Did Scott Brown link the crashy nut in Austin with his campaign?
By adamg - 2/19/10 - 11:25 am
I didn't vote for Brown, doubt I will in two years, but in this video, is he really attempting to legitimize a suicidal murderer or is he just being incredibly clumsy in a live interview? I think he's trying to deflect Faux's attempt to make the loser a martyr, because he says he hopes the guy isn't connected to the sort of real anger he claims got him elected, but that he just completely mangled the thought. But maybe I'm missing something (if so, fire away):
Comments
I guess...
Well, Scott Brown does not do well in national interviews. He mangled that one that popped up during the campaign about not knowing whether or not Obama was an American, too.
So, maybe he's just REALLY BAD at trying to say "No, that's not the same anger that brought me into office," or deflecting other inane questions.
He seems to draw a comparison
Its pretty clear he's made a link in his mind between the people who voted for him and a guy flying a plane into a government building. Here's a thought experiment. Lets say all the facts here were the same but for one thing: what if the guy was a muslim? Hmmm?? I bet Scott would have had quite a different thing to say. Don't you?
No, no, you're not missing a thing
Whether he's inviting suitors for his daughters or talking about planes flying into buildings, Scott Brown is showing that he lacks a screening mechanism.
And what you see in that interview is evidence that in the dim recesses of his mind, he believes that this act of domestic terrorism may be an understandable (even if not defensible) reaction to frustration over paying taxes.
Watch the interview a couple of times. This guy's tea kettle is rattling.
You know what would help him here?
Teleprompters.
OR...
....a note written on his hand.
This guy is an embarrassment. Being well spoken is not a crime. Sounding like you are well educated is also not a crime.
Speaking of being well spoken
Um uh er, I uh, er, trust uh, er uh that you uh, er had uh, er, the same uh, er, opinion for the paaahst uh, er, 47 years?
the spin we're in
Brown wants to have it both ways. He wants to talk about himself, his campaign, the populist "rage" he says got him elected and himself at the center of fixing Washington ... while at the same time deflecting any association with the Austin IRS bomber.
Neil Cavuto also wants to separate the Austin IRS bomber from the "populist rage" that got Scott Brown elected:
We can probably agree that the man's suicide is an sign of an irrational decision. But unless Cavuto wants to present some evidence, he is engaged in journalistic malpractice for denouncing the guys "rants" about the "system", "IRS", and "Government". Clearly Cavuto wants viewers to think the man's complaints have no merit, even if we can agree his suicide was irrational.
If you feed people a steady diet of "guv'mint is the problem" and give them half a rational reason to confirm it, the unbalanced ones will predictably go off.
Cavuto and Brown are spinning about political rage of an individual who in their minds threatens to make the populist rage movement look unhinged.
In other words, they can't help but see every event, whether or not it relates to their political beliefs, as potentially affecting other people's opinions about their ideology which is why they present their spin and not the news.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5268124n
Meanwhile
Despite the PMSNBC/WaPo crowd linking this Stack guy with what they sophomorically refer to as 'teabaggers', the kook's manifesto reveals that he was a leftie with not much in common with the tea party crowd at all.
For example?
I get "nut mad at the world", but I can't do the mental gymnastics required to see it as a "lefty" document. Maybe you can tell me what I'm missing?
example
I took a quick look at his manifesto yesterday and it contained anti-capitalism, anti-Bush, anti-big business and pro-government health care statements. It also ends with:
The Washington Post version? This:
Interpretation
I also took a quick look and saw anti-bailout, anti-government, and anti-tax sentiments.
Guess we'll never know, but he did choose to fly into an IRS building and not the offices of some Fortune 500 company.
Does that matter?
After all, the kook is now dead. It really doesn't matter what way his kookiness leans if talking heads of one persuasion choose to "feel his pain" to paint him as a martyr for all persons who see themselves as similarly "abused" by having to pay taxes to support services they consume.
Martyr, eh?
I think it appropriate, at this juncture, to point out that until watching certain "news" broadcasts yesterday, some huge percentage of Americans, thought that martyr = Islamic terrorist conducting "martyrdom operation".
maybe a bit of a reach
I have to say that when I first heard about the incident yesterday, my second thought was wouldn't it be something if this guy (pilot) is linked to the Tea Party because then it becomes difficult to differentiate, in an intellectually consistent way, the Tea Party people from the far right militia people around the country. What do you think that would do for the careers of the Sarah Palins of the world?
w/r/t our new Senator, well, you might be reading (or hearing) a bit too much into it. It just looked to me to be a clumsy attempt to get to his previously provided talking points as quickly as possible. Who knows, though.
Lamentable
I don't just lament the loss of life. I lament the loss of a potential supporter.
It's an interesting and gray
It's an interesting and gray area. On one hand, the GOP doesn't want their mouthpiece(FOX) to be putting down the anger that keeps it alive, so they have to be careful when they talk about issues such as this. If only the guy had been a "leftie radical" Brown could have stated that "rightie values" are superior and more patriotic. As it is, he's got to tread carefully lest he perturbs some of the radical fringes that got him into office. You know in their minds they do differentiate between the "radicals" Obama "hangs around with" and the radicals that vote them into office. Of course, I'm not saying all GOP'ers are radical, but they certainly courted that fringe this past election.
But maybe I'm missing something (if so, fire away):
Well, for one thing, there's no "U" in "Fox"....
Don't you mean that there's no 'A' ?