The Real Extremists

A recent poll of voters in Iowa shows Michelle Bachmann up 13 points over Mitt Romney (her nearest challenger). Magellan Strategies (the group responsible for the survey) says the following:

Michele Bachmann has broad support across all voting subgroups, with particular strength among men and social conservatives. Among the 44% of respondents that identified themselves as a member of the Tea Party movement, Michele Bachmann leads by 33 points.

But as Bachmann’s popularity surges, attacks against her have grown more vicious. Perhaps the worst example comes from Marc Maron, who said the following a few days ago on Bill Maher’s HBO show:

I don’t wanna be crass, but I just hope that Marcus Bachmann takes all that, y’know that rage that comes from repression and denial and brings it into the bedroom with her [laughter]. I hope he f--s her angrily, because that’s how I would. And I’ve thought about it [more laughter].

The attacks on Bachmann are similar to those launched at Sarah Palin during her presidential campaign.  Sandra Bernhard, for instance warned Palin that she would be “gang-raped by my big black brothers” if she were to come to Manhattan.

The attacks on Palin and Bachmann have attracted some attention, but the sex-related verbal attacks on conservative men are just as troubling.

During the Palin campaign, NBC aired a Saturday Night Live skit that featured a segment  suggesting that Todd Palin might be having sex with his own daughters. On the aforementioned Bill Maher show, Maron portrayed Marcus Bachmann as angry, repressed and possibly animalistic. Shortly thereafter, fellow guest Dan Savage portrayed Senator Rick Santorum as someone to be sexually victimized, saying the following:

Just so that we don’t get charges of sexism, because only Michelle Bachmann was (unintelligible), I sometimes think about f_cking the shit out of Rick Santorum.

Marcus Bachmann and Rick Santorum have been portrayed as extremists because of their views on homosexuality. But never, to my knowledge, has either man advocated violence toward gays or to political opponents. Never have I heard either one of them say anything remotely like this.

I would suggest, therefore, that the real extremists are men like Maron and Savage, who delight in daydreaming about subjecting those who disagree with them to rape and violence.

Savage, who recently served as grand marshall for the Gay Pride Parade in New York City, is not doing the Gay Rights movement any favors by behaving the way he does. Proponents of the movement often suggest that their movement is one that advocates love and tolerance. Savage is not advocating either of those things. Instead, he is laughing about the thought of sexually assaulting a man with whom he has political differences. That should appall anyone.

 

Comments

[larry kurtz]

Sorry, Ms. Flint: Appalled? i cackled all the way through your missive wondering how old you are or whether you've ever been out of South Dakota. Apparently you've never seen Eyes Wide Shut or been to a gay bar. What the Bachmanns do in their own bedroom(s) is none of my business.

Back before your time there was a guy named Tom Eagleton. He wasn't even close to being as stark, raving psychotic as Michele Bachmann is or anywhere close to as hateful as Rick Santorum is.

[Jimi]

Miranda,

Nice Post!

Please don't let Larry's comment affect you in any way, shape or form. Obviously, he has missed the entire point, and I doubt someone as unstable as Larry is can be calmed enough to get it.

[Donald Pay]

So, you seem to trying to equate the statements of humorists, satirists and entertainers with the actions of a quack clinician who uses federal funding in pursuit of trying to "cure" homosexuality (which has led to suicides) and to the vile positions of a former Senator and candidate for President who would use the power of government to strip children away from their gay parents. To me, the whininess and cowardliness of your defense of anti-gay extremism is to be pitied.

[duggersd]

Donald, you are equating Bill Mahar to a comedian. Ann Coulter said it best. The only reason these people make the stupid statements they do is so blogs will talk about them. If not for the blogosphere, nobody would even know they said anything. So for that, Miranda, I am afraid you are only making a few people more know what these idiots have said. To be sure, if I said I hope Bill Clinton f--s her angrily, because that’s how I would. And I’ve thought about it (ewww!), you can rest assured I would be called all kinds of things. But Donald and Larry do not see that.

[duggersd]

Donald, you are equating Bill Mahar to a comedian. Ann Coulter said it best. The only reason these people make the stupid statements they do is so blogs will talk about them. If not for the blogosphere, nobody would even know they said anything. So for that, Miranda, I am afraid you are only making a few people more know what these idiots have said. To be sure, if I said I hope Bill Clinton f--s her angrily, because that’s how I would. And I’ve thought about it (ewww!), you can rest assured I would be called all kinds of things. But Donald and Larry do not see that.

