Congressman Alan Grayson has been mouth-flashing again.
Every video of this mouth flash has been disabled. (in the place of the embed code: Embedding disabled by request) Here is a copy of the transcript:
REP. ALAN GRAYSON, D-FLA.: Here I am the only member of Congress who actually worked as an economist, and this lobbyist, this K Street whore, is trying to teach me about economics.
So many questions, so little time.
- Why is Rep. Grayson allowed to ‘take it back?’
- Why is he so special that a video of him being a rude ass has been ‘deleted’ for all practical purposes?
- How do these remarks differ from what Don Imus said?
- Will Grayson get the same treatment from his colleagues that Wilson was given?
Apparently Rep. Grayson was on a radio show and was speaking about Linda Robertson, a lobbyist and advisor for Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke.
According to Politico:
Republicans and Democrats slammed Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) for calling Linda Robertson, an adviser to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, a “K Street whore” in a month-old radio interview that circulated on Capitol Hill Monday night.
“There’s no call for that language. No call for it. That’s absurd. If he was standing here now, I’d say that to him,” said Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.)
“He’s out of control,” added Washington Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who is vice chairwoman of the House Republican Conference.
The remarks are the latest to surface in a string of controversial statements by Grayson, who said on the Alex Jones radio show that he believes Robertson, a former Enron lobbyist, is not qualified to pass judgment on intricate financial matters.
It’s clear that his colleagues’ opinion of him has suffered.
“Is this news to you that this guy’s one fry short of a Happy Meal?” asked Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.)
House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer defended Robertson, whom he said he knows.
“I think it’s inappropriate and unfair,” the Maryland Democrat said. He decried the “heated rhetoric” that he said interferes with the ability solve problems.
Late last month, Grayson said Republicans’ health care plans were for Americans to “die quickly.”
Steny Hoyer needs to learn that there are just some things you don’t call women. ‘Whore’ is one of those things.
Grayson issued the following apology:
“I offer my sincere apology,” Grayson said in a statement, just hours after his spokesman defended his comments. “I did not intend to use a term that is often, and correctly, seen as disrespectful of women.”
What can I say, it is never O.K. to call a woman a whore. What on G-d’s green earth was this man thinking, or rather NOT thinking!
There is simply no excuse. He has been walking right up to the line for a while. With ‘whore,’ he crossed over.
I did have to laugh about him comparing Cheney to Dracula.
http://www.politico.com/singletitlevideo.html?bcpid=19407224001&bctid=46050106001
Its bad.
Captain Cajones??
Here in the America of the Twenty-first Century, where I live, we have NO BANNED WORDS.
Are you asserting that someone who describes their own profession as that of being a whore, should still not be referred to as a whore? Calling someone a “sex-worker” still means whore, so PC substitute words get you nowhere.
Calling someone a media whore, a K street whore or any kind of whore in the context that was described above is a slang way of describing someone who will do anything for a buck (or, in the case of lobbyist, anything to forward a client’s agenda on the Hill). It did not mean that the person was actually a prostitute, although I have known (not in the biblical sense) K Street lobbyists who were, at the least, former whores (and damned good ones from what I heard).
Your complaint reminds me of the evolution of the term, computer geek. At first, the term was generally understood to be derogatory, but with time and the fact that many “geeks” became uber rich, today when someone wants a REAL expert in computers they say, “We need to find some geeks to fix this” or sometimes the people in that profession will reserve the term “geek” for only those who really know their stuff.
Perhaps someday soon the term, Lobbyist whore, will be attributed to only those who are the big earners in that, very whore-like profession.
Until then, save your righteous indignation for something that really deserves it. I say adopt and glorify the phrase, ___ whore. Anyone want to be a blog whore? If it pays over 200,000 per year like K Street lobbyists, then I am in!
