Cantor Accuses Democrats of ‘Fanning Flames’
In a press event today, he was forceful in contrasting his own actions with those of Democrats who have been harassed:
House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) angrily lashed out at Democratic leaders for their handling of reported threats against members of Congress Thursday, accusing them of “dangerously fanning the flames” by blaming the GOP and confiding that he has also been the recipient of threats. [...] “I’ve received threats since I assumed elected office, not only because of my position but also because I’m Jewish. I’ve never blamed anyone in this body for that, period. Any suggestion that a leader in this body would incite threats or acts against other members is akin to saying that I would endanger myself, my wife or my children. Just recently I have been directly threatened. A bullet was shot through the window of my campaign office in Richmond this week, and I’ve received threatening e-mails. But I will not release them, because I believe such actions will only encourage more to be sent,” he said.
Cantor said he had “deep concerns” that DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen [response here] and DNC Chairman Tim Kaine in particular “are dangerously fanning the flames by suggesting that these incidents be used as a political weapon.” He took no questions. But he did try to take back the narrative.
It would hurt Republicans, as Joe pointed out earlier, if the public came to believe that they fostered an atmosphere conducive to threats. So Cantor tried to shift the focus to the people actually making those threats. And, in the process, showing that Republicans are on the receiving end of threats, too.
Steve Benen’s among those not buying it:
Let me get this straight. As the dim-witted Minority Whip sees it, Democrats are facing vandalism, assault, and harassment, and Democratic leaders want it to stop. But by urging responsible officials to denounce (and hopefully, discourage) misconduct, Dems are, Cantor believes, “dangerously fanning the flames.” … A few hours after accusing Democrats of “fanning the flames,” Cantor was the featured guest on a conference call held by the “S.T.O.P. Obama Tyranny National Coalition.” By all appearances, Cantor isn’t quite bright enough to appreciate the irony.
Politico has video of Cantor’s remarks. The press release regarding the “vandalism” from Richmond police. TPM has the incident report. The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports that a “preliminary investigation determined that a bullet was fired into the air and struck the window at a downward direction.” Discussion via memeorandum.
43 Responses to “Cantor Accuses Democrats of ‘Fanning Flames’”
GOP spends fourteen months telling people Stalin is about to come into their homes and force their chidlren to receive communist muslims health insurance. Anything to stoke the flames, government takeover, destruction of America, death death death rape horror Mao Mao AAAAAAAAAH.
Democrats pass it anyway.
Then suddenly, death threats! Democrats wonder just WTF is going on.
Cantor goes “Oh well see here now!” and says democrats are the ones escalating the rhetoric (while memeorandum lights up with wingnuts telling democrats they brought it on themselves: http://www.fark.com/cgi/go.pl?i=5144241&l=http:… )
This is the exact same tactic homophobic Christians use – slowly escalate the rhetoric and whip people into a fearful, self-righteous froth, then when the inevitable happens and someone demands accountability, run and hide under a blanket and claim innocence and hurt feelings.
I didn't think I could loathe the GOP and their web-section even more. I'm actually kind of grateful my capacity for hatred and contempt is being tested and strengthened, in the same sense that swimming improves your stamina.
Oh course they are fanning the flames, as soon as they passed helathcare they went into damage control mode. This doesn't excuse the looneyness of a few far righties, but its mainly a diversion meant to deflect criticism of the ram down and unorthodox methods democrats used to force feed their version of healthcare reform to America.
And another of the 'outrageous' acts (like the 'nigger' and the spitting accusations) turns out to be overblown and plain false. In this case, it is the coffin story:
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/03/st…
Of course, for some reasons the retractions don't get as much traction. I wonder why?
Just to make sure I'm clear here: They pass legislation you don't agree with and justifies cutting gas lines & break windows?!
Oh the coffin was on the SIDEWALK was it?
And of course they didn't intend for the congressman to think he belonged in the coffin!
They were just implying he was responsible for elderly people and fetuses going into coffins (not that only a useless f-ing PEASANT would ever be stupid enough to think death panels and federally funded abortions are in the bill!).
