Read a little. Learn a lot. • Tightly-written news, views and stuff • Follow us on Twitter • Be a Facebook Fan • Tumble us!
 

Posted on June 14, 2010 | tags

 
 

Politics: Andrew Breitbart is making politicians look like idiots again

  • I deeply and profoundly regret my reaction and I apologize to all involved. Throughout my many years of service to the people of North Carolina, I have always tried to treat people from all viewpoints with respect. No matter how intrusive and partisan our politics can become, this does not justify a poor response.
  • Rep. Bob Etheridge • Regarding the altercation he had with a couple of “college students” recently. After being asked if he supported the Obama agenda, he got angry, said “who are you?” repeatedly and started hitting the kids. While dude’s reaction wasn’t exactly called for, we argue this statement on BigGovernment.com is just as bad: “Expect more of this. It is going to be a long, hot summer.” Yeah, sure guys. Make more of these stupid fake controversies to draw attention to your crappy site. Play to the worst tendencies of politics. source

Posted by Ernie Smith • Permalink


 
  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    Yes, Big Government is the real bad guy here, not the Rep that assaulted someone for asking him a question. Glad you got your priorities straight Ernie.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    I don’t think my priorities are unstraight: Andrew Breitbart (or God knows who else) is paying kids money to do stuff like this just to see if they get anything like this. Sometimes, they luck out and something like this happens.

    Fact of the matter, the conflict would’ve never happened had Breitbart never put them up to it.

    It doesn’t excuse what this congressman did, but let’s be honest; they’re like Internet trolls with a paycheck and a camera.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    You know what I find odd? That you didn’t even post the video of the assault.

    Post the kindly old man’s apology and then some supposedly threatening words by Brietbart and call it a day! Not trying to skew your readers view of this scandal in any way are you Ernie by not showing this kindly old man assaulting a guy and grabbing him by the neck?

    It doesn’t matter who these guys are or what their agenda is, it’s not acceptable for a Congressman to assault someone for asking them a question. It really boggles my mind that you’re defending him and attacking the victim here. Do you think rape victims deserve it too because they’re “asking for it” by dressing so provocative?

    You should read this HuffPo article and realize what an idiotic stance you’re taking: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-goldstein/wh…

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    I don’t know if you clicked the source button or not, but there was video of the assault at the link. I posted a quote instead of a video for two reasons.

    First, my format works best when I don’t post the same type of content twice – so a quote goes after a video, a fact box goes after a quote. I’ve done it this way for a year and a half.

    Second, the story was kind of old when I got to it and felt it had moved beyond the video itself to the apology. Both of those reasons had nothing to do with trying to hide information. I chose to do the fresher campaign ad instead because it hadn’t been everywhere yet.

    I still think my prior point stands. It’s possible that they did this to two dozen Congressmen before one took the bait. Just because one took the bait doesn’t mean that it validates this form of gotcha journalism. It’s really unethical. And I’ve criticized James O’Keefe’s work in the past too because of its truth distortion.

    That the Congressman took the bait is awful and unfortunate and he should be reprimanded, but come on, those kids were clearly trying to provoke a response.

    I’ll give you this, Tom: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010…

    The “students” remained anonymous throughout and merely tipped off Breitbart to the clip, which his people then edited.

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010…

    As it is, though, the original WaPo reporter is getting scads of crap about what he wrote.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    I don’t know if you clicked the source button or not, but there was video of the assault at the link. I posted a quote instead of a video for two reasons.

    First, my format works best when I don’t post the same type of content twice – so a quote goes after a video, a fact box goes after a quote. I’ve done it this way for a year and a half.

    Second, the story was kind of old when I got to it and felt it had moved beyond the video itself to the apology. Both of those reasons had nothing to do with trying to hide information. I chose to do the fresher campaign ad instead because it hadn’t been everywhere yet.

    I still think my prior point stands. It’s possible that they did this to two dozen Congressmen before one took the bait. Just because one took the bait doesn’t mean that it validates this form of gotcha journalism. It’s really unethical. And I’ve criticized James O’Keefe’s work in the past too because of its truth distortion.

