Brown says 'didn't hear' 'curling iron' remark. Um... "You Lie"

[jefferson_dem]

Brown 'didn't hear' 'curling iron' remark

A spokeswoman for the Massachusetts State Republican Party says Scott Brown didn't hear a supporter's nasty remark at a West Springfield rally yesterday.

Democrats are circulating a video of Brown smiling after his supporter's "curling iron" line, a reference to a controversial sex abuse case Coakley handled.

"We can do it," Brown said with a smile after the shout.

"The 'we can do it' statement was in response to the growing energy of the crowd," said the spokeswoman, Tarah Donoghue.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/Brown_didnt_hear_curling_iron_remark_.html

Here's a video. Watch the fucker smile - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28u3vPExxp4 That his campaign is forced to respond means they are at least a little concerned.

[MercutioATC]

1. The curling iron statement isn't a random call for sodomy.

It's in response to a specific issue many have with Coakley...her apparent kid-gloves handling of a defendant accused of raping a toddler with a hot curling iron.

[jefferson_dem]

5. Oh. It's a call for sodomy based on a supposed "policy disagreement" with the MA AG.

Gotcha.

Thanks for the clarification.

[MercutioATC]

7. "Maybe we should waterboard Cheney and see how he likes it"

How many times have I read that on DU?

Same thing.

[Aramchek]

16. not at all. Cheney actually had people waterboarded. Coakley never hot curled someone's anus.

[MercutioATC]

19. Cheney's POLICY allowed people to be waterboarded...he never did it himself.

...and Coakley's actions allowed somebody who sodomized a toddler with a curling iron to remain free for two years...which I consider pretty damn distasteful, too.


I'm not advocating the "curling iron up the butt" meme, but I don't feel that using it is any more offensive than dozens of other attacks I have read.

[FrenchieCat]

9. So you are saying that it is quite fine to say something like

what was said because it really is in reference to something else?

That's some twisting to get to where you want to go.

[MercutioATC]

20. I'm saying that it wasn't a random comment...and that it was directly related to Coakley's actions.

The statement is a little over the top, but I don't think it's any worse than half of the things we say here...and certainly not as bad as if it were a completely random call to sodomize somebody with a curling iron.

[dkf]

31. That sounds like something we'd rather not have explained further.

Wow. Bad.

I strongly suggest we drop this accusation like now.

[MercutioATC]

32. It's not an "accusation", it's a documented occurrance:

"In October 2005, a Somerville police officer living in Melrose raped his 23-month-old niece with a hot object, most likely a curling iron.

Keith Winfield, then 31, told police he was alone with the toddler that day and made additional statements that would ultimately be used to convict him.

But in the aftermath of the crime, a Middlesex County grand jury overseen by Martha Coakley, then the district attorney, investigated without taking action.

It was only after the toddler’s mother filed applications for criminal complaints that Coakley won grand jury indictments charging rape and assault and battery.

Even then, nearly 10 months after the crime, Coakley’s office recommended that Winfield be released on personal recognizance, with no cash bail. He remained free until December 2007, when Coakley’s successor as district attorney won a conviction and two life terms."


http://freedomeden.blogspot.com/2010/01/martha-coakley-and-keith-winfield-child.html

[dkf]

33. Not talking about that accusation.

I'm talking about getting on Browns butt about this. Bad move because it demands the explanation you just gave me which is not a good thing IMO.

[MercutioATC]

34. Gotcha. I think many of those posters don't know the history.

They think some man just randomly suggested sodomizing her with a curling iron.

[dkf]

36. That is what I thought

And I was wondering why someone would pull that insult in particular. Didn't make sense til these explanations.

[MercutioATC]

37. I immediately looked it up. It was too bizarre a statement to be random.

I don't condone the statement, but I don't think it's much different than suggesting Cheney be waterboarded, considering the history.

[dkf]

38. Good for you.

My antenna went up but not enough to google. I love my iPhone but the sucky keyboard and spellcheck make me a little lazy. It's atrocious for punctuation too.

[MercutioATC]

39. I agree about the iPhone.

I love mine for what I use it for, but it's not great for web-surfing.

[woo me with science]

2. I'm sorry, but Coakley is a disaster on child abuse issues.

She chose to let go on his own recognizance a police officer who raped a 23-month-old child with a curling iron.

And while she let an ACTUAL, vicious child abuser go, she has inexplicably defended the conviction of Gerald Amirault in that famous daycare ritual abuse scandal that we know was the result of hysteria and brainwashing of vulnerable children by social workers.

http://www.salemnews.com/puopinion/local_story_015225322.html?keyword=topstory

This garbage healthcare bill will be the reason for her defeat, but the Dems did not help themselves by picking a horrible candidate in the first place.

