No, not Colbert and Gable, but a true story of just how PC stifles the exchange of ideas, from the most recent issue of City Journal, a publication of the Manhattan Institute. Tell me, was the author treated fairly or not?

Link to article

Very interesting and a bit frightening, sfo. I'm surprised you haven't been accused of some -ism for posting it. Thanks for the link.

Wm., stayed tuned; I'm sure I'm in for it. BTW, never dare a gay man!

I think it is disgraceful. Stories such as these certainly make you think twice before relying on the media for you source of information.

Out of curiousity, I wonder how old the Star-Telegram reporter was? I'm betting he was quite young.

[ December 03, 2002: Message edited by: Aubie in Bham ]

I'm sorry, I dare say that there is yet more to the story. What exactly did he say about gays? That was mentioned in the news story but never in the speaker's rebuttal. I imagine that there is some fault on both sides, well maybe fault is not the right word, but I think that so often, extreme people, both liberals and conservatives, get angry and embarrassed when their statements made in small meetings with like-minded people are reported in the mainstream press.

The fact is people say things in some venues which they would never say in other venues and are often not thrilled when those things are put out in the open. It happens all the time. Most every policitian in the world does it, it's called tailoring the message to your audience. The problem is that if you do that, you run the risk than another audience will get to hear that same message via the news or some other way and be horrified.

Bush delivers way more conservative messages to conservative groups and Clinton delivered way more liberal messages to liberal groups. They don't want the middle to hear these things that they are saying becuase it is alienating. I'd be willing to bet that some of the things this guy said were way off to the right side of the street that most people would be shocked at. And likewise if Maxine Waters were giving some speech to some liberal group and we heard what she said we'd probably be shocked and horrified too. I think that comes with the territory when you hold those sorts of views. He does sound a bit like a martyr to me, and I've heard people like Waters complain that they are misrepresented as well, and she's a martyr too.

[quote]Originally posted by mattkorey:
Bush delivers way more conservative messages to conservative groups and Clinton delivered way more liberal messages to liberal groups. They don't want the middle to hear these things that they are saying becuase it is alienating. I'd be willing to bet that some of the things this guy said were way off to the right side of the street that most people would be shocked at. And likewise if Maxine Waters were giving some speech to some liberal group and we heard what she said we'd probably be shocked and horrified too. I think that comes with the territory when you hold those sorts of views. He does sound a bit like a martyr to me, and I've heard people like Waters complain that they are misrepresented as well, and she's a martyr too.

---

This guy is not a politician. He doesn't have any constituencies to placate or votes to win. What he said was that Huck Finn is an anti-racist masterpiece. That is not a personal attack against anyone.

Besides, how do these negative stories keep getting out? Isn't the media controlled by Republican operatives? Al Gore said it, so it must be true.

The author chose to use sensitive topics and sensitive words in order to elicit a response and sell books. He can't do that and then throw up his hands because people react to them. The very essence of attacking Political Correctness is going to offend people because PC is around in order to foster a less hostile environment even if the majority (white males) think minorities are being oversensitive.

Whatever happened to this writer - the biggest problem I have with his piece is his use of the same tactic he accuses liberals of using. Because one person in the room, and apparently some reporters from a newspaper, misquoted him, and very well may have done so deliberately, he paints all liberals as agreeing with these people and their tactics. Even in the parts of his book he quotes he uses broad descriptions of what is not liberal to paint liberals as some monolithic group. I mean "the only teacher who agrees with your values teaches phys ed" - that smears all public school teachers as some kind of mindless PC-ites.

There is a very interesting column in the Washington Post today about speech codes on campus and when professors should be censored. In the end he talks about how a group of students at Georgetown engaged in a free-wheeling debate on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and managed to do so without violence and with respect. That is the attitude we should all take when debating issues - but it does no good when either side, or both, resort to stereotypes, anecdotes and generalizations, it does not lead to informed debate.

Post Column

(Oh, and gmginsfo, the Colbert/Gable movie was "It Happened One Night" - "It Could Happen to You" was the Nicholas Cage/Bridget Fonda/Rosie Perez film - sorry, I'm a movie queen ).

[ December 03, 2002: Message edited by: CPT_Doom ]

[ December 03, 2002: Message edited by: CPT_Doom ]

Waa, waa, waa. I am so sick of hearing Conservatives whine. Grow up already!!!