[Donald Pay]

No, I think the statements are bad. They are attempts at gross humor that went way too far. I put them in the same category as the type of snarky sarcasm that Ann Coulter and Dennis Miller sometimes try to do, and which often badly misfires. But I don't get too upset with them because they are saying things in jest, or trying to. The people you have to be concerned about are the Santorums and Bachmans of the world. They are deadly serious, and I mean deadly.

[Malcolm]

While I don't like those statements, I still think that they are not the real problem. Most of them sound like jokes, albeit bad ones, whereas the things Marcus Bachmann said were certainly not. He called homosexuals "barbarians" who needed to be educated. I'm sorry, but that's just plain wrong. Not because he said it, but because he clearly believed it. I seriously doubt that any of the people mentioned above would actually approve of or commit sexual crimes against these people, but people like Marcus Bachmann actually believe the horrible things that they say about people. Hate speech that ACTUALLY promotes violence against a group of people, in addition to promoting an atmosphere of intolerance towards them? THAT is extremism that needs to be stopped - not harmless bad humor.

I would also like to add that there is a big difference between something said by a comedian or other minor public figure and a person running for political office. Additionally, Sandra Bernhard actually stated that she wished Palin no actual harm, and that the statement was part of a larger comedy piece - as she is a comedian. Not a presidential hopeful. Call me "elitist", but I expect my president to be a very high caliber of human being. As such, I hold anyone who seeks that position to an extremely high standard, a much higher standard than I hold my comedians to. That's my point of view, and I hope I have been quite clear. Thank you, and have a wonderful day.

[Miranda]

Thanks everyone for your comments!

Mr. Kurtz: Somehow, cackling seems to fit you. You're right on three accounts. I have not been to a gay bar, I have not watched Eyes Wide Shut, and the private life of the Bachmanns' is, well, private. As for me, I am old enough to have one school-aged child, but not old enough yet to make a habit out of cackling. I have traveled through much of the Midwest, visited both coasts and lived, for a number of years, in California. I even briefly resided in the Bay Area.

Jimi: Thank you!

Donald: I do not, in fact, equate them. I believe the "comedians" in this case are much worse. Not long ago, one of the lines that was often repeated by those in favor of gay rights was, "Being gay is not a choice. Nobody would choose to be gay." The argument was that gays were so miserable because of the way they were treated, that, if they could have chosen to be straight, they would have.

Those at Bachmann's clinic, if, in fact, they did provide reparative therapy were, whether or not you agree with their beliefs or methods, attempting to help people who didn't want to suffer find a way out. Their methods do not appear to have been hostile. As many have pointed out, the clinic was voluntary and made no secret of the fact that it had a religious bent. You could argue that their treatment was ineffective, that those who provided it were misguided, or perhaps that it had negative consequences. However, where I think those at the clinic are superior to so-called comedians like Maron, is that their motivation seems to have been a desire to help, rather than a desire to harm.

I reject the idea that slapping the label "comedian" on yourself makes you immune to responsibility for your words. Now, politics and comedy are often mixed. While men like Maron and Maher might only call themselves comedians, they also offer political commentary and often do their utmost to influence politics.

Consider, for instance, Maher's role in the Christine O'Donnell race. Because of this, I think they should be held accountable when they make the kinds of vicious remarks they did on this segment. If they were joking, I'm afraid I missed the joke part. Where were they funny?

Furthermore, it wasn't long ago that several Democrats were suggesting that by using cross-hairs on political maps, Republicans were pushing men like Jared Lee Loughner to violence. If people are so easily influenced that seeing cross-hairs on a political map can inspire them to kill, what might Maron and Savage inspire?

Finally, Savage is an "advice columnist" who runs an anti-bullying campaign. The fact that he thinks the idea of sexually bullying of Rick Santorum is funny makes a joke of his campaign.

DuggerSD: Coulter may have a point, but I think it's about more than attention or ratings. To me, it looks like an attempt to intimidate conservatives, especially those who disagree with them on the issue of homosexuality. I agree with your last point. A conservative who said this would (and should) lose his job.