[jefferson_dem]

6. Amazing.

I'm glad you said "i'm sorry".

[woo me with science]

8. Grow up. nt

[jefferson_dem]

11. Any other public calls for violence against women you want to apologize for excusing?

Feel free to critique Coakley's supposed "soft on crime" position but that's totally irrelevant to topic of this thread - a teabagger publically calling for her to be sodomized with a curling iron.

Grow up ... yourself.

[woo me with science]

12. You know what disgusts me?

People whose views on outrageous behavior depend on the party affiliations of those involved. People who purposely omit facts and important context because they want to stir up partisan outrage.

I absolutely did critique her being "soft on crime." In this case, that means freeing a policeman who shoved a hot curling iron up inside a baby girl's vagina and anus. You put this story here completely without context--a disgusting, cynical move given that you would be screaming bloody murder if Brown had freed a child rapist. Spare me your faux outrage about what someone shouted at a rally, and spare me your cynical attempts to keep people unaware of the only person in this story who actually DID get a curling iron shoved up inside of her...and was denied justice for TWO YEARS by Coakley. You are the one who needs to grow up.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/06/some_saw_coakley_as_lax_on_05_rape_case/?page=full

I don't know what is happening to the soul of my party. What is happening in Massachusetts is an outrage, a clusterfuck, and a scandal, and it is the fault of DEMOCRATS. We put forth a "healthcare" bill that will indenture Americans to the corporate bloodsuckers, with NO cost controls whatsoever. Then we choose this disaster of a candidate to run for Teddy's seat in Massachusetts.

Sheesh.

[jefferson_dem]

15. Now you're just making shit up.

I offered the OP because I think it's a relevant story in this campaign - the attitudes and behaviors of those who support Brown for Senate and, in turn, how he responds to the absolutely obscene comments about Coakley being made at his rallies. When some pitchfork-wielding member of a teabgger mob calls for sodomy of anyone with a curling iron, I am outraged. You, apparently, are not. Justify your position all you want but that's the bottom line.

Then again, I shouldn't expect rational discussion given your wild-eyed rhetorical flourish regarding "corporate bloodsuckers". Oh please. Perhaps your biggest concern about the OP is that it exposes the ravenous hate that fuels a kindred "kill the bill-er".

Yes, what has happened to the soul of the party?

[woo me with science]

17. Talk about twisting things around.

That was truly bizarre. I am the one ignoring an outrage??? All I did was add context to your post, and you could not tolerate it. And the only reason you could not tolerate it was because it might reflect badly on someone with a "D" after her name. Shame on you.

Don't you dare tell me with a straight face that you would be arguing this way if the situation were reversed and Brown had released a sadistic child rapist into the community for two years. I am sure you would be MOST outraged at the vile comments someone yelled at his rally, wouldn't you? And I'm sure you would chastize any attempt to mention the child he raped or the rapist who was released as "irrelevant."

Yes, I am angry about the healthcare bill, which was a tremendous opportunity squandered so badly that Dems will pay for it in many elections to come. I am also angry that my party chose this disaster of a candidate for Teddy's seat. I am angriest of all that some Dems still don't get it and continue to play these ridiculous "see no evil" games over and over again, defending this crap and choosing instead to hyperventilate about some idiot at a rally as though that were the main problem here.

Be honest, for god's sake. This party is truly blind with partisanship if you can't even do that.

Sometimes DU makes me so sad.

[jenmito]

13. " This garbage healthcare bill will be the reason for her defeat,..." The majority in MA want

the bill to pass.

[woo me with science]

14. Just barely.

Massachusetts should be a blue, blue state with overwhelming support for healthcare reform. Polls show that only 43 percent in the state support this bill, and the ones who approve are virtually all Democrats. Independents, who are desperately needed in elections, are as opposed to the bill as Republicans are. Furthermore, internals of polls show that the approval of Democrats for this bill is weaker in intensity than the opposition to the bill by Independents and Republicans. That's important information when you are considering who will get out the vote.

It didn't have to be this way. There initially was tremendous support among independents for healthcare reform that would actually cut costs for average Americans. Independents would have enthusiastically supported a bill that was not a sell-out to the insurance companies.

This bill should have much stronger support in Massachusetts than it does. The internals of every poll taken so far suggest that it is the main reason Coakley is in so much trouble.

[jenmito]

18. The last Rasmussen (Repub.) poll has support for the bill in MA at 52%

with 46% not liking it. That's a majority. Therefore, it is NOT going to hurt Coakley.