DC guy hit the nail on the head there, he has the biggest constituency of all to placate, his consumer base who will buy his book. He knows which buttons to push with his silly over the top exagerated generalizations. It came back and bit him in the butt and now he wants sympathy. Keep on lookin' pal.

People who say things to foster controversy and debate shouldn't be such wusses when they get it. At least people like William Bennett and other people who have said the same things this guy is saying don't cry when people get up in arms about it.

[quote]Originally posted by mattkorey:
DC guy hit the nail on the head there, he has the biggest constituency of all to placate, his consumer base who will buy his book. He knows which buttons to push with his silly over the top exagerated generalizations. It came back and bit him in the butt and now he wants sympathy. Keep on lookin' pal.

---

Stein's book has been out, if my memory serves correctly, for well over a year. I think it's a bit late at this point to gin up sales by being controversial.

Anyway, in your first post, you said: "I think that so often, extreme people, both liberals and conservatives, get angry and embarrassed when their statements made in small meetings with like-minded people are reported in the mainstream press. The fact is people say things in some venues which they would never say in other venues and are often not thrilled when those things are put out in the open. It happens all the time." You seem to suggest here that the author is mad because he got all this attention. But now you're saying that he actually wanted the attention in order to sell books. I really don't see how both of these theories can be true.

Maybe this writer was treated tragically unfair, and maybe there was some calculated effort to bring down this McTeer guy, but geez, he certainly does sound darn whiney in this article. He even admits that "it didn't take long for things to settle down," but then he dredges it up again to whine on the Internet.

There's a good chance he was treated wrongly over the whole Huck Finn story, but his opening speech comments, particularly the one about being "actually relieved when your daughter plays with dolls and your son plays with guns" were borderline offensive, and gives me some indication of the overall tone of the speech. We'll never know until we hear an objective opinion of someone who was there, or unless we see the tape ourselves.

I'm saying that he wanted this attention, but only from a very select conservative group. And did not want his statements broadcast out to the public at large. Both of those things can indeed be true. They may not be smart on his part, or others who repeatedly do this, but they are nonetheless easily true.

Face it, most people who are extreme and are authors, mostly sell their books to those who are like-minded. So they pitch that group and try to get them to buy it and buy into it. That part is probably just good marketing, or at least a strategy that is likely to work. However, I just favor someone like William Bennett who will do that but when he is called on the carpet for the things he says to these groups, he will hold his ground and not be a victim about it at all, but just state his case. Same goes with someone like Barney Frank. He will say all sort of things to liberal groups, but if he gets called onto Bill O'Reilly's show, he'll tell Bill the exact same thing and not flinch.

Most of these extreme people aren't like them. They only want to be bold when there is safety in numbers and not when it might bring some harsh scrutiny and criticism and not just a standing ovation from people just like them.

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
Besides, how do these negative stories keep getting out? Isn't the media controlled by Republican operatives? Al Gore said it, so it must be true.

---

[Violins beginning....]

This "negative" story is from a conservative publication (the Manhattan Institute is avowedly conservative--it also has Dr. John DiIulio Jr. as a Senior Fellow), so that's how it got out. Stein's whining is a bunch of tendentious claptrap, really, and his Huck Finn horror story repeats a narrative that has been told by others, only I suppose he thinks it's new. BTW, it's not liberals who are trying to shut down debate on books and access to reading: go to ALA's Book Burning Site to see what groups are setting fire to Harry Potter books, etc. in the 21st century.

Moreover, any serious review of scholarly--and liberally-tinged popular--literature on Huckleberry Finn would show that the book is widely--WIDELY--considered anti-racist, that Twain's portrayal of the enslaved man Jim, Huck, the Dauphin, and other characters is quite nuanced, and that Twain was anything but a racist.

Now, if he were talking about his struggles with PC critics over more recent and ideologically slippery, yet extraordinarily beautiful works like Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian or John Updike's Rabbit at Rest, or perhaps Philip Roth's The Human Stain, Darius James's Negrophobia, or J.M. Coetzee's Disgrace, all of which deal provovatively with issues of race, class, and gender, I'd actually consider that this guy was saying something new.