    That the Congressman took the bait is awful and unfortunate and he should be reprimanded, but come on, those kids were clearly trying to provoke a response.

    I’ll give you this, Tom: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010…

    The “students” remained anonymous throughout and merely tipped off Breitbart to the clip, which his people then edited.

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010…

    As it is, though, the original WaPo reporter is getting scads of crap about what he wrote.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    It’s “unethical” and “provoking a response” to ask a Congressman a question? You do know they work for us, right?

    You’re acting like these guys jumped out of the bushes wearing ape masks and carrying a Gadsen flag. They stopped him and asked him 1 question and the guy flipped his shit. The aggrieved party is the guy that got manhandled and his neck rung by the Congressman, not the guys that DARED ask him a question.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    I’m sorry, there’s a difference here, man. Any question can be provocative if it’s asked the right way. And that question was worded in a provocative way.

    If they really wanted to just ask him a question, why the cameras? Why did they give the video to BigGovernment.com of all sites instead of The Washington Post? Or whereever else?

    I just can’t let the kids get a pass here. They clearly were trying to get SOMETHING out of him. They got more than they expected.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    Ah I see, so asking provocative questions and not giving the video to established media sources is all you need to justify physical violence by a Congressman against a citizen? What is the limit on the amount of violence you find reasonable in this instance, you know for future reference? Punching to the face? biting? are kicks to the balls off limits? We need to know these things so the next time a Congressman aggressively assaults a college students we know WHO to be outraged at.

    You’re working yourself into a corner here that doesn’t have a happy ending.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    No, I’m not. I haven’t changed my stance one bit. Those kids baited him. He overreacted. End of story.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    “I haven’t changed my stance one bit.”

    And therein lies your problem.

    It’s funny how you’re pretty much working off the DNC talking points Politico listed here: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0610/Dem…

    Even down to blaming Breitbart for some reason. Good going Ernie.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    Sorry, I didn’t get that memo. Who cares what the talking points are? I’d feel the same way about the situation if Democratic trackers were trying to ambush a GOP guy. No matter his reaction, trailing some politician to draw a reaction strikes me as wrong. It’s passive-aggressive.

    And just because Etheridge drew blood doesn’t completely invalidate the faults of the kids. They were reportedly waiting outside a Nancy Pelosi fundraiser. They were looking for trouble.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    Sorry, I didn’t get that memo. Who cares what the talking points are? I’d feel the same way about the situation if Democratic trackers were trying to ambush a GOP guy. No matter his reaction, trailing some politician to draw a reaction strikes me as wrong. It’s passive-aggressive.

    And just because Etheridge drew blood doesn’t completely invalidate the faults of the kids. They were reportedly waiting outside a Nancy Pelosi fundraiser. They were looking for trouble.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    Sorry, I didn’t get that memo. Who cares what the talking points are? I’d feel the same way about the situation if Democratic trackers were trying to ambush a GOP guy. No matter his reaction, trailing some politician to draw a reaction strikes me as wrong. It’s passive-aggressive.

    And just because Etheridge drew blood doesn’t completely invalidate the faults of the kids. They were reportedly waiting outside a Nancy Pelosi fundraiser. They were looking for trouble.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    So “looking for trouble” is all the justification needed for a Congressman to attack a constituent?

    Is that your official stance?

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    Not taking the bait.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    You already took it.

    Hey you know what, that oil spill isn’t really BP’s fault, all that oil was just sitting there underground looking for trouble.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    Ambush journalism that’s looking for a response like Etheridge’s and an oil spill clearly caused by an accident: Not the same thing at all.

    The metaphor you’re looking for is the kid on the playground who’s getting goaded into a fight.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    You can always tell when you’ve backed someone into a corner, they immediately lose their sense of humor.

    But anyway your analogy makes no sense because asking a Congressman a single, legitimate question isn’t “goading”, and it wasn’t really a “fight” since the kid didn’t even try to fight back, it’s an assault.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    I don’t know if you clicked the source button or not, but there was video of the assault at the link. I posted a quote instead of a video for two reasons.