It's not as if some people might be more prone to use violence against a politician accused (wrongly) of causing the deaths of elderly and innocent babies! OH NO WHO COULD EVER OH DEAR!
I'll tell you why the retractions don't get much traction! Because the “retractions” are being made by people who have cancer of the soul and the mind and wouldn't recognize the concept of taking responsibility and self-moderation if it jumped up and raped their noses!
No, he's just saying that complaining about death threats and brownshirt tactics is just a way to make yourself look good after “ramming through” an ideologically moderate bill the country is about 50/50 divided on.
So he's not being evil or relativist, just depressingly dumb and impudent.
I believe you are out of touch with reality if you think that the methods used were “unorthodox” or that the majority of the population did not want the reforms in the bill. You are using the words directly from the right wing talking points. I think you need to stop listening to FOX News and broaden your perspective. Millions of patriotic Americans support the reform bill, as evidenced by the polls on Monday by USA Today which showed that 49% thought it was a good thing and 40% did not.
No need for damage control by the Dems, we just need to keep calling the right wing on the lies they spew, like “ram down” and “unorthodox”.
Austin,
“Overblown” and “plain false” do not have the same meaning, but that's a minor quibble. The major point is that the Gateway Pundit post you link to does not prove, or support, either charge. In fact, what the original article reports, there in black and white alphabetical characters, is almost exactly the same as what Jim Hoft says is the truth. They're both saying the same thing. Hoft's post makes absolutely no sense at all.
Gateway Pundit is not a reliable source of accurate information. It's extremely far right, and does not usually, in my experience, relate events in a truthful way.
Also, I would be grateful for supporting evidence on your statement that the “nigger” and spitting accusations are also overblown or plain false.
“as soon as they passed healthcare they went into damage control mode”
You bet your ass. Hype the “rage” and attack the GOP as a distraction (from controversial legislation most people have rejected all along, just barely passed, much less than was sought, passed against an opposition using a trick that the Dems can't expect to use with other legislation the rest of the year), and have Obama take his traveling campaign circus on the road again. It's annoying but not surprising at all.
“Overblown” and “plain false” were referring to the 'nigger' and spitting reports, both of which have been debunked.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/anatomy_…
And as with the Gateway Pundit, follow the links inside. I know that anything other than a KOS or DYU reference is obviously a lie in your mind, but the tiny bit of effort to push your mouse button on the links they provide should even be within your ability to try and see the truth, even when you do not like it.
Yeah, coffin on the sidewalk was just a “prayer vigil”. You know, telling people that this here democrat was responsible for the elderly and unborn dying and stuff.
I mean, it's not as if any abortion clinics have ever been firebombed in America. I mean, it's not as if the right hasn't been telling themselves they are all that stand between the US and the apocalypse^10. It's not as if the death threats and the white powder and the cinderblocks are related to the escalating rhetoric.
I mean come on Kathy it is just a prayer vigil. Christians are always cute and innocent. And they smell good.
Also BOFF SIDS RAE BADD.
Kathy -
p.s. – even the DU has backed away and retracted the 'coffin' story, so you have new marching orders to follow:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/du…
I addressed the coffin story earlier – it's not even a threat. It's just anti-abortion theatrics.
Cantor was actually right that Democrats are exploiting these threats for political gain. But then he went ahead and did it himself by claiming that his office was attacked because he's Jewish. Then Richmond police concluded that the shot that hit his office was fired up in the air from who knows how far away – probably by some unrelated gangbanger – and happened to land on the building where one of his offices lay.
Cantor tried to take the bold road and tell the Dems to man up…but then he went ahead and whined about an incident that the police have already explained as unrelated to politics. He is a useless advocate for the GOP.
“He is a useless advocate for the GOP”
That is pretty much my opinion of him. They need to find someone else to put in the spotlight.
“Overblown” and “plain false” were referring to the 'nigger' and spitting reports, both of which have been debunked, but I admit i did not make that clear. ANd of course they do not mean the same think, which is why I used both words, as both apply.
Neither the reports of racial slurs being directed at black members of Congress, nor the spitting report (which happened to Barney Frank) have been “debunked” or shown to be “overblown.” I'm not even sure what “overblown” would mean in this context. The word “nigger” WAS shouted out by one or more demonstrators, and whether it was shouted directly at John Lewis or Jim Clyburn or whether they heard it shouted, and maybe it was meant for another black congressperson, is irrelevant, to say the least.