CPT Doom (what DOES that mean?) - you're right and I'm red, but only in the face. Isn't there another one called "It Should Happen to You," starring Judy Holliday? Clearly a case of mixed media on my part.

To answer the question of how do these stories keep getting out, well, I bear the responsibility for posting it here. But whether or not the Manhattan Institute is a conservative think tank, which it is as much as it is a free market one, is irrelevant, except to again show that it's ironic that conservative organs seem to be the ones who report these kinds of stories since more liberal journals refuse to do so.

Nor is the novelty of Stein's admittedly viewpoint driven statements at issue; the very title of the story shows that. And there's nothing new in recognizing Twain's classic as hardly racist, but rather race healing, for lack of a better term. At worst, what we have here is a case of a conservative engaging in the now-accepted practice of "storytelling" as a form of testimony. Unlike many of those dumbed-down academic - and, worse, legal! - adventures in fancy, though, Stein's story is based on the facts of a personal exprience. I see no reason to doubt him or require "objective" (more at, impartial) verification. And as a SF resident, I know EXACTLY what he's talking about when he refers to what the local media insist on calling "the best place on earth."

[quote]Originally posted by gmginsfo:
Isn't there another one called "It Should Happen to You," starring Judy Holliday?

---

For movie trivia, try http://www.imdb.com .

[quote]Originally posted by fantomas:
[QB]
BTW, it's not liberals who are trying to shut down debate on books and access to reading: go to ALA's Book Burning Site to see what groups are setting fire to Harry Potter books, etc. in the 21st century.
QB]

---

[standards crumbling...]

If that's the case, then go to: Right Turns to see what groups are trying to dumb down spirited debate - the very core of its mission! - at what was once one of America's premier law schools.

Looks like Harvard's Beats just got a little redder!

[ December 03, 2002: Message edited by: gmginsfo ]

[quote]Originally posted by fantomas:


[Violins beginning....]

This "negative" story is from a conservative publication (the Manhattan Institute is avowedly conservative--it also has Dr. John DiIulio Jr. as a Senior Fellow), so that's how it got out. Stein's whining is a bunch of tendentious claptrap, really, and his Huck Finn horror story repeats a narrative that has been told by others, only I suppose he thinks it's new. BTW, it's not liberals who are trying to shut down debate on books and access to reading: go to ALA's Book Burning Site to see what groups are setting fire to Harry Potter books, etc. in the 21st century.

Moreover, any serious review of scholarly--and liberally-tinged popular--literature on Huckleberry Finn would show that the book is widely--WIDELY--considered anti-racist, that Twain's portrayal of the enslaved man Jim, Huck, the Dauphin, and other characters is quite nuanced, and that Twain was anything but a racist.

Now, if he were talking about his struggles with PC critics over more recent and ideologically slippery, yet extraordinarily beautiful works like Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian or John Updike's Rabbit at Rest, or perhaps Philip Roth's The Human Stain, Darius James's Negrophobia, or J.M. Coetzee's Disgrace, all of which deal provovatively with issues of race, class, and gender, I'd actually consider that this guy was saying something new.

---

The Manhattan Institute story was not negative. It was a straightforward account of the liberals' gratuitous attacks on a conservative. I'm talking about the negative stories in the Dallas papers, the New York Times, etc. I thought, as Al Gore put it, "wealthy conservative billionaires" control the media. (I guess the non-wealthy conservative billionaires are sitting this one out.) If this is the conservative media, I'd hate to see a liberal one.

[quote]Originally posted by fantomas:


[Violins beginning....]

This "negative" story is from a conservative publication (the Manhattan Institute is avowedly conservative--it also has Dr. John DiIulio Jr. as a Senior Fellow), so that's how it got out. Moreover, any serious review of scholarly--and liberally-tinged popular--literature on Huckleberry Finn would show that the book is widely--WIDELY--considered anti-racist, that Twain's portrayal of the enslaved man Jim, Huck, the Dauphin, and other characters is quite nuanced, and that Twain was anything but a racist.

---

But Stein didn't just pull this out of nowhere. His son's teacher accused the son of racism because he praised Twain's work. That's what Stein was responding too.

Moreover, if Stein's analysis of Huck Finn is so mundane, why did the black guy in the audience get so bent out of shape over it? Perhaps the poor guy is just not as well read as you are, but alas, I doubt any of us are.

