For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com
Premium Left blogad
Left Blog Ad

Advertisement
Nasty Tennis Player’s ‘Anger’… Just Like Joe Wilson?
Written By : Warner Todd Huston

It was bound to happen, but it might have been the Orlando Sentinel’s TV reviewer Hal Boedeker that was first out of the gate to compare the obscenity laden tirade disgorged at a tennis match by Serena Williams to the no more than annoyed outburst of “you lied” from Representative Joe Wilson during President Obama’s healthcare speech.

Apparently, according to Sentinel columnist Boedeker, there is no difference to pointing out that a liar is lying, as Wilson did, and losing one’s mind in a petulant, childish explosion of anger, as Williams did. In fact, Boedeker didn’t just compare Wilson to the diva tennis player but he lumped Fox News, Tea Party attendees and Glenn Beck into the mix just for good measure. They are all “angry” according to Boedeker.

After comparing Williams tirade to Rep. Wilson, , Boedeker went on to claim that the “fury” of the Tea Party goers won’t help anything, then he chided Rep. Wilson for raising funds as a result of the incident last Wednesday, hit at Glenn Beck and Fox News, and on and on it went. It was one extended attack on everything conservative.

Of course, one wonders if Mr. Boedeker ever called the anti-war movement on its useless “fury,” or called out Nancy Pelosi for saying that anyone that disagreed with her is “un-American”?

We can guess that likely he hasn’t. After all with all his finger pointing, in a piece where he tries to set himself up as the reasonable one castigating those “angry” conservatives out there, he can’t seem to find examples of where anyone on the left exhibits this same sort of “anger.”

If Mr. Boedeker was so upset at the low form of political discourse, wouldn’t you think he’d be displeased with Pelosi’s name-calling, or perhaps the nearly psychotic behavior of folks like Keith Olbermann? Wouldn’t you think that Mr. Boedeker would raise an eyebrow at the nutty behavior of Cynthia McKinney, or Representative Jan Schakowsky? Shouldn’t Boedeker be a tad upset that Senator Dick Durbin called our troops Nazis, or shocked that Senator John Kerry said that those same troops marauded through the night “terrorizing women and children” in Iraq?

Wouldn’t you think that Boedeker would find it apropos to raise an eyebrow at the Old Media, of which he is a part, constantly calling Tea Party goers “tea baggers” knowing full well of the dirty connotation that the label has?

Boedeker did at least give us a line from the profane Bill Maher. Unfortunately, it isn’t clear at all what he feels about Maher’s words. Boedeker doesn’t tsk Maher nor moan at his rhetoric, he just lists the quote as one of the “range of reactions” that represents “the sharpest attack.” Did he think Maher was over the top or wrong for his outburst? Boedeker doesn’t really say. He leaves it wholly unclear. It is hard to understand the point of the Maher quote unless it was thrown in as an effort to appear non-partisan in his piece. The result is unsatisfactory for balance, for sure.

In the end, it seems clear that “anger” and the low character of today’s political debate is not what vexes Mr. Boedeker. If it did he’d have at least one example of the left’s indulging the same methods and would have come out clearly against such. No, what seems to vex Mr. Boedeker is the conservative side of the aisle. Apparently conservatives are just wrong and Boedeker will use any meme to promulgate that idea. Sadly, it appears that his inapt comparison of the foul-mouthed tennis star to all of America’s conservatives simply served as Bodeker’s vehicle to attack the right.

0
  • http://conservativebootcamp.com martinhale

    They are all “angry” according to Boedeker.

    No sh*t, Sherlock. Amazin' piece of detective work there, Mr. Boedeker.

    Yes, people are angry. Angry at a government which takes an ever-increasing share of their income and pisses it away on self-aggrandising political sop. Angry that 250,000+ people a week are losing their jobs and yet the government is solely focused on spending even more of their money on a health care boondoggle, instead of fixing the economy. Angry that their political representatives are arrogant, aloof and unresponsive to their desires. Angry at being lied to day in and day out. Angry at being told that their protests are an artifact of racism. Angry at being told to "sit down and shut up" by everyone who doesn't like seeing their anger on display.

    I agree with Mr. Boedeker that having a lot of angry people around isn't the ideal condition for a healthy society – what I differ with him over are the solutions. He obviously wants more of what's causing that anger in the first place; I want less of it.

  • gfchicago

    "I agree with Mr. Boedeker that having a lot of angry people around isn't the ideal condition for a healthy society – what I differ with him over are the solutions. He obviously wants more of what's causing that anger in the first place; I want less of it."

    Posted by martinhale

    2009-09-15 10:57:29

    Well said Martin.

  • whats_up

    Angry that their political representatives are arrogant, aloof and unresponsive to their desires.

    Posted by martinhale

    2009-09-15 10:57:29

    Martin,

    It would seem that the constituents arent that unhappy with their elected representatives as they are being sent back to Washington and not voted out of office.

