Imagine If A Republican Had Tweeted This

Blogging While Blue, run by former Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin, sent out this Tweet promoting a post critical of Saxby Chambliss:

Wow. So unless you can pass an annual exam administered by the folks at Blogging While Blue you suffer from dementia or Alzheimers? Or is this an example of the “all Republicans are idiots because we say so” meme?

32 comments

  1. griftdrift says:

    My goodness! Someone said something snarky on twitter! Well blow me down Joshua. I best go set stricter filters on my twitter feed to make sure those nasty Democrats don’t tarnish all the pure and holy pearls of wisdom I receive from Republicans!

    *glass jaw*

  2. Three Jack says:

    My guess, many GOPers either tweeted or at least thought the same when they first heard reports of Saxby’s gaffe (albeit taken somewhat out of context, but still….come on old white guys, just shut up).

  3. pettifogger says:

    Not that bad. Of course, I’d be offended if Shirley Franklin insulted my intelligence, but that is another matter altogether.

    If someone tweeted that about the POTUS, however, MSNBC would insist we have three new “n words” today.

  4. NoTeabagging says:

    I truly despise that waste of bandwidth on the “Soundbite O’ the day” news reporting. Especially when that soundbite is incomplete and then skewed to put words/meaning/spin on the quote.
    so here is the alleged full Saxby quote, from your link above BTW,

    “On Tuesday, during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on sexual assault in the military he said “The young folks who are coming into each of your services are anywhere from 17 to 22 or 23. Gee whiz, the hormone level created by nature sets in place the possibility for these types of things to occur. So we’ve got to be very careful how we address it on our side……But guys, we are not doing our job. You’re not doing yours, and we are not doing ours with the rates we are seeing on sexual assaults.”

    So instead of the incomplete reporting alleging Saxby said it was understandable (or worse OK) for young people to commit sexual assaults while in military service due to raging hormones, He does actually say this is not OK or acceptable for the military, and if I read it right Congress, to have so many sexual assaults in the ranks. Or am I just putting my own spin to that quote?

    • pettifogger says:

      Saxby just wasn’t especially eloquent. Everyone knows what he’s saying, and he’s correct. He didn’t excuse the behavior, he simply mentioned the situation that created fertile ground for such assaults. Which is relevant, considering that situation isn’t going to change regardless of what type of training we provide to members of the military.

      • Rick Day says:

        Not elequent? The entire comment is damning. So this is justification for totes banning females from the military; because men can’t control themselves, it’s the woman’s fault.

        Sexby was making patriarchal excuses for ‘boys will be boys’.

        Um, except for manrape in the military. We can blame that on…the women too!

        There. Is. NO. Excuse.

        • pettifogger says:

          Where did he place any blame on females or say that men can’t control themselves?

          I’m pretty confident his point was that when you take a bunch of young men, put them in stressful situations in terrible locales, empower them and encourage them to be alpha males to the extreme, and keep them generally away from females, things get more combustible than normal. That isn’t an excuse for any behavior, it is simply explaining why the military may have, and continue to have, this problem.

          Your remarks are just PC absurdity. Saying there is no excuse falsely implies that an excuse was provided, just like your baseless “it’s the woman’s fault” comment. I simply do not understand people who sit around trying to become outraged about innocuous things. I’m guessing you’d be traumatized by a child making a gun out of a pop tart, too.

          • penguin says:

            any place where you blame hormones, not rapists for rapes, is essentially blaming the victims. If they would just give out porn in the military and keep those women parts covered, they could control themselves! Saying sexual assault is bad does not excuse the preceding comments, which are awful. Rape, as countless studies have proven, is not about hormones. And implying that “men just can’t control themselves and their hormones” should be offensive to any man too. It’s not a PC issue. Might as well tell rape victims they’re being too sensitive to get offended when you tell them their rapes were caused by too many hormones.

            Sen. Chambliss may feel genuine disapproval of the staggering prevalence of sexual assault in the military (not to mention that the general public numbers are astounding too). His comments nonetheless exhibit why “rape culture” exists and why the military has been unsuccessful in preventing it. Let’s all say it’s bad, and hope people get the message. But, women are just objects toying with men’s hormones, so what we really gotta do is figure out how to control all that.