[quote]Originally posted by mattkorey:
I'm saying that he wanted this attention, but only from a very select conservative group. And did not want his statements broadcast out to the public at large. Both of those things can indeed be true. They may not be smart on his part, or others who repeatedly do this, but they are nonetheless easily true.

Face it, most people who are extreme and are authors, mostly sell their books to those who are like-minded. So they pitch that group and try to get them to buy it and buy into it. That part is probably just good marketing, or at least a strategy that is likely to work. However, I just favor someone like William Bennett who will do that but when he is called on the carpet for the things he says to these groups, he will hold his ground and not be a victim about it at all, but just state his case. Same goes with someone like Barney Frank. He will say all sort of things to liberal groups, but if he gets called onto Bill O'Reilly's show, he'll tell Bill the exact same thing and not flinch.

Most of these extreme people aren't like them. They only want to be bold when there is safety in numbers and not when it might bring some harsh scrutiny and criticism and not just a standing ovation from people just like them.

---

But why is this even controversial? As Fantomas has pointed out, Stein's analysis of HF is a pretty widely accepted interpretation of the book. The bigger point is that the media's not trying to give Stein attention, but rather launching this bass-ackwards attack on a potential Bush nominee they don't like.

This was an interesting thread to read -touching on so many thought provoking subjects.

What caught my eye up front was Stein's reference to the National Center for Policy Analysis. NCPA puts out a daily news digest that I have often found to be a good source of alternative views on a variety of topics in the news. It contains summaries of some of their stuff mixed with items they've gleaned from newspapers. Today's featured:

o DEMOCRATS DON'T UNDERSTAND TAX CUTS, says Bruce Bartlett; thus Republicans are driving the economic agenda....NCPA

o DIVIDEND TAX REDUCTIONS COULD RAISE STOCK PRICES 20 PERCENT, and change companies' policies, economists say....WALL STREET JOURNAL

o COMPLYING WITH THE TAX CODE COSTS $115 BILLION ANNUALLY, and experts believe the current system should be scrapped....HERITAGE FOUNDATION/WASHINGTON TIMES

o CLARITIN SHOULD DROP TO $17 TO $20 OVER THE COUNTER, about the same as an insurance co-payment....NEW YORK TIMES

o THE BENEFITS OF PROSTATE CANCER SCREENING has not been determined, say researchers....ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE

Sometimes the arguments are easy to poke holes in, but it usually provides some food for thought.

Some thoughts of my own after reading this thread...

It's not uncommon for remarks made in a forum such as the one in which Stein participated to look terrible in the morning papers the next day. So much of the context, delivery and humor is lost when the words are flattened out on a printed page. In addition, a speaker will often tailor comments not only to the audience but to the occasion as well. Commencing a speach with a few lighthearted anecdotes can play well to a particular audience at a certain event yet the same could trigger a riot in another setting.

I've never liked Huckleberry Finn (or most of Twain's other works, for that matter). It might have been important in its day but most of his points would be pretty obvious today even to a schoolchild. No wonder the schools fail to capture the imaginations of children. The wonders of television, the internet and XBOX up against pap like Huck Finn.

When it comes to the press and the media, I've decided it's all about them, their power and their important mission to guide and save our society. They sensationalize everything from the weather on up to lure largely gullible readers/viewers into their carny show of tricks and hoochie-koochie wonders. The goals: controlling the hearts and minds of the nation, making a buck and further agrandizing their own status. I've never read anything in the press on those few subjects of which I've had a personal knowlegdge that I could call wholly accurate. I must assume that everything else is likewise peppered with inaccuracies and ommissions. Anytime they get called on any of their excesses they retreat to the first ammendment and their important function safeguarding freedom and democracy. If it's any consolation it's pretty much always been this way. It's just that nowadays our exposure to the media in its various forms has vastly increased so the effects, good and bad, are greatly magnified. We're doomed but, in case any of you missed this important item from last nights news, Zsa Zsa's condition has been upgraded to stable and she should make a full recovery.

[quote]Originally posted by Torgauer:
....
When it comes to the press and the media, I've decided it's all about them, their power and their important mission to guide and save our society. They sensationalize everything....
We're doomed....

---

Hey, gang, Saturnalia is coming up. Why not get yourselves a shortwave radio?