I don’t know how I feel about this actually. I could imagine a male lobbyist being called a K Street whore as well, easily, and I wouldn’t react except to think it was very strong language. I could also imagine him saying instead that this woman, Robertson, was “whoring for a K Street lobbying firm.” That would be tougher than my first example, but softer than what he actually said. I have heard lobbyists routinely described in very harsh words, and certainly people joke about whorish behavior in the political realm. Would it be ok to say a person prostituted him/herself as a lobbyist?
I feel there is a difference somehow in calling a male lobbyist a whore and calling a female lobbyist a whore, but I am not sure it is right to feel that difference. However either way, it was stupid and inappropriate of him to say what he said. The English language is so vast. He could have described her in equally damning terms without using that explosive word.
Bring it on, Congressman Grayson. The next time some self-righteous moralist in your party tries to deride all opposition as “screaming teaba@@ers,” they won’t have a leg to stand on. Hypocrite.
I think both Wilson and Grayson are wrong, Emma. They are wrong for different reasons.
Leila, I agree. ‘ whoring for K street’ doesn’t pack the same wallop as calling Robertson a whore. I think the stand alone position of whore is what made it so bad. Its a fine line. He has just had a big careless mouth unbecoming a member of congress.
We might be changing the blog name to Raunchy Blog. This week we have covered naked men, fondled dogs, and women being called ‘whores.’ I am going to look for a church topic.
Just kidding about the name change.
Tyler, no one has banned the word whore. In a civilized world, men don’t call women whores. It just isn’t done. It’s one of those social rules for which there are consequences.
Yes, I am indignant that any man would be so frigging stupid as to do that.
Women may call themselves whores. Women may call other women whores, but they risk consequences. Men can never do it and be considered anything but cads.
Nicest guy you would ever want to meet. Biggest slut in town. If he publically calls her a whore, he is socially toast. Iam guessing though that you are old enough to already know that.
But thank you for sharing….
I am in between Leila and Tyler. If it was a male lobbyist, I would have np problem AT ALL with the term. It doesn’t mean they have sex for money, obviously. It’s saying they have no shame in what they do for money which is true of many lobbyists. But since it’s a woman he should have said K Street slimebag or something.
I actually prefer real whores to lobbyist whores, because the real ones are not standing in the way between American citizens and their representatives in government. I don’t think real whoring should be a crime. It makes more sense to crack down on lobbyists in my book.
And Greyson, I’m glad there is someone on the left talking trash. It seems to work wonders for the right wing agenda, it’s rampant over there.
The best thing to do with Rep. Grayson is ignore him. He is a fluke, a Democratic that got swept in on Barack Obama’s coat-tails in an otherwise Republican district. Obama carried the district by 4 points (52-48) and so did Grayson. Obama will not be on the ticket in 2010 but Grayson will have to face a Republican leaning electorate on his own. It will be a major upset if he retains his seat.
The funny thing is that his big mouth has probably cost him his next job. Typically, vulnerable Congressmen who tow the Administration’s line against the wishes of their district are normally given jobs in the Administration as a reward (often times Ambassadorships) Look at Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky, who voted for President Clinton’s 1993 budget at her extreme political peril.
Anyway, my point is that by now everybody knows Rep. Grayson has a big mouth, but he will be out of Congress in another 15 months. Until then, we should do our best to ignore him.
I am all for free speech but the problem one runs into in defending this is that Rep. Grayson knew very well he was speaking of a woman when he chose that word. If we held Jackson Miller via Greg Letiecq accountable for using gender-based sexual propaganda as a focal point for political antagonism, then Grayson should also be accountable for using this derogatory term.
Also, why is it that men are not made to feel vulnerable to accusations that imply sexual impropriety? There is sexism written all over this. That is why Grayson has apologized. He knows he was wrong, and he admitted it. I wish I could say the same for Miller and Letiecq.
