GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Union “goon” uses anti-gay slur at Rhode Island Rally

by

In The Last 24 Hours,” Jim Hoft writes, “Dem Protesters Have Assaulted a Young Woman, Tortured a Camel, Called Opponents ‘Bad Jews’ & Attacked Gay Black Tea Partier… They Must Be Very Proud.” (Via Instapundit.)

Meanwhile as James Taranto writes, “It’s quite striking the way almost every lie the left ever told about the Tea Party has turned out to be true of the government unionists in Wisconsin and their supporters.” For almost as long as citizens have joined Tea Parties to protest excess government spending, Democrats and their allies in the MSM have peddled the meme of violent right-wing protest.  Here’s Jim Treacher on the topic:

We get months of “Teabaggers are violent” — hell, years — when in reality, Tea Partiers have been the recipients of violence. Meanwhile, these union guys are ratcheting up the violent rhetoric and now actually assaulting people in broad daylight.

Michelle Malkin gives us the example of one union “goon,” as she dubs him, making derogatory remarks about a cameraman’s supposed sexuality, in the same breath suggesting that gays are an inferior species while using a derogatory term to do so:

At AFSCME’s “solidarity” rally in Providence, Rhode Island on Tuesday, a cameraman was accosted by a fuming pro-union protester. The cameraman had his back to the goon, who appears to accost him unprovoked. The goon screams:

“I’ll f**k you in the ass, you faggot!”

I expect the national gay organizations to react speedily to this slur and demand that AFSCME apologize for his rude behavior and use of the offensive term.  I’ll be checking their websites in short order so I can include their condemnations in this post.

UPDATE:   Nothing on HRC’s site as of 2:44 PM PST (5:44 EST).  Nor anything at NGLTF.  Guess if union stooge hurls an angry anti-gay insult, it’s not offensive.

UP-UPDATE:  Anyone know if Barney Frank has differentiated himself from this goon’s nasty rhetoric?

UP-UP-UPDATE: Bruce forwards me this tweet: “I wonder if HRC will condemn the union guy the way they did Willow Palin.”  Well, Willow’s comment did get a whole bunch of lefties’ panties in a bunch.  Let’s see what the same folks have to say about this.  Wonder if the MSM will pick it up like they did the comment of that teenager?

UP-UP–UP-UPDATE: As a reminder, HRC issued at least two statements on the above matter, HRC to Sarah Palin: Don’t Let This Teachable Moment Pass You By and HRC to Sarah Palin: Two Days of Silence, Will You Speak Up?

Comments

  1. At some point in the next 12 hours, your usual trolls will chime in how ‘of course the TEA Party is violent’ and so on. They’ve lost the capacity to discern good from evil, right from wrong.

    The most common use of the TEA Party-as-violent meme is to provide topcover for the Progressives’ own violent enforcers. It sets up the ‘we’re just defending ourselves’ defense.

    They don’t need the topcover. DOJ won’t do a thing about it, and neither will the states.

  3. The ends justify the means. In other words, rules don’t apply to Democrats & Democrat affiliated groups. However, given the negative poll numbers, most people don’t care for the double standards.

  6. Yup there goes Granny Goodness, another lie filled post. no one used ‘the N word’ on Lewis in the Tea Parties.

    Turn in your Race Card Granny. Like your pants, it’s on fire.

  11. “I’ll f**k you in the ass, you faggot!”

    ——–

    That goes well past the line on so many levels…..

    – While the slur does not violate freedom of speech, it violates a sense of common decency. The liberal-left that usually prides itself in ‘appearance over substance’ would normally jump all over this.
    – The threat of rape IS a threat of violence. All violence is potentially life-threatening.
    – If making a violent threat wasn’t bad enough, this idiot chose to do it on state property, and in front of a camera. A felony?
    – How are anti sexual harassment laws worded? This is state property again. Another charge?

    But the most obvious damage to the liberal cause was not caused by the man himself, but the deafening silence of the very people who claim to be against all this; the Liberal culture of America.
    .

  14. #2 – “When a bunch of crazed wing-nuts called Barney Frank the same thing and called John Lewis the N-word, you guys didn’t have a lot to say.”

    Because, Auntie Bitch, NEITHER ONE HAPPENED.

    And does this mean that you will be going to R.I. and asking people the same thing that the union thug did?

    Checkmate.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

  21. Instead of providing evidence, Paula, you have revealed your prejudices. The fact that you’re “working on that” suggests that you leap to conclusions first, look for evidence second.

    Malkin, while having strong views, always makes sure to check her facts.

  22. to Miss Paula Poundstone..

    The problem with you Liberals is you’re never happy with the narcissistic life you’ve crafted for yourselves. It’s never enough, you always want more and to hell with the consequences.

    Members of the teacher’s union have for the last few days been stepping in front of the cameras and claiming they’re primary concern has always been the children. However, when union members are caught on camera while congregating behind closed doors, they sure do sing a whole different tune. Hey don’t take my word…. Watch the video:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-piPkgAUo0w

    .

  23. Paula and reality don’t talk much do they?

    Paula doesn’t realize Breitibart is being sured for actions the Government took. He just got thrown into the briar patch.

    Paula also doesn’t have any evidence the video was ‘faked’ But she’s so desperate to change the subject that she’ll put anything up.

    It’s the process she remembers reading about when the SAG routed the Nazis at Treblinka.

  24. Instead of providing evidence, Paula, you have revealed your prejudices. The fact that you’re “working on that” suggests that you leap to conclusions first, look for evidence second.

