Fox reports that,
The California Senate voted 19-2 on Tuesday to demand an apology from Democratic Gov. Gray Davis (search) for what many regard as an ethnic slur made against Arnold Schwarzenegger.
During the floor debate, some Democrats faulted Davis for telling a supporter — in a conversation he thought was private but was overheard by a reporter — that anyone who can’t pronounce California should not be governor of the state. Davis later said he was only joking.
“I am not going to deny that when the governor made fun of Mr. Schwarzenegger’s accent it was very, very painful, especially for someone like me who speaks with an accent,” Sen. Martha Escutia, D-Norwalk, who voted for the motion, said on the floor.
Sheesh. Now, I am no fan of Gray Davis and rather like Schwarzenegger. But, please, this was rather obviously a joke. And a reasonably funny one, for that matter. I’m pretty sure Arnold wasn’t offended.
(Hat tip: Eugene Volokh)
About the Author: James Joyner is the publisher of
Outside the Beltway and the managing editor of the
Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer, Desert Storm vet, and college professor with a PhD in political science from The University of Alabama. He lives just outside the Beltway in Alexandria, Virginia.
Follow James on
FriendFeed |
Twitter |
Digg
NOTE: My spam filter automatically deletes any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post. Those doing it manually should ensure they have linked the post before sending the TrackBack ping.
Comments are Closed
Andrew Sullivan also has another interesting post in the same thread that I missed the first time:
Like Glenn Reynolds, I’m besieged by people who think I’m wrong about the tone of Bush’s campaign speech last night. Fair enough. It’s a subjective judgment call, and I certainly respect those who took it otherwise. But what amazes me is the vituperative tone, and how many then accuse me of being anti-war, anti-Bush and anti-American. Me? Are politics so polarized that you have to either engage in hagiography or hatred of our leaders? Is there nothing permissible in between?
I’m not sure when this happened. It was certainly in evidence during the Clinton Administration when Democrats couldn’t bring themselves to criticize even the most reprehensible acts of their leader, despite his lack of loyalty toward them, and Republican commentators such as Rush Limbaugh reflexively opposed anything Clinton did just because it was Clinton doing it.
I’ve noticed this trend on the blogosphere as well. I have quit going to some of the more “out there” sites on both the left and the right, because the level of discourse is so low as to outweigh any gain that might come from exposure to less mainstream viewpoints.
Update: Slightly apropos of this point, Terry over at Possumblog offers this response to a mention of his site as G-Rated :
Thanks for continuing to drop by and visit, Rob–in case any of you have never visited Acidman, his blog is G-rated, as well. Usually each one is followed by an “oddamn”, but there you go.
Heh. I’d link to the post itself but. . . .
About the Author: James Joyner is the publisher of
Outside the Beltway and the managing editor of the
Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer, Desert Storm vet, and college professor with a PhD in political science from The University of Alabama. He lives just outside the Beltway in Alexandria, Virginia.
Follow James on
FriendFeed |
Twitter |
Digg
-
SpaztiPundits linked with Calm down people...
NOTE: My spam filter automatically deletes any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post. Those doing it manually should ensure they have linked the post before sending the TrackBack ping.
Comments are Closed