Also, The American Thinker is another totally disreputable source. If you want to quote a conservative source, there are plenty out there that are considered reasonably credible. The American Thinker is not one of them. You might as well quote The John Birch Society.
And for your edification, I have never even read, much less quoted from, the Democratic Underground, precisely because of its reputation for extreme opinions on the left side.
And as with the Gateway Pundit, follow the links inside. I know that anything other than a KOS or DYU reference is obviously a lie in your mind, but the tiny bit of effort to push your mouse button on the links they provide should even be within your ability to try and see the truth, even when you do not like it.
I did follow the links inside, and I looked at the screen shots, which I have to assume Hoft put there because he thought they supported his point. They don't. I repeat, his post makes no sense. I also note your nasty, highly personalized language, in response to a civil, polite question from me.
even the DU has backed away and retracted the 'coffin' story, so you have new marching orders to follow:
There is nothing to “retract” about the coffin story because every media outlet that reported it made it clear that it was not intended as a death threat — although what it WAS intended to protest — the “slaughter of millions of babies” and the “killing of the elderly” as the result of this bill — is Exhibit A for the fact that Republicans have stuffed people's heads with lies. Yes, lies. Total lies. There is no “slaughter of babies” in this bill and there is nothing that will “kill the elderly.” So this in itself is a prime example of how Republicans have been fueling violent, extreme emotions with violent, extreme claims about the bill that do not contain a shred of truth.
… so you have new marching orders to follow.
I do not deserve to be spoken to this way, and I refuse to respond anymore to any comments from you that address me in this tone.
Anyone who takes anything via Gateway Pundit seriously has really bad problems. There isn't much more whacky right wing that that site.
“”Overblown” and “plain false” were referring to the 'nigger' and spitting reports, <del>both</del> neither of which have been debunked, but I admit i did not make that clear.”
Fixed that for you.
Except that going to that site is like asking the fox if it REALLY got into the henhouse.
Try this instead:
http://stlactivisthub.blogspot.com/2010/03/summ…
No, I think I will act like all the Lefty posters here and refuse to read any site that does not already agree with my preconceived notions out of fear of actually being exposed to other ideas.
I am learning from the best.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by TMV, Joe Gandelman. Joe Gandelman said: Eric Cantor accuses Dems of "fanning the flames" : http://bit.ly/d0hdfW [...]
I've never understood the argument that the Dems are ramming HCR down people's throats. Obama ran on this issue and was elected president. The Republicans have had input and offered various amendments on this for the past 14 months. Even after the GOP claimed that this reform was a communist Nazi attack on American people filled with death panels and the government would kill peole a huge number of Americans still support it. One if the reasons Obama became president is because people wanted change and this is a change. Funny that those who claim to support democracy are the same people who try to thwart the will of the American people when it doesn't suit their narrow interests.
The bullet that went through the window of Cantor's campaign office was on downward trajectory, which means it had to have been fired from a lllllllooooonnnngggggg way off, which makes it unlikely his office was the intended target. In any case, Cantor is a good republican, which means he won't let objectivity get in his way. Fanning the flames? What a dweeb.
That's because there's nothing to understand. They like to make things up. Apparently that's all they have.
Kathy–
I admire your ability to stay calm in response to the abuse you often get around here.
You're pretty awesome!
all this reminds me a bit about the Bill Sparkman story.
I'm pretty sure that Cantor didn't say anything about this incident being related to his being Jewish- he was saying that he's been threatened in the past because of it. I agree he shouldn't have made a big deal over the recent vandalism incident, though it's a pretty tough to make the point he was making (that the recent threats are not significantly different than what all politicians face) without pointing to some particular incidents, and then when you do that you risk having people compare the incidents and also to see you presenting yourself as a victim just as the people you're criticizing are doing.
