City Journal Winter 2016

Current Issue:

Winter 2016
Table of Contents
Tablet Editions
Click to visit City Journal California

Readers’ Comments

Harry Stein
Bullies and Their Pulpit « Back to Story

View Comments (9)

Add New Comment:

To send your message, please enter the words you see in the distorted image below, in order and separated by a space, and click "Submit." If you cannot read the words below, please click here to receive a new challenge.

Comments will appear online. Please do not submit comments containing advertising or obscene language. Comments containing certain content, such as URLs, may not appear online until they have been reviewed by a moderator.

Showing 9 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
Another excellent-read-between-the-lines analysis by Harry Stein. In my book, nothing speaks louder than how quickly and unequivocally Incognito’s black teammates sprang to his defense; especially in light of how the ‘narrative’ had already been chiseled in stone by the PC crowd at the NY Times and ESPN.
Professional sports is my refuge from the onslaught of never-ending doom-and-gloom of Obama World. As depressing as life has become with a never-ending recession, the ‘Affordable’ Healthcare Act, Benghazi, the IRS, etc, etc, etc--when the whistle blows before the opening kickoff every Sunday afternoon and evening and Monday night, for a few hours I can forget it all and root for my teams. To see professional sports (not to mention the military) being sucked into the evil vortex of political correctness makes me sick. Is nothing sacred?
What ????

"the sports pages are no longer a refuge from real-world problems"... yeah, like since O.J.

"ESPN... that network’s obvious drift leftward...."

Poor little, oppressed White 1%ers...... gawd, you're funny.
Peter says: "Now here's a challenge to you. Define 'racism.' Until you do, you really shouldn't write about it because what racism means to one person is not what it means to the next."

What relativistic garbage is this? The word "racist" (or "racism"), like every other word in the English language, has a meaning. Sometimes words have more than one meaning. Nevertheless, words mean something. When words lose their meaning--or when a word's meaning is subject to different meanings depending on who is using the word--then we have what Peter aptly notes: "cross-talk and babble".

It's this cross-talk and babble that allows the liberal media to perpetuate their view what constitutes the correct world order.

A word's meaning does not change depending on WHO is using it. A word's meaning may depend on the CONTEXT in which it is used, but it doesn't change merely because the person using it possesses a certain skin color or a certain ideological bent. So let's quit quibbling over whether somebody is a racist just because they are of a particular skin color and they use a word that those of another skin color may, generally, find offensive. The context within which the offensive word is used makes all the difference; but the use of the offensive word, itself, does not necessarily mean one is racist or that the use of the perjorative word is evidence of racism.
Jeez, this is football, you have to have a thick skin to play - these people are supposed to be the toughest of the tough.

Now that gays are a firmly in the Democratic coalition, bullying, which is something Democrats could have cared less about a few short years ago, is a hot issue. It is fascinating how Democratic media thrusts issues like bullying onto the national stage, and then drop them once it becomes convenient. Remember "homelessness," which emerged as an issue with which to beat Reagan and then Bush in the '80's? When Clinton was elected homelessness was immediately forgotten - was it "solved"? Of course not, but with the election of Bill Clinton homelessness as a concern became a detriment to Democrats, so Democratic media dropped it like a hot potato.

Homelessness was not forgotten nearly as fast as the anti-war issue once Obama was elected. Is there anyone out there who remembers who Cindy Sheehan is? How about Code Pink? That ring a bell? Did Sheehan and Code Pink wink out of existance once Obama was elected? One would think so.

Despite the internet, talk radio and Fox News, Democratic media still has a firm grip on the nation's agenda. The ability of Democratic media to control that agenda is the single most important tool Democrats have - and conservative media unwittingly (or perhaps wittingly) aids in this control by paying attention to the agenda items tossed out by Democrats, as a way of stirring the pot.