Malcolm: Thank you for your perspective. I listened to the Marcus Bachmann clips and I can see why it might look like he was referring to gays as "barbarians." But it sounds to me as if he is referring to teenagers as barbarians instead. Bachmann actually appears to take a rather understanding approach to teenage struggles, noting that teenagers have been curious about sex since the beginning of time, and even conceding, when his interviewer asks if "experimentation" is part of that that it certainly could be. But, he says, parents need to help educate "barbarians" and to show them that not everything that feels right is. While it is certainly fair to say that Bachmann's position is wrong, I do not think the Barbarian comment was about homosexuals. I would also note that if you can excuse Bernhard for her comments because she later said she wished Palin no harm, then it is fair to excuse Marcus Bachmann for his, as he has said that he does not view gays as Barbarians and that he "would not talk like that."

[Miranda]

Thanks everyone for your comments!

Mr. Kurtz: Somehow, cackling seems to fit you. You're right on three accounts. I have not been to a gay bar, I have not watched Eyes Wide Shut, and the private life of the Bachmanns' is, well, private. As for me, I am old enough to have one school-aged child, but not old enough yet to make a habit out of cackling. I have traveled through much of the Midwest, visited both coasts and lived, for a number of years, in California. I even briefly resided in the Bay Area.

Jimi: Thank you!

Donald: I do not, in fact, equate them. I believe the "comedians" in this case are much worse. Not long ago, one of the lines that was often repeated by those in favor of gay rights was, "Being gay is not a choice. Nobody would choose to be gay." The argument was that gays were so miserable because of the way they were treated, that, if they could have chosen to be straight, they would have.

Those at Bachmann's clinic, if, in fact, they did provide reparative therapy were, whether or not you agree with their beliefs or methods, attempting to help people who didn't want to suffer find a way out. Their methods do not appear to have been hostile. As many have pointed out, the clinic was voluntary and made no secret of the fact that it had a religious bent. You could argue that their treatment was ineffective, that those who provided it were misguided, or perhaps that it had negative consequences. However, where I think those at the clinic are superior to so-called comedians like Maron, is that their motivation seems to have been a desire to help, rather than a desire to harm.

I reject the idea that slapping the label "comedian" on yourself makes you immune to responsibility for your words. Now, politics and comedy are often mixed. While men like Maron and Maher might only call themselves comedians, they also offer political commentary and often do their utmost to influence politics.

Consider, for instance, Maher's role in the Christine O'Donnell race. Because of this, I think they should be held accountable when they make the kinds of vicious remarks they did on this segment. If they were joking, I'm afraid I missed the joke part. Where were they funny?

Furthermore, it wasn't long ago that several Democrats were suggesting that by using cross-hairs on political maps, Republicans were pushing men like Jared Lee Loughner to violence. If people are so easily influenced that seeing cross-hairs on a political map can inspire them to kill, what might Maron and Savage inspire?

Finally, Savage is an "advice columnist" who runs an anti-bullying campaign. The fact that he thinks the idea of sexually bullying of Rick Santorum is funny makes a joke of his campaign.

DuggerSD: Coulter may have a point, but I think it's about more than attention or ratings. To me, it looks like an attempt to intimidate conservatives, especially those who disagree with them on the issue of homosexuality. I agree with your last point. A conservative who said this would (and should) lose his job.

Malcolm: Thank you for your perspective. I listened to the Marcus Bachmann clips and I can see why it might look like he was referring to gays as "barbarians." But it sounds to me as if he is referring to teenagers as barbarians instead. Bachmann actually appears to take a rather understanding approach to teenage struggles, noting that teenagers have been curious about sex since the beginning of time, and even conceding, when his interviewer asks if "experimentation" is part of that that it certainly could be. But, he says, parents need to help educate "barbarians" and to show them that not everything that feels right is. While it is certainly fair to say that Bachmann's position is wrong, I do not think the Barbarian comment was about homosexuals. I would also note that if you can excuse Bernhard for her comments because she later said she wished Palin no harm, then it is fair to excuse Marcus Bachmann for his, as he has said that he does not view gays as Barbarians and that he "would not talk like that."

[Dave]

So did Hitler.... Just sayin'...

[Dave]

Sorry...

"Michele Bachmann has broad support across all voting subgroups, with particular strength among men and social conservatives. Among the 44% of respondents that identified themselves as a member of the Tea Party movement, Michele Bachmann leads by 33 points."