[woo me with science]

21. That's a pretty simplistic analysis

that completely ignores the internals of the polls. Actually the latest number is 53 percent in Massachusetts supporting the bill (your numbers are from a week ago). However, this is dismally low for a state like Massachusetts, where Democrats typically have a 34-point electoral advantage.

Coakley is in a state where she should be winning handily, but instead she is fighting for her life, because independents have abandoned her in droves. Most polls over the past week have shown independents breaking about 2 to 1 for Brown, and some have even shown 3:1. Polling has consistently indicated that opposition to the health care bill is a major reason for that.

All current polls indicate that Brown's voters are much more energized than are Coakley's. Even Robert Gibbs is commenting on the tepid response of Massachusetts voters this election. When you restrict polling to likely voters in Massachusetts, support for the health care bill has been reported at 36 percent.

Coakley may yet pull it out, because MOST voters in Massachusetts are Democrats. But to state that this bill isn't hurting her is inconsistent with reality.

[jenmito]

22. Don't you think Ted Kennedy would've supported the healthcare bill? Do you think

HE would've lost, too?

[woo me with science]

23. I suspect that Ted Kennedy would have fought harder

for a bill that actually reflected the interests of the people.

[jenmito]

24. That wasn't my question. Please re-read and try answering again. TIA. n/t

[woo me with science]

26. Oh, please.

Let's recap, shall we, Jenmito? This is the sum total of the argument you have made to me so far:

Post #1: "The majority in MA want the bill to pass."

Post #2: "The last Rasmussen (Repub.) poll has support for the bill in MA at 52% with 46% not liking it. That's a majority. Therefore, it is NOT going to hurt Coakley."

I responded with two lengthy, substantive posts explaining to you why the internals of current polls do not comport with your conclusion. Moreover, I pointed out that the single number on which your entire argument rests is not even accurate when it comes to likely voters as opposed to all voters in Massachusetts.

You have responded to nothing I said. Not one thing. Instead, you ask me an inane question about Ted Kennedy, which I answered. You responded rudely, as though I am the one who is being nonresponsive.

Sheesh.

Do you know what Coakley's problem is? It is the very same problem exemplified by your very short, empty, unresponsive, and ultimately arrogant posts to me. As I already told you, I believe that Ted Kennedy would have fought much harder for a bill that actually represented the people. We would not have ended up with THIS bill if he were still around. Of course he would have accepted compromises that fell short of what he wanted, but there is no way he would have rolled over for the insurance companies to this extent.

But there is something even more important, Jenmito: Even if Senator Kennedy had eventually supported a bill that he considered flawed, he would have been able to build more support for it than Coakley and her fellow healthcare bill apologists have done, simply by being honest with the public about its shortcomings and building political support and confidence from them to improve it in the future.

Coakley is a disastrous candidate who has done absolutely nothing of the sort. She essentially disappeared from the campaign trail during perhaps the most important special election for Democrats in recent memory, and she has essentially told the voters that everything is hunky dory with this bill, despite poll after poll reflecting the voters' frustration and dismay over what this bill actually says. Beyond her unexplained and undefended thumbs-up for this mess, nobody knows what the hell she stands for or what she even thinks. That is why she is fighting to break even with this Republican goon in a state where a Democrat should have been elected in a heartbeat.

This is not the fault of progressives or the people of Massachusetts. This is Coakley's fault and the Democrats' fault. She has been arrogant and completely unresponsive, just like your one- to three-sentence posts to me here.

[jenmito]

28. Sorry, but you're changing the subject...

I simply asked if you think Kennedy would've lost IF he supported this bill. It's a yes or no question. I do not think the reason Coakley may lose is because she supports this bill. I think it's because she ran a horrible campaign. Again, though, it was a simple question for a reason-to make a point.

[woo me with science]

29. You are incapable of having a responsive conversation. nt

[jenmito]

30. Keep deflecting the simple question. n/t

[Jennicut]

3. Even if someone had an issue with her handling of a particular case, agreeing with it or

going along with it at a rally is pretty childish.

[dionysus]

4. so is semi-condoning the remark on here. giving excuses to teabaggers is so...tacky...

:hi:

[jefferson_dem]

10. I am seriously flabbergasted that some here would even try to excuse this vileness.

Makes me question ... why?

[MercutioATC]

35. Because she treated a child molester with kid gloves, maybe?

For fuck's sake, the guy sodomized a toddler with a hot curling iron and she interviewed...but declined to charge...him.

She then recommended that he be released on OR with no bail.


Many think that is vile.

[TheBigotBasher]

25. Brown said he did not who the teabaggers are

Now where was this picture taken again?

[MadBadger]

27. Has this been on the news in Massachusetts?

I think the best chance Coakley has at this point is to get a groundswell of support in the final days of the campaign from women, much like Hillary in New Hampshire