the candidate pushes around someone on the opposite end of the political spectrum. Of course, they'll never admit it in person, but maybe anonymously on the Internets...

On a side note, if we're talking about gaffes that may have cost a candidate his or her re-election, would Elizabeth Dole in 2008 qualify? If I remember right, she was cleaning up in the polls until she started calling Kay Hagan an atheist, and then a couple of weeks and a few truckloads of campaign contributions later, Hagan was mopping the floor with her.

Posted by: GJonahJameson | June 15, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Typical cowardly liberal; picking on a kid a foot shorter than he was.

I just wish it had been a Hispanic, handicapped, disadvantaged, pregnant woman. Then maybe libturds would see these low life scum they elect for what they really are as apparently that's what it would take to penetrate their thick vacuous skulls and sensibilities.

Posted by: Bcamp55 | June 15, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Typical cowardly liberal; picking on a kid a foot shorter than he was.

I just wish it had been a pregnant woman. Then maybe libturds would see these low life scum they elect for what they really are as apparently that's what it would take to penetrate their thick vacuous skulls and sensibilities.

Posted by: Bcamp55 | June 15, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

If you were honest, you'd report:

"Which one of the following groups do you think is most responsible for the oil spill?"
58% "The oil company British Petroleum for not being prepared for a leak"
7% "The federal government for allowing offshore drilling in deep coastal waters"
10% "Environmental groups for opposing drilling on land and in shallow waters closer to the shoreline"
8% "American consumers for relying on such large quantities of oil and gas"
10% All

Fox News Poll 6/11/10

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/us_oil_spill_fox_689.php

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

If he were honest:

When the Deepwater Horizons rig blew up and spawned a terrible oil spill on April 22, my administration's response was conditioned by decades of liberal and leftist thinking about business and government. My background in academia and community activism had never exposed me to the basics of making business decisions or to the fundamentals of a market economy. To the contrary, my friends on the left and I tended to see businessmen, doctors, bankers -- pretty much anyone who made a profit -- as selfish creeps. "There comes a point when you've made enough money" I scolded, when urging passage of a financial reform bill.

Going beyond rhetorical overkill, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the Justice Department had opened a criminal probe into the oil spill -- though without offering a shred of evidence that any laws had been broken.

We certainly can make a terrible situation worse -- and I've become convinced that the arbitrary six-month moratorium on new deep-water drilling will further damage the already reeling economies of the Gulf states and could result in the loss of 20,000 oil industry jobs in addition to the losses being suffered in the fishing and tourism industries.


By demonizing BP and searching for scalps to display in this crisis, I've shown poor leadership. I regret that now.

Perhaps we've all learned now that we must take another look at ANWR and shallower waters. Environmentalists did us no favors by agitating for bans on drilling in more accessible sites. At least if a spill happens there, it can be dealt with.

But most of all, we must, as grown-ups, recognize that sometimes terrible things happen and there is no one to blame. The search for villains is unbecoming a mature people. My administration will drop the criminal probe. We will abandon the paradoxical posture of saying that we are responsible for the response to the spill yet at the same time hurling thunderbolts at BP.

I won the confidence of many voters by showing that I didn't lose my head in the midst of the financial crisis of 2008. In response to the Gulf spill, I forgot that. I've tried bullying, boasting, threatening, and emoting. I now understand that the best course is one I've never considered for myself or my political philosophy -- modesty.

Charen

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 1:41 PM | Report abuse

For all campaign staffers out there, check out my patented Effenheimer Fundraising System.

http://www.mnprogressiveproject.com/diary/5674/effenheimer-fundraising-system

Does your candidate routinely say crazed and insane things? Worry no longer.

Does your candidate make public gaffes so often you want to keep her/him away from any public speaking opportunity? Worry no longer.

You can capitalize on your candidate's mental imbalance or stupidity. Turn those gaffes into megabucks with my patented Effenheimer Fundraising System.

Posted by: e_pusey | June 15, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

@bumbling,

This poll indeed confirms the Republican enthusiasm gap and anti-incumbent mood. We'll all follow these polls over the next few months to see the trend. It's still early days.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

I'm so glad that liberals have come here to post in support of this freak.
It shows what they're really all about.

I wish some liberal freak would grab me by the neck and arm.
As a former proud member of the USMC I would've defended myself successfully.

Posted by: Thozmaniac | June 15, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Democrat Stan Greenberg and Republican Glen Bolger conducted the first public battleground poll of this election cycle. They chose the 70 House districts experts regard as most likely to oust incumbents this fall. What they found was grim news for Democrats.

For this poll, Bolger and Greenberg chose the districts where incumbents are considered the most vulnerable, and, in the case of open seats, the ones most likely to switch party control in November. Sixty are currently held by Democrats — many of whom won these seats even when voters in the same district preferred Republican John McCain for president in 2008. The other 10 districts are the flip side — held by Republicans in the House, even though their voters went for Barack Obama in 2008.