I am all for free speech but the problem one runs into in defending this is that Rep. Grayson knew very well he was speaking of a woman when he made this remark. If the women of this community held Jackson Miller via Greg Letiecq accountable for using gender-based sexual propaganda as a form political antagonism, then Grayson should also be accountable for using this derogatory term.
Also, why is it that men are not made to feel vulnerable to accusations that imply sexual impropriety? There is sexism written all over this. That is why Grayson has apologized. He knows he was wrong, and he admitted it. I wish I could say the same for Miller and Letiecq.
Witness too, I think it is unfair to blame Jackson Miller for the gender based sexual propaganda being used by Letiecq against Rishell’s campaign manager.
This blog has intentionally stayed away from that issue rather than to give any attention to bad, immature behavior on the part of Letiecq towards women. I do not doubt that it was his intention to draw us into the fray.
However, since Miller is the one who will eventually profit from any negative opinions created on bvbl, it is easy to see why blame is being placed. We have dealt with Jackson Miller one on one and simply refuse to give any credence to any misbehavior on the part of Letiecq. I imagine Mr. Miller wishes it had never happened also. He has always been a gentleman.
If Miller is such a gentleman, let him behave like one in public, and apologize for these offensive actions perpetrated on his behalf. “One on one” is no comfort to a general public that has come to question Letiecq’s sanity and Miller’s integrity (at least when it comes to women and minorities).
What I want to know is……….. How does Grayson know the whores hang out on K st.?
Jackson Miller has integrity with regard to both women and minorities, of which Rishell is both, and he has always been courteous to her perhaps with one exception in the heat of a debate. It was discussed on this board that Miller recently purchased dinner for some Rishell staffers. So, although he has not publicly apologized, one could safely say that he IS sorry. He throws Letiecq under the bus in private, to various degrees depending on how far he thinks his words will carry.
I predict he will make some sort of public statement after Tuesday. That will give him a some time to build a more moderate base of support, something I hope he does anyway for the sake of the party and for the sake of his future prospects in Richmond.
I don’t know of anyone who has ever seen Miller act like anything other than a gentleman in public. I expect his wife would get him first and then Chief Deane would. 😉
Where would you like Miller to do this great renouncing, Witness? Bvbl? That would come down faster than you could say Jack Robinson!
I think you are playing into Letiecq’s game plan, frankly. I would prefer this blog not be a part of Greg’s reindeer games. Fine to discuss Miller’s policies, past votes, and his platform though. It should be open to inspection. Same with his opponent, Jeannette Rishell.
NOT splc, I guess he knows the same way that Dick Morris knows.
I don’t know, M-H. If it’s true that Jackson Miller is ashamed of Greg Letiecq and sorry for what he has done on behalf of his various campaigns over the years, I can’t see how that’s good for Letiecq. It means he’s crossed the line, not over for the middle-of-the-road people, but also the far right.
I am rooting for Miller to move back to the middle and purge himself of the shameful partnership (even if it brought him to power). The past is the past. He can still do good things. The first good thing he needs to do is repudiate Greg Letiecq and his hateful, sexist, and racist tactics. I can’t tell you how far that would go toward restoring Miller’s integrity in the eyes of women and minorities.
It’s great that Miller is privately ashamed and privately a gentleman and privately apologetic for Letiecq’s campaign tricks on his behalf. But I’d like to see Jackson Miller become a man who can do the right thing in public as well, even if it means facing down scary Greg Letiecq.
Jackson can take on Greg. Greg has been reduced to a mad clown in the eyes of 99 percent of the people who know his name. Jackson is a member of the most distinguished legislative body in America, save the US Congress. C’mon Jackson! Greg Letiecq is only one constituent. The rest of your district is rooting for you to show us your metal.
It’s just as rampant on the left, it’s just that somehow it is often ignored, or it is deemed OK. There was a huge amount of trash talking on the left in the last 8 years before Obama came in. For some reason it was OK at the time.
Free Speech, yes.
Free of any consequences resulting from said speech, no.
It’ll come back to bite him.