            • pettifogger says:

              Incredibly illogical leap here. The idea that hormones don’t contribute to any sexual assault is absurd. But that is different from “not blaming rapists for rape.” Chambliss didn’t say “rapes were caused by too many hormones,” he described why the military is a problematic arena for sexual assaults.

              It is no different than describing binge drinking as fertile ground for sexual assault. We’re not blaming alcohol instead of individuals, we’re simply willing to acknowledge that some situations result in a higher likelihood of sexual assault.

              It is fascinating to me that a society so obsessed with root causes of everything simultaneously purports to have no interest in any environmental factors for sexual assault. It is, quite obviously, PC gone insane. I had a female (well educated, high income, professional, independent) use the phrase “actual rape” yesterday, and we subsequently had a conversation about how it is pretty forbidden to differentiate between any types of rape, at least as a male.

              For the record, so I can’t be misconstrued: I do not blame anything but rapists for rape. Not women who act or dress a certain way, not alcohol or drugs, not hormones, none of it. A male who commits rape is 100% responsible for said rape. But I will recognize that the military is probably going to continue to be an area where sexual assaults occur with at least some frequency, as Chambliss indicated.

              If my daughter said she wanted to go live and work around swaggering young men with a lot of energy and yes, hormones raging, I’d have some concerns about these issues. As it is, that is called college. If you take away most of the women and add a lot more machismo, you’d have the military. However, my concern would in no way excuse any of the actions I feared, would they?

              As another caveat, I don’t think the military is some rape factory as this may otherwise imply. I know a lot of servicemen who would be the first to oppose this type of behavior, and I know most are probably like that.

              • penguin says:

                it’s actually not illogical. from the perspective that yes, hormones are involved with sexual activity sure. Rape is an act of violence. One that is about an inability to control hormones, maybe–though, having sex with a partner withholding enthusiastic consent should theoretically be disquieting to most psychologically unimpaired male’s hormones. “More” hormones don’t make someone rape. And you seem to acknowledge that. I don’t see why more hormones implies less ability to control themselves. (Statistically, pubescent males who have the highest raging hormones are not even close to most likely to rape).

                There are lots of root causes to rape, in the military, and every where else. What would be lovely is if we talked about them in way that says the perpetrators are at fault (not the victims or shoddy science) and that we need to focus on a culture that dehumanizes women to mere property or intruders into men’s hormonal world. If hormones are at issue, let’s get a grip and say we better impart a culture that says not being able to control your hormones is inexcusable. Sen. Chambliss’s comments imply we are all just victim to hormones.

                • pettifogger says:

                  I don’t find your comments in this post unreasonable, but I do find the assumption about Chambliss totally without basis. I think people making assumptions such as yours are giving him two strikes automatically for being white and male (maybe four for being Republican and older). I don’t think that is fair, and I don’t think he was excusing rape in any way.

                  I won’t even say hormones are a root cause, only that a male-centric environment with little opportunity for sexual pursuit will likely result in some very poor decision making by men who may avoid such actions in other environments. It doesn’t make them less at fault in any sense, but I don’t see the problem in recognizing that certain environments should warrant extra scrutiny and precaution.

                  Your comment about pubescent males doesn’t account for all the other factors in the military. Empowerment, emphasis on strength and vitality, frequent lack of access to women, etc. I’m sure those in the health community could point to other things, like a need for domination in some soldiers, etc. Again, it isn’t about whether or not these things cause rape (they don’t), but it is reasonable to acknowledge that such environments probably lead to bad choices for some of the crappier human beings among us.

  5. Rick Day says:

    *snicker* you think that is a low blow, let me introduce you to some elderly with declining mental capacities. It happens. Maybe something IS wrong with him, but unlike Reagan, was actually loved the country enough to step aside. Unlike Reagan.

    Buzz, were you ever bullied as a child by people who were bullies like Ronald Reagan?

    *sideways glance* just…curious..

    • Harry says:

      Are you saying the Millennials who are your customers have so much more mental capacity?

      • Jackster says:

        We do. They don’t have kids, and most of them don’t run businesses, so there is no diminished mental capacity that comes along with such endeavors.

        For Buzz – Those big boy pants must be getting a bit snug.

  6. Joshua Morris says:

    If anything, Chambliss should get the Captain Obvious Award, and Franklin should get the Sheldon Cooper look of haughty derision. Waste of time.

  7. seenbetrdayz says:

    Without any context and taken at face value, I’d actually agree with what she tweeted.

Comments are closed.