These are this year's swing seats — the political terrain where the battle for control of the House of Representatives will be won or lost. In this battleground, voters are choosing Republicans over Democrats 49 percent to 41 percent.

Poll Results 'A Snooze Alarm'

"In a year where voters want change and in which Democrats are seen to be in power, this is a tough poll — about as tough as you get," Greenberg said.

Bolger said the poll results will be a wake-up call for Democrats, who were stunned at the beginning of the year when Republican Scott Brown won the U.S. Senate seat held for years by the late Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts.

"If Massachusetts was the first wake-up call, this is was the snooze alarm going off," Bolger said.

He pointed out that President Obama's approval ratings are much lower in these competitive districts than they are nationally: 54 percent of the likely battleground voters disapproved of Obama's performance; 40 percent approved.

"It's very problematic for the president to have a 40 percent approval rating in these 60 Democratic districts," Bolger said. "When you look at history, when the president is below 50 percent nationally, his party tends to lose more than 40 seats."

Berry down to 40 percent. All you need to do is get to know him.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Welcome, marie, you are very funny.

Posted by: drindl | June 15, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

first, no viewers, now no integrity. they are hot on MSNBC's tail to the bottom:

Ted Turner must be flinging his remote at the wall in despair. CNN, the cable network he founded, is poised to turn its prime-time schedule over to two disgraced public figures, ex-Gov. Eliot Spitzer and former British tabloid editor Piers Morgan, in its desperate bid to restore lost ratings.

Hooker-loving Spitzer is thisclose to a deal to co-host an 8 p.m. talk show, sources said. Morgan -- a former editor of Britain's Daily Mirror being groomed to replace Larry King -- was caught up in a scandal in 2000 after he bought shares in a company before his paper touted them as good buys. He quit in 2004 after printing fake photos of Iraqi prisoners being tortured by British soldiers.


Two perfect liberals - a cheat and a liar.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 15, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

So this is the new Brietbart tool in the rightwing box – stalking elected Demmocrats and confronting them in the street, and then videotaping it to try to ruin them.

We'll see whether journos swallow this one whole like both the WaPo and the NYTimes did with the phony/fake edited ACORN video.

If two strange men came up and stuck a camera in my face, refusing to identify themselves, I would have done the same thing -- and so would most anyone else but a coward.

Posted by: drindl | June 15, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Great video from the Bachman's race against Tinklenberg:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJBpL5ORWUo

"...Minnesota cast your vote and hunt that witch..."

Posted by: mariewilson11 | June 15, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues APPARENTLY you have NEver tasted the SWEETNESS THAT IS A MUSE.
---------------------------------------
Bwahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!

No, I don't think I've ever tasted such sweetness.

So glad you are so inspired. There have been relatively few so inspired by 37. Actually, there has been no one who has been inspired by him. Until you came along.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Bsimon, what do you think about Bachmann's fit for her district? I just checked the results of the last few Presidential elections. While her district has been the most conservative in the state, Obama did manage to pull 45% there. I think Bachmann is a lot more backwards than the constituents of a 45% Obama district.

Posted by: DDAWD | June 15, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Why does the columnist consider Rep. Bachmann's remark a "gaffe." It sounds like she was speaking "truth to power" to me. it's only a gaffe if it isn't true.

Posted by: CarlosHawes | June 15, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues APPARENTLY you have NEver tasted the SWEETNESS THAT IS A MUSE.

37thand0street - OH DULCINEA-

is like prophet to what political DISCOURSE COULD BECOME IF LEFT TO THE markerT foRCES,

SOME METH,

A CAP LOCKED kEYBOARD AND A WELL WORN

SPACE

BAR.

Posted by: mariewilson11 | June 15, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

first of all assault and battery is a civil legal term
secondly isn't it a bit odd that these same righties who are so up in arms about this story are totally silent when it comes to Whitman who shelled out $200,000 to buy her victim's silence after accosting an employee.
And finally if this was truly an assault rather
than a provoked political stunt, why were
these so called students not immediately in
the D.C. D.A.'s office filing class C assault charges?
Perhaps the D.A.s would have disclosed their
identity, who was behind their political stalking and potentially what they were paid, and would have questioned their behavior prior to the incident, all matters these
punks obviously don't want the public to know about, but would obviously be explored by any credible defense lawyer.

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

first of all assault and battery is a civil legal term
secondly isn't it a bit odd that these same righties who are so up in arms about this story are totally silent when it comes to Whitman who shelled out $200,000 to buy her victim's silence after accosting an employee.
And finally if this was truly an assault rather
than a provoked political stunt, why were
these so called students not immediately in
the D.C. D.A.'s office filing class C assault charges?
Perhaps the D.A.s would have disclosed their
identity, who was behind their political stalking and potentially what they were paid, and would have questioned their behavior prior to the incident, all matters these
punks obviously don't want the public to know about, but would obviously be explored by any credible defense lawyer.