    Consider this, Dan. Paula is claiming that a video of union goons using an anti-gay slur and assaulting a cameraman is fake. They will produce evidence to prove it is fake at some later date, but until then, the video must be considered fraudulent.

    But, we have to take their word for it that Barney Frank and John Lewis were subjected to slurs…. even though none of the dozens of cameras and microphones at the scenes of the alleged incidents captured anything of the sort.

    Wow, really?

  26. Yes, it’s like I have been saying, there is no truth on the left, there is only ‘The Narrative.’ And ‘The Narrative’ says that the union activists are the good guys. ‘The Narrative’ says that the union activists cannot be bigots. THerefore, any evidence that contradicts ‘The Narrative’ must be dismissed as fraudulent.

  29. Now Paula has me wondering how the all-powerful Mr. Swanson’s “bias” could have oozed into the camera, unfairly altering its detailed, computer-pixelated record of WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

  32. just “happened” to be at the right place at the right time

    Yeah, because what are the odds that a conservative journalist would just happen to have a video camera at big left-wing union protest? And what are the odds that the union goons would do something obnoxious? Imagine the sheer improbability of those two events happening… in this day and age. It’s like taking a camera to Charlie Sheen’s house and having him just happen to stumble out drunk.

  33. Paula & Anti-Dogma need go out on a date; they can slander all the Republicans they want while they are drunk on booze. Their movie of choice could be The Exorcist; it’s so romantic. Levi can be in the backseat as her learns about the birds & the birds.

  34. who… just “happened” to be at the right place at the right time

    … because, after all, nobody ever goes to mass demonstrations. Least of all with a camera.

    And because it doesn’t matter if someone was caught in truly awful, reprehensible behavior, if you can distract attention by impugning the motives of others. A lesson from President Clinton.

  35. Yes the fellow was wrong for what he said and we should condemn him for it.

    Now in the future, as it has in the past at say Tea Party rallies (Barney Frank), or at McCain-Palin rallies (it was actually commie f*ggot there), Dearest can we expect you to write a huffy diatribe about why the RNC haven’t issued press releases rebuking such individuals?

    I can see that’s probably not going to be the case since the ladies here are in such a huff at having to actually examine past inaction, but as you call upon HRC to do the right thing, can we expect the same of you? I mean there are dozens of examples we could use counter. The woman who had her head stomped on at a Rand Paul rally, or a fight instigated against counter-protesters by Tea Party ralliers in Florida. The next time that dear soul Ms. Palin assures us that the “lame-stream media” lies about violent Tea Party protesters, will you rebuke her as well?

  38. Staged?

    Democrats would rather believe a prepared statement by the DNC than their own eyes.

    That explains why Global Warming just wont die. To the leftist, reality is an abstract concept. Only when information is gathered from multiple sources and debated by a group of trained, ELITE, ‘collective’ thinkers, can the real truth be determined. And only by a carefully worded statement from those elites, to the cult followers, can every nuance of truth be appreciated.

    Occams Razor be damned!
    .

  39. So when are you going to condemn him and repudiate both his behavior and the Obama Party he represents, Counterfail?

    You know, like you’re shrieking be dine with the Tea Party?

    Strange, isn’t it? Counterfail makes all these demands of other people, but resolutely refuses to follow any of them itself.

    It’s like he’s demanding that the rules not apply to him because of his sexual orientation.

    Teenagers.

  40. JS, where did I ever say I was in favor of using the word, “faggot.”

    Trying to parse your comment; we’ve got a guy here associated with a left-of-center outfit hurling the word, “faggot” at someone of whose sexuality who was uncertain with intent to demean. Don’t you think that’s worthy of criticism for the same folk who asked Sarah Palin to speak out against her daughter using the slur, even after said daughter had apologized?

  41. I think that it’s a bit of a reach to characterize the Pro-Union Gentleman’s language as an “anti-gay slur”; he may well have meant faggot in the Southparkian sense of “a guy who is incredibly annoying, loud, and in-your-face, as typified by Harley riders.”

    In the words of Big Gay Al (PBUH), “Gay men need to accept that fag and faggot are never going to go completely away, because they’re just too much fun to say!”

  43. I think that it’s a bit of a reach to characterize the Pro-Union Gentleman’s language as an “anti-gay slur”

    Except for the anal rape part.

    Which reminds me: it’s interesting watching liberals squeal ,like Ned Beatty, that Republicans are supposedly redefining “rape” when they were doing it themselves as they fell all over each other to defend Roman Polanski.

  45. Cognitive Dissonance says:

    Maybe this is all an unfortunate misunderstanding. Maybe what’s missing here is context.

    Was this “Pro-Union Gentleman”, by chance, a member of the International Brotherhood of Proctologists? Could he have been offering a free service simply to initiate a friendly debate?

    As an expert in his field, is it possible that that he was unaccustomed to the limits normally observed in pleasant conversation, do to his own professional experience?

    If that’s the case, i can understand how he feels. Being around assholes all day tends to put me in a bad mood too.
    .

  47. “Except for the anal rape part.”

    I dunno. To me, anal-rape reference or no, the goon’s use of the word f@ggot is an “anti-gay slur” IF and ONLY IF he believed that the guy he was addressing was literally a homosexual.

    And I would argue that “I’ll f*ck you in the ass, you f*ggot!” can plausibly be read as signifying exactly the same thing as “I’m two seconds away from punching your teeth out, you scumbag!” (Which is to say that one should not be hyper-literal when analyzing this kind of invective.)