  • http://www.superdickery.com mightysamurai

    It would seem that the constituents arent that unhappy with their elected representatives as they are being sent back to Washington and not voted out of office.

    Yeah Martin, remember that election that didn't happen where our representatives weren't thrown out of office?

  • D-Vega

    I remember it. It happens about every two years or so.

  • http://conservativebootcamp.com martinhale

    Yeah, Martin!

    Oh, wait, that's me.

    Sam's got it right in one, WU. Since the mass displays of anger are a relatively new phenomenon (we conservatives are not used to demonstrating in the streets like you lefties are), and since we haven't held a national election since the new administration took over, I'll wait to see what happens electorally in 2010 before I engage in a debate about whether the displayed anger is an effective force for political change or not.

    But whether that anger fuels a wholesale turnover in elected representatives or not, doesn't make it any less tangible or real. Somewhere north of a hell of a lot of people showed up in DC this weekend to give voice to their anger. Quibble over exact numbers if you wish, but every wide-frame shot I've seen shows that it was a sizable crowd of people, none of whom are particularly happy with the current crop of political animals.

    But ultimately, my comment wasn't really about that – it was really about Mr. Boedeker stating the obvious – that people are angry, and it was about my divergence of opinion with him about possible ways to resolve that anger.

  • whats_up

    But ultimately, my comment wasn't really about that – it was really about Mr. Boedeker stating the obvious – that people are angry, and it was about my divergence of opinion with him about possible ways to resolve that anger.

    Posted by martinhale

    2009-09-15 14:06:17

    That anger manifests itself every four years Martin when "our" guy doesnt win, the other side gets mad, calls all the voters idiots, wonders how in the world that they could elect "that guy" This is not a new phenomenon, it is a cycle that keeps repeating and repeating itself.

  • http://conservativebootcamp.com martinhale

    WU, in all seriousness, when was the last time several hundred thousand conservatives at minimum gathered in political protest in a very liberal city? I've been observing politics for over 45 years, and I can't recall such a large conservative protest ever. I disagree completely with the notion that the anger on parade in DC at the weekend is a merely representative of some sort of cyclical phenomenon. These are people who are new to the world of political protest. This is most definitely not a cyclical event in these people's lives. Sure people grumble about politics, who wins and who loses, but these are people who don't habitually join in rallies and protests. It's not part of their lifestyle. So for them to get themselves to DC, spend the time and money needed to participate, it required a significant emotional commitment on their part.

    I know that you on the left wish fervently to discount the importance of that, and would like to equate what happened in DC at the weekend to rallies conducted by the left over the years. But it's a poor comparison because there are significant differences between the people who make up the two groups. That all those very ordinary people turned out when they don't turn out for other rallies and causes is an indication that strong emotions were driving them. Emotions they're not used to having. These are not jaded anti-war protesters for whom protests are a way of life (Medea Benjamin, Cindy Sheehan, et al); these were everyday people who were feeling extraordinarily (for them) angry, enough so to put everything else on hold for a day or two to participate.

    Most of the people who rallied lived through the Clinton years when they were not in control, and they managed to not protest then. Some of them lived through the Carter presidency and didn't protest then. Now, they turn out. Something's different. There's a different mood among conservative Americans today. You can be as dismissive of that as you wish.

    I am remarking on how the expression of anger which manifested itself in that protest in DC is a new phenomenon within the conservative rank and file. It's emblematic of an anger that's been slow to develop, but which I think will probably be seen more frequently, now that the ice has been broken, and will likely be part of the American debate for a while to come. It may well be that the left has poked the sleeping giant of middle America one time too many, and the giant is waking up. Fringies at both extremes have known for years that they didn't want to wake the sleeping giant, 'cause they might get crushed if they do.

  • http://quantum-kitty.blogspot.com/ simulacre

    Excellent post Mr. Hale. I agree wholeheartedly. 33% of the eligible voters voted in the last election…If the other 66% awakes and finds that their country and way of life are threatened, whichever fringe responsible will go the way of the Whigs.

  • whats_up

    Posted by martinhale

    2009-09-15 17:19:30

    Martin,

    You may be right, we'll see. If more people get involved in politcis and their civic duty that is a good thing, no matter how it comes about. I guess i have seen the faux outrage from the conservatives so many times that it is hard to tell when it is drumed up and when it is real, we will wait and see on this.

  • NoloContendere

    Serena looked like she had a severe case of 'roid rage to me.

Advertisement
Featured Video

Debbie Spend-it-now is selling America’s future to the Chinese

php developer india
Previous Features

Ads

Five Ways Conservatives Will Have to Sell Their Souls if Romney Wins
An Interview With Ron Paul
The RWN Real-Estate Sale
RWN\'s Favorite Tony Robbins Quotes
Stop Apologizing for Being an American
The Amway Experience
Premium Right Ads
Blogads Right
Advertisement
User Info