After all, what was the entire Trayvon Martin episode but the means by which Obama cemented support among blacks and got them to the polls after the campaign wrote off the white middle class vote? I would bet my last dollar that somewhere in Obama campaign headquarters is a memorandum in which those in the campaign were instructed to search for and find just such an incident. The worst thing about it is that conservative media played right along, allowing themselves to be shamelessly manipulated into keeping the story on the front page not only on Democratic media but conservative media as well. Democrats laughed all the way to the polls.

The power of Democratic media is astounding,as dizzylying strong as ever. Examples abound. My personal favorite is in attacking Romney as an out of touch rich guy in 2012, it managed to make the nation forget that Democrats fielded super rich John Kerry in 2004. At least Romney made his money by hard work, and didn't marry into it! But even that distinction wasn't necessary as Democratic media did an incredible sleight of hand, nearly as neat a trick as making the nation forget that when Bush II took over in 2000 the nation was in recession. Does anyone remember that - it somehow doesn't jibe with the generally accepted notion that Clinton left office with a large budget surplus and a humming economy.

No wonder the Republicans still try to make nice in the vain hope that Democratic media won't bite.

And now of course, with the Incognito-Martin affair Democrats once again have an issue on which to rally the troops, and take a swipe at football, which isn't exactly on the progressive approval list. And, of course, it allows Democrats to put bullying front and center on the national agenda - with conservative media playing right along, as usual.
Interesting column, Harry.

Now here's a challenge to you. Define "racism."

Until you do, you really shouldn't write about it because what racism means to one person is not what it means to the next. The result is cross-talk and babble. But then again, maybe that's the idea.
“To the contrary, whatever might have happened between him and his “brother” Martin was in the nature of their normal give and take ... “

Among 1990s feminist lawsuits over, ‘hostile environment,’ three New York women stockbrokers sued their employer over ‘sexist language’ in offices. One woman broker observed, ‘If you think the guys use coarse language with you, listen to what they say to each other. Grow up. And by the way, how about trading your tight skirt and half-unbuttoned blouse for professional attire?’
Samokritika: Note the parallels between our Leftists' witch-hunts and the practice in Stalin's USSR --

'Kritika/samokritika is an example of an “apology ritual” in which the apology element served to affirm the “mistake,” to pronounce a lesson to others below [in rank] not to make the same mistake, and to recognise the status and rights of the party receiving the apology (the Leadership) to set the rules.

'It thereby affirms the unity and authority of the Collective.

'The subject, who was either removed or censured, was supposed to play his part by recognising that the leadership’s position was “completely correct”, reiterating the critique in the context of “self-criticism” [samokritika].

'These apologetic rituals were a “show of discursive affirmation from below,” indicating that the dissident “publicly accepts . . . the judgment of his superior that this is an an offense and reaffirms the rule in question.”

'In this sense, they had a transactional component, in which the self-criticism paid “symbolic taxation” to a higher authority.'
Ah, the Agony Aunts of the Media Marxists have their skirts up over their heads again! dear, dear, dear. The men in the football locker rooms are using Bad Language! (Do they EVER listen to themselves? the Agony Aunts like Barb Costas, I mean).

They really know how to whip up a lynch mob, don't they? and blacklist anyone they decide is guilty of Thoughtcrime. Talk about witch hunts! As always, everything they accuse their opponents of doing, they are themselves doing a hundred-fold.

Martin is a real jerk: it looks like he's out for a lawsuit and a fat payday because he can't hack it in the NFL, poor baby. After this, no team will want him: he's a rat.

If anyone wonders about men (you know, the untamed kind) and how they talk to each other when they're just hanging out and giving each other grief, see "Gran Torino." Clint Eastwood and his pals give the kid a lesson in how it's done, and it's all in good fun, for cryin' out loud.

But Incognito of the ironical name will be forced to perform "samokritika."
the reality is that we will probably never know the relationship between the 2 men. Amongst friends, teammates, etc many otherwise inexcusable things are said and done. Once the friendship ends the negative comes out. If Incognito has emails recordings texts with Martin saying inappropriate things now is the time to show it. The situation is irreparable and Incognito will probably be shunned and unemployable