    First, my format works best when I don’t post the same type of content twice – so a quote goes after a video, a fact box goes after a quote. I’ve done it this way for a year and a half.

    Second, the story was kind of old when I got to it and felt it had moved beyond the video itself to the apology. Both of those reasons had nothing to do with trying to hide information. I chose to do the fresher campaign ad instead because it hadn’t been everywhere yet.

    I still think my prior point stands. It’s possible that they did this to two dozen Congressmen before one took the bait. Just because one took the bait doesn’t mean that it validates this form of gotcha journalism. It’s really unethical. And I’ve criticized James O’Keefe’s work in the past too because of its truth distortion.

    That the Congressman took the bait is awful and unfortunate and he should be reprimanded, but come on, those kids were clearly trying to provoke a response.

    I’ll give you this, Tom: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010…

    The “students” remained anonymous throughout and merely tipped off Breitbart to the clip, which his people then edited.

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010…

    As it is, though, the original WaPo reporter is getting scads of crap about what he wrote.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    It’s “unethical” and “provoking a response” to ask a Congressman a question? You do know they work for us, right?

    You’re acting like these guys jumped out of the bushes wearing ape masks and carrying a Gadsen flag. They stopped him and asked him 1 question and the guy flipped his shit. The aggrieved party is the guy that got manhandled and his neck rung by the Congressman, not the guys that DARED ask him a question.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    I’m sorry, there’s a difference here, man. Any question can be provocative if it’s asked the right way. And that question was worded in a provocative way.

    If they really wanted to just ask him a question, why the cameras? Why did they give the video to BigGovernment.com of all sites instead of The Washington Post? Or whereever else?

    I just can’t let the kids get a pass here. They clearly were trying to get SOMETHING out of him. They got more than they expected.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    Ah I see, so asking provocative questions and not giving the video to established media sources is all you need to justify physical violence by a Congressman against a citizen? What is the limit on the amount of violence you find reasonable in this instance, you know for future reference? Punching to the face? biting? are kicks to the balls off limits? We need to know these things so the next time a Congressman aggressively assaults a college students we know WHO to be outraged at.

    You’re working yourself into a corner here that doesn’t have a happy ending.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    No, I’m not. I haven’t changed my stance one bit. Those kids baited him. He overreacted. End of story.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    “I haven’t changed my stance one bit.”

    And therein lies your problem.

    It’s funny how you’re pretty much working off the DNC talking points Politico listed here: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0610/Dem…

    Even down to blaming Breitbart for some reason. Good going Ernie.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    Sorry, I didn’t get that memo. Who cares what the talking points are? I’d feel the same way about the situation if Democratic trackers were trying to ambush a GOP guy. No matter his reaction, trailing some politician to draw a reaction strikes me as wrong. It’s passive-aggressive.

    And just because Etheridge drew blood doesn’t completely invalidate the faults of the kids. They were reportedly waiting outside a Nancy Pelosi fundraiser. They were looking for trouble.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    So “looking for trouble” is all the justification needed for a Congressman to attack a constituent?

    Is that your official stance?

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    Not taking the bait.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    You already took it.

    Hey you know what, that oil spill isn’t really BP’s fault, all that oil was just sitting there underground looking for trouble.

  • http://shortformblog.com shortformblog

    Ambush journalism that’s looking for a response like Etheridge’s and an oil spill clearly caused by an accident: Not the same thing at all.

    The metaphor you’re looking for is the kid on the playground who’s getting goaded into a fight.

  • http://www.theblacksmoke.com/ Tom Alday

    You can always tell when you’ve backed someone into a corner, they immediately lose their sense of humor.

    But anyway your analogy makes no sense because asking a Congressman a single, legitimate question isn’t “goading”, and it wasn’t really a “fight” since the kid didn’t even try to fight back, it’s an assault.

  • Pingback: Rep. Bob Etheridge screwed over by GOP operatives | ShortFormBlog

 

More in Politics (1 of 1 articles)