Posted by: leichtman1 | June 15, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

ddawd - the 'stunning' claim is particularly revisionist, considering Rep Bachmann represents the most conservative district in Minnesota. The locals are more inclined to agree with Rep Bachmann's characterization than to be offended by it. As a 'gaffe' it only made her more prominent and produced a huge cash windfall for Tink, who didn't know what to do with the money.

Posted by: bsimon1 | June 15, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

@mariewilson,

Go, girl. Let's see if you get banned for mirroring our resident obsessive/compulsive, 37th.

Bets anyone?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | June 15, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I wasn't stunned that Bachmann won. Unless you are saying that it's stunning that people let her off the hook for being so mild on Obama?

To say that Obama may have anti-American views was downright tame compared to the right wing invective we heard. Is it really worse than "pals around with terrorists"? (Of course, Miss Palin got crushed, so who knows?)

Posted by: DDAWD | June 15, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

We are talking about whether someone was RESPONSIBLE with their vote or not.

That is the question.

And - when half the country is saying "EXPERIENCE MATTERS"

AND "QUALIFICATIONS ARE IMPORTANT"

And you have millions of people IGNORING THAT SIMPLE LOGIC.


and millions of people PURPOSING IGNORING EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS -

An instead voting for someone WHO WAS CLEARLY INEXPERIENCED - AND UNQUALIFIED

BECAUSE SHE WAS WHITE and PALIN WAS A MILF AND THAT IS ENOUGH FOR US

AND YES - IT IS ABOUT TIME THAT THE REPUBLICANS WERE HONEST THEY VOTED FOR PALIN BECAUSE SHE WAS A MILF. A VERY HOT MILF

If a white man had the SAME INEXPERIENCE, THE SAME LACK OF QUALIFICATIONS - HOW far in the Presidential race would he have gone ???? LOOK AT MCCAIN HE IS STRUGGLING WITHOUT A MILF IN AZ

Yet - if people vote for someone WHO IS CLEARLY INEXPERIENCED AND UNQUALIFIED...BUT HOT AT LEAST THEY GOT THAT....!!!!


AND IF THAT PERSON MESSES UP - SAFETY INSPECTIONS ARE NOT DONE PROPERLY - AND AN OIL RIG BLOWS UP. THEY ARE STILL HOT AND THE MEN OF THE GULF WOULD LIKE A VISIT. no?


Is it asking too much that you take personal responsibility for giving someone a job - a job that they clearly can not handle. DRILL BABY DRILL IS NOT A SLOGAN IT IS A WAY OF LIFE THE WAY GOD INTENDED IT TO BE.


11 People are dead, hundreds of birds are dying - thousands of fishermen are out of work. WE CAN AT LEAST HUM DRILL BABY DRILL IN A RESPECTFUL WAY ALMOST LIKE AMAZING GRACE SINCE IT IS THE SOUTH AND WE ARE SENSITIVE TO THAT AND ALL


An entire ecosytem could be destroyed. DRILL BABY DRILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT -- PALIN SAID IT AND SAID AND SAID AND i THINK THE PEOPLE IN NEW ORLEANS WOULD GO OUT AND DRILL WITH PALIN IF THEY HAD THE CHANCE BUT THE SOCIALIST COMMIE nAZI GOVERNMENT WON'T GIVE THEM THAT CHANCE TO DRILL BABY DRILL RIGHT NOW!


MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE SHOULD HAVE BEEN CLEANED UP BY A MILF!!!!!!!!!I THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK YOUR COUNTRY TO DO?


THINK OF THE JOB SHE WOULD HAVE DONE WITH THOSE GLASSES, A TIGHT RED SKIRT AND A FEW SNARKY LINES THOSE MEN WOULD HAVE BEEN SAFE IN THEIR DRILLING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


DRILL BABY DRILL -WHY NOT THE OIL IS GODS OIL AND HE GAVE IT TO AMERICA FOR HER SUVS


BUT THE SAFETY INSPECTIONS STILL WERE NOT BEING DONE PROPERLY BUT SHE WAS STILL HOT - THAT LUCKY TODD i WISH i WAS HER TODD FOR A DAY AND ONE MORNING IN WASILLA.


iS IT TOO MUCH TO ASK THE PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T GIVE PALIN THE JOB TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE JOB SHE COULD HAVE DONE ?????

OK THE PLATFORM COULD HAVE BLOWN UP ANYWAY BUT WHO IS HOTTER OR WHITER PALIN OR OBAMA ----?????