The most ridiculous part about this is the way that Stupak has gone from villian to persecuted hero in the span of a week. Just last week there were articles here which implied that he was a whiner when he complained that his answering machine was full of angry rants and threats (at that time presumably from people who were angry at him for holding out and not supporting the bill.) Now all of a sudden when the threats are apparently coming from the other side, it's a travesty and he's held up as one of the victims of harrassment and potential violence.
That alone should prove the point- that these kinds of threats are now being hyped even though they are unfortunately par for the course in our political system.
Absolutely. There's a reason that the people deemed most “persuadable” to switch sides are the ones targeted – by both sides. I bet Bernie Sanders on the left and Jim Demint on the right get relatively few threats for this reason.
Now that I look at his quote again I realize you are correct – he's been targeted in the past for being Jewish (which I don't doubt for a second).
The problem of him bringing up an incident that turns out to be nothing is that he is trying to make the “both sides do it” claim. But if that falls through we are back to the “all the violent threats are coming from the right”.
I didn't know Stupak received death threats when he was holding up the bill.
Do you know that? because I didn't know that.
Yes, Kathy actually cited that this was occurring. And then she added “Cue up the world's smallest violin” and quoted from a Hullabaloo article that was decrying Stupak for making this about himself instead of caring about women whom Digby believes would be aggrieved by the abortion provisions he wanted to put into place.
Yes, I agree. He probably hurt his case more than helping it, even though his point was perfectly valid.
I second that.
One tough, and great, lady
Dorian
What an interesting situation our nation finds itself in.
Each party, it seems, is touting—almost proud of, almost as if competing–how many threats and acts of incivility, violence have been perpetrated against them.
“I have more than you….”
Wow!
Then have your little tantrum. I live in this area. The tea party activists were deliberately trying to intimidate Carnahan. Before the vote they were screaming outside his office and burning him in effigy. It scared the daylights out of his staff. It doesn't especially shock me that, since their antics went viral, that they turned around and claimed they were sooo misunderstood. But believe what you want to. You are going to anyway.
Stupak has not “gone from villain to persecuted hero in the span of a week.” He has received over 50 death threats and abusive phone calls. Whether you conclude from that that he's “persecuted” is your choice, but the fact of it is the fact of it. And when a member of Congress receives dozens of death threats at his home, so many that his wife doesn't want to pick up the phone, somehow that tends to get reported. I guess the very act of reporting it and writing about it is “hyping” it for some, but I don't agree.
Speaking for myself, I don't view Stupak as a “persecuted hero.” As far as I am concerned, he is the same cynical, opportunistic hack he was before he made the deal he made, but he doesn't deserve to get dozens of death threats and abusive phone calls. I'm sure if he had refused the deal, and gotten those same threats, you would not be sneering at how he's a “persecuted hero.”
I just looked back at this post of mine you cited, and you are right about part of it. Stupak did not deserve to receive violent, abusive phone calls or death threats then, and he doesn't now.
My “cue up the world's smallest violin” remark was brought on by the general tenor of Stupak's complaint, that his life had been turned into a “living hell” because of all the angry phone calls and e-mails he was receiving. Angry phone calls and e-mails are not the same as death threats. But the piece I cited did say he was getting those, too, and that was not just unjustified, but outrageous. No one should be subjected to death threats for taking a political position.
I did not make that clear, and I apologize.
The fact that from time to time people say things like what you just did, above, helps more than you may realize. It really lifts me up. So thank you, George. I appreciate your kindness.
Thank you, Dorian.
You are more than welcome, Kathy, and remember always that old Ecuadorian saying: ” illegitimus carborundum”
In other words ,Courage and keep it up
Dorian
Thank you for acknowledging that, Kathy. I felt you were wrong to be so dismissive of his complaints then (I don't think it's wrong to express disgust, sympathy, etc, for the more recent threats.) The point is, your opinion about it changed when he switched sides and began getting threats from right wing extremists rather than left wingers. I realize you feel this is justified somewhat because you honestly think that these are different kinds of threats. I respectfully disagree, although I'll concede that details have now been released which were not previously given. If it comes out that he was in fact complaining about threats of violence before when he was opposing the legislation, I hope you'll acknowledge that.
If it comes out that he was in fact complaining about threats of violence before when he was opposing the legislation, I hope you'll acknowledge that.
If it does, I will.