Erik Rush may have rendered himself irrelevant in the world of commentary, but that won't stop him from doing as much damage as possible to the dignity of responsible opinion.
Shock to the Boston Marathon explosions was still in the air when that tweet was posted and it may have been the cause for President Obama's call for calm, not jumping to conclusions - or rushing to judgment.
When one person tweeted, "Are you ALREADY BLAMING MUSLIMS??" Rush responded:
He later tweeted that he was being sarcastic, writing:
It didn't help, moreover, that Rush's responses to critical tweets were just as vitriolic as his initial "jokes."
The Rush To Defend Sarcasm
As with any shocking public assault of any person or group, the resulting controversy will become more interesting than the assault itself: who will distance themselves and who will defend? Will FOX News (he's a contributor) produce a non-coverage of the incident? Or will some of its members issue a whispered mea culpa? Will colleague Ann Coulter cheer? Such blatant "sarcasm" will need bold and fierce defenders. Coulter, for example, could certainly empathize with Rush for making a "joke" that's deemed offensive to many.* Of course, this may be one incident Coulter would be wisely to sit out, but if the Coultergeist smells publicity ...
And since Erik Rush aided organizations like the Family Research Council with his anti-gay remarks, will Tony Perkins defend his remarks under the protection of free speech. Or freedom of religion, for Islamophobia is indeed a religion. Just ask Pam Geller.
Defending offensive people (especially intentionally offensive people) is always risky: in America, backlash can occur at any time, especially when it comes up against another American axiom - innocent until proven guilty. Rush's statement immediately made Muslims the underdog at a time of unexplained crisis and America always tries its best to root for the underdog. Furthermore, Rush has made his living out of pummeling the left and the liberal populace, taking the credit for "breaking" the story about Obama's ties to controversial pastor Jeremiah Wright.
Is Responsible Opinion Dead In The Age Of Twitter?
In an era when media like FOX News has rendered dead responsible journalism, it might be argued that responsible opinion has also been aid to rest. Responsible opinion could be defined as that opinion which is intelligently put from a respected podium and accountable for its words - and their effects. Social media like Twitter, however, has given the podium to everyone, and while the intent of dialogue is honest, the cacophony if unaccountable tirades and hate speech is deafening.
And Erik Rush's hate tweet was heard over it all.
Which is why it matters. News commentators like Rush already have a podium from which to blast outrage, so when one climbs atop the Twitter pile, it is heard by more people - and effects more people. It outrages more people and inflames more hatred - in both directions. It is not merely a spark to more discussion, it is a statement to incite violent anger on both sides of the sociopolitical spectrum.
It is too bad that Erik Rush doesn't consider himself accountable for anything he says and that he is free to be as "sarcastic" as he wishes. Hate speech is like that. One can only hope that he will held accountable by everyone else ...
... some day.
*During National "Coming Out Day" Coultergeist suggested that there be a national "Fathers disowning their sons day."
(Note: The above photo depicting the execution of homosexuals in Iran was not part of the Geller campaign ads, but one of the photos included in a corresponding comment posted on The American Freedom Initiative's website. The imposed captioning is mine - RevDan).
Pandering to fears of Sharia law is usual fodder for Pam Geller, but her latest ads target a different demographic, and in San Francisco, the home of that demographic.
The above ad is to run on the side of San Francisco MUNI buses and other transit, but in a turn-around strategy, The SFMTA (Transit Authority) will donate a portion of Geller's money to the Human Rights Commission. Theresa Sparks of the Commission said that they would take Geller's money of hate and turn it into something positive for the community. The sentiment was apparently lost on Geller who captioned the YouTube clip of Sparks with "San Francisco Human Rights Theresa Sparks City Officials support jihad, anti-gay, anti-woman." (see below)
The reaction to the ads is very revealing and probably unintended by Geller: the Right is all too righteous and the Left (mostly gays) is repulsed at being used.
Geller Group (from Atlas Shrugs)
- and hopefully those PC liberal gays will heed to this.- We must suffer the stupid 'til we can enlighten them. Patience!Patience! Patience!
- It’s about time somebody did this in the heart of Californication. It might be a hilarious idea to set up a fund “to support oppressed homosexuals in the Middle East”. Maybe to even convince homosexuals to travel there to make a nuisance of themselves.(NOTE: this is the comment to which the above photo was attached)
And from Bare Naked Islam (It really isn't Islamophobia when they really ARE trying to kill you!):
American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) submits new bus ads on ‘Muslim Oppression of Homosexuals’ to San Francisco Transit. As with most leftists, the Gay community has at best been missing in action when it comes to the anti-jihad movement. More often, they attack us. I wonder where they will be now?
Gays (from Joe.My.God):
- One disgusting creature denouncing other equally vile characters.
- I think it's perfectly reasonable to despise these hateful regimes in the Middle East and elsewhere (Indonesia, Pakistan) and still consider Geller a hate-fulled nut case.
- Apply her thinking in New York and you get Islamophobia, apply it in Iran and you get death sentences for gays. She is who we are fighting in Iran just as she is who we are fighting here.
Gay comments frequently point out Geller's own anti-gay stance: for example, Geller virulently opposed the appointment of Kevin Jennings by Obama:
From Atlas Shrugs:
"President Obama has appointed Kevin Jennings, founder of GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network) ... Jennings is a vicious, anti-religious bigot who once said “[F–k] ‘em” to the “Religious Right.” He supports promoting homosexuality and gender confusion as normative to even young students."
In comments about Geller, the Christian Right was often referred to as the Christian Taliban.
Whose Jihad Is It?
While the LGBT community of San Francisco has always been considered the focal point for equal rights, few in the gay community consider the struggle akin to a religion. It is certainly not a "holy war" since that term is used by some social conservatives to indicate their fight against gay rights. "What's yours?" paints the picture of virulently militant gays, the kind characterized by such organizations as Act Up! But Act Up! was focused on the AIDS crisis and government's inaction, especially in the realm of medical research and treatment. It chastised the sacred cows like Jesse Helms, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson, but never invoked the name of God. The term of Jihad, therefore is totally misplaced, and, in fact, offensive.
The Jihad is in Geller's mind - where it is always been.