.

Posted by: mariewilson11 | June 15, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

We are talking about whether someone was RESPONSIBLE with their vote or not.

That is the question.

And - when half the country is saying "EXPERIENCE MATTERS"

AND "QUALIFICATIONS ARE IMPORTANT"

And you have millions of people IGNORING THAT SIMPLE LOGIC.


and millions of people PURPOSING IGNORING EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS -

An instead voting for someone WHO WAS CLEARLY INEXPERIENCED - AND UNQUALIFIED

BECAUSE SHE WAS WHITE and PALIN WAS A MILF AND THAT IS ENOUGH FOR US

AND YES - IT IS ABOUT TIME THAT THE REPUBLICANS WERE HONEST THEY VOTED FOR PALIN BECAUSE SHE WAS A MILF. A VERY HOT MILF

If a white man had the SAME INEXPERIENCE, THE SAME LACK OF QUALIFICATIONS - HOW far in the Presidential race would he have gone ???? LOOK AT MCCAIN HE IS STRUGGLING WITHOUT A MILF IN AZ

Yet - if people vote for someone WHO IS CLEARLY INEXPERIENCED AND UNQUALIFIED...BUT HOT AT LEAST THEY GOT THAT....!!!!


AND IF THAT PERSON MESSES UP - SAFETY INSPECTIONS ARE NOT DONE PROPERLY - AND AN OIL RIG BLOWS UP. THEY ARE STILL HOT AND THE MEN OF THE GULF WOULD LIKE A VISIT. no?


Is it asking too much that you take personal responsibility for giving someone a job - a job that they clearly can not handle. DRILL BABY DRILL IS NOT A SLOGAN IT IS A WAY OF LIFE THE WAY GOD INTENDED IT TO BE.


11 People are dead, hundreds of birds are dying - thousands of fishermen are out of work. WE CAN AT LEAST HUM DRILL BABY DRILL IN A RESPECTFUL WAY ALMOST LIKE AMAZING GRACE SINCE IT IS THE SOUTH AND WE ARE SENSITIVE TO THAT AND ALL


An entire ecosytem could be destroyed. DRILL BABY DRILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT -- PALIN SAID IT AND SAID AND SAID AND i THINK THE PEOPLE IN NEW ORLEANS WOULD GO OUT AND DRILL WITH PALIN IF THEY HAD THE CHANCE BUT THE SOCIALIST COMMIE nAZI GOVERNMENT WON'T GIVE THEM THAT CHANCE TO DRILL BABY DRILL RIGHT NOW!


MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE SHOULD HAVE BEEN CLEANED UP BY A MILF!!!!!!!!!I THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK YOUR COUNTRY TO DO?


THINK OF THE JOB SHE WOULD HAVE DONE WITH THOSE GLASSES, A TIGHT RED SKIRT AND A FEW SNARKY LINES THOSE MEN WOULD HAVE BEEN SAFE IN THEIR DRILLING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


DRILL BABY DRILL -WHY NOT THE OIL IS GODS OIL AND HE GAVE IT TO AMERICA FOR HER SUVS


BUT THE SAFETY INSPECTIONS STILL WERE NOT BEING DONE PROPERLY BUT SHE WAS STILL HOT - THAT LUCKY TODD i WISH i WAS HER TODD FOR A DAY AND ONE MORNING IN WASILLA.


iS IT TOO MUCH TO ASK THE PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T GIVE PALIN THE JOB TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE JOB SHE COULD HAVE DONE ?????

OK THE PLATFORM COULD HAVE BLOWN UP ANYWAY BUT WHO IS HOTTER OR WHITER PALIN OR OBAMA ----?????

.

Posted by: mariewilson11 | June 15, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Whether the 2 videographers were students working on a project or operatives of Breitbart or the RNC, it's fairly clear that the goal of the edited video itself is not to unseat Etheridge but to promote "create-the-news" pseudo journalism as the only true purveyor of truth.

Posted by: WhenRepublicansAttack | June 15, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

This wasn't a "gaffe", it was a assault and battery. His behavior was absolutely unacceptable, and he only apologized because the video went viral. He has become a disgrace to the Democratic Party, and this Liberal calls for his immediate resignation. I am so sick of people - from both Parties - going into Congress and then acting like they have become Gods over us. They work for us, not the other way around!

Posted by: thomasmc1957 | June 15, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps it's not a gaffe, but Rep Kirk has some more damage control to do if he's going to save his senate candidacy.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ju2VUx2YjhbyG5Obd_oP9PGUME-AD9GBMBTO0

Also; it was not 'stunning' that Rep Bachmann pulled out a win in 08, gaffe and all. It was more stunning that Bob Anderson, who didn't campaign, earned 10% of the vote.

Posted by: bsimon1 | June 15, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company