Hitler enjoyed similar popularity.... Just sayin'...

[Jimi]

Dave,

WTF?

What does National Socialism and the Tea Party Movement have in common? And what does the rhetoric of Michele Bachmann have in common with the rhetoric of Hitler?

Weren't the idiot that posted this?

"Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

At least pratice what you preach!

[Bill Fleming]

Miranda, I don't think you're following the logic through. If Bachmann was indeed referring to teenagers as "barbarians" (as you suggest) what then is he implying about homosexuals other than that they are former barbarians who didn't (in his opinion) get properly educated. Is there any other way to read it?

Besides, isn't referring to all teens as barbarians even more insulting than the insult you are trying to excuse him of?

Are your children barbarians? Mine aren't. Never were.

[Bill Fleming]

p.s. Miranda, comedians are supposed to be extreme.

Politicians, not so much.

Bugs Bunny, Wile E. Coyote, and Yosemite Sam are all extremists and we love them for it.

Birthers, not so much.

If you are confusing politics and entertainment,
you wouldn't be the first to do so,
but hopefully, you are still mistaken.

[Lynn]

People like Maher might think of themselves as comedians, but the have lowered themselves into the gutter, which really has nothing comedic about it. If conservatives made comments such as these, they would be excoriated by the media and probably lose their jobs. People who accept or excuse such tripe are down in the gutter with those that utter it.

[Miranda]

Bill: Yes, I do think you could read the barbarian comment through that way. But only as far as you could say that Bachmann feels that someone like me is a Barbarian. I think what he's referring to is something like Hobbes's State Of Nature, which is "nasty, brutish and short." Laws and governments are supposed to protect us from our brutish nature. For Christians like Bachmann, moral laws work the same way. If, that in fact, was what Bachmann meant, then I see nothing wrong with it, though, as I say, I can see why it might look like he meant something else.

Regarding Comedians: No, they're not. They're supposed to be funny. I agree with Lynn and, as I say above, I don't think slapping the label "comedian" on yourself makes you immune to scrutiny or responsibility for your words.

[Bill Fleming]

Miranda. if comedians are not extreme, they aren't funny. i.e. a pie on the table is not funny. A pie in the face is. You're over-thinking this.

[Bill Fleming]

By the way, Miranda, most Americans reject the Hobbsian notion. We are more of the mind of John Locke who believed that human nature is one of reason and tolerance, and that in our natural state, all people are equal and independent. This was the Founders' position and the basis of the DOI, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

You are of course free to believe that you and your children and — by extension — gay people are barbarians if you wish.

But remember you are only free to do so because you live in a Lockean political system.

Under a Hobbsian one, you could be putting your liberty in jeopardy by saying such a thing. Especially if you were talking about the priests or the kings. ;^)

[Miranda]

Bill: Agreed on Locke, but Hobbesian concepts are and have been a part of American thought since the founding. I don't think the suggestion that men, in their state of nature, aren't civilized creatures is extreme.

On Comedians: I don't think you have to be extreme to be funny at all. Some of the best humor is very subtle. The Smothers Brothers, for instance, were often successful, not because they threw pies at each other, but because Tommy would make small mistakes. Sometimes, you really had to be paying attention to notice. Meanwhile, not everything that is extreme is comedy. Comedy needs to have some element of humor. It has to be funny. Savage and Maron are about as funny as cancer.

[Bill Fleming]

I at least agree with you that Savage and Maron aren't funny, Miranda.
Perhaps, that's really your only point? If so, no argument. Best, BF

[Miranda]

No Bill. It's not just unfunny. It's also vicious, repulsive and appalling.
The only excuse you offer for it is that it is comedy. But we both agree that it isn't funny, so where’s the comedy? Let me answer that for you. There is none.

[Bill Fleming]

Good joke or bad, Miranda, it's still a joke. It's about intent, not effect.

As per all of the above, it seems you're still missing the whole point.
The Bachmann's are not joking.
They are insulting and think they are right.
The bad comics at least are conscious that their statements are bogus

[Bill Fleming]

The delicious irony here is that the Bachmanns are getting all the laughs.

[Dave]

Are you saying that such approval ratings were not enjoyed by lunatic leaders throughout history?