What does conservative pundit Tucker Carlson have to do with an outhouse in Montana?
More than you might think.
Over the weekend, the Montana Republican Party proved wrong those of us who believe our political discourse has gone down the toilet. In fact, our political discourse has gone to a place where there isn’t even plumbing.
Outside the Montana GOP convention in Missoula stood an outhouse labeled “Obama Presidential Library” and painted as though it had been shot full of holes, according to the local paper. Inside, a fake birth certificate for “Barack Hussein Obama” was stamped with an expletive referring to bovine droppings. A message in the structure gave fake phone numbers for Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi “For a Good Time.”
The state party chairman, Will Deschamps, said that the structure was not in “real good taste. We do have a president of the United States, and we have to honor that.” But he also dismissed the matter as a “sideshow” and “not something I’m going to agonize over.”
But the outhouse is not a sideshow. It is something we should all be agonizing over.
There are always going to be nuts at both ends of the political spectrum who do and say ugly things. Usually, leaders denounce the vile elements among them and try to distance themselves.
Under the Obama presidency, however, conservative leaders are encouraging the vulgarity — if not joining in by heckling the president from the House floor. The Republican Party’s presumptive presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, recently shared a stage with Donald Trump only hours after the buffoon tycoon had again floated the disproved allegation that Obama wasn’t born in the United States. Among many such episodes before that, Romney failed to challenge a supporter who suggested to him that Obama “should be tried for treason.”
Conservative leaders may believe it benefits them that one in six voters still thinks Obama is Muslim. But when conservatives sanction the debasement of Obama, they are debasing the presidency itself. A Gallup poll last year found that only 35 percent of Americans had confidence in the presidency. A Harris poll last month found that only 22 percent of Americans have a high degree of confidence in the White House.
That’s why my confidence in Tucker Carlson has dropped. I’ve liked him for years, even forgiving him his brief moment on “Dancing with the Stars.” I have been impressed by his launch of the Daily Caller, a website with first-rate talent. But now Carlson is turning the Daily Caller into the Daily Heckler.
As is now widely known, one of Carlson’s reporters, Neil Munro, interrupted Obama midway through a Rose Garden statement on immigration, demanding to know why the president was favoring “foreigners over American workers” and informing him that “you have to take questions.” Later, when Obama tried to address Munro’s topic, the journalist continued to interrupt and hector.
A reporter heckling a president in the Rose Garden was an outrageous and unprecedented affront to the office. Munro later offered a reasonable, if not terribly believable, explanation, saying that he “timed the question believing the president was closing his remarks, because naturally I have no intention of interrupting the president.”
But Carlson went further, saying that he would like to give Munro a raise for not being a “stenographer” like other White House reporters. He said Munro was doing what ABC’s Sam Donaldson did when he shouted questions at Ronald Reagan. (Donaldson justifiably disagrees.) Carlson’s website posted a clip purporting to show “Reagan heckled by entire WH press corps.” But the video in fact shows reporters breaking in to ask questions when Reagan tried to hand off the lectern to his attorney general.
Carlson told me Tuesday that he was “making a larger point about the passive nature of press coverage from the White House” and its tendency to be too respectful of authority “across all presidencies.” I agree on this. I’ve criticized Obama and his predecessor for taking too few questions, and I’ve at times scolded the press corps under both presidents for being soft in its questioning.
I also don’t join the charge that Munro is necessarily racist (although some Obama disparagement surely is), and I don’t agree with those who say the White House should revoke his press pass. But I think Carlson should fire him.
Heckling the president in the middle of a Rose Garden speech isn’t holding the president to account. It is belittling the presidency, and it smells just as bad as an outhouse in the Missoula summer.
Dana Milbank is a columnist for The Washington Post. His email address is danamilbank@washpost.com.
I remember posters on these pages thinking it was perfectly acceptable for someone to throw a shoe at Bush. Some here suggested it was deserved. The left has never shown Bush one ounce of respect; even when Chavez called him the devil. Obama babies; toughen up and get over it
I remember that!, I was upset at that Shoe throwing attempt at Bush!
Because he Missed!
If someone where to throw a shoe at Omama they would be labeled a terrorist/ racist and vilified in the press. Thus the liberal doctrine ” do as we SAY not as we DO”….
This is another in the Washington Post’s “Daily Calling” for praise to Obama, the narcissist-in-chief. Mr. Munro stated that he believed Obama had a pause in his speech, and he asked a question. He was not heckling as Millbanks states, and anyone who has heard the exchange would understand that. Actually, the president showed how uncouth he is.
We respect the office of the President of the United States, but not the one who is there now, any more than we could the years of Clinton.
Dana Milbank – I’ve seen you a few times on the mainstream news shows. You’re not one to talk about respect. That is, of course, unless you’re one of the double-standard Dems. Oh, almost forgot. You are.
So the events she has described are perfectly fine or what?
She? Dana isn’t a she.
My mistake, but why is the gender of the author of importance? Are you just trying to derail the conversation in order to avoid answering my question?
If disrespecting the President is only fine when he is a Republican but soemthing that is racist or wrong when he happens to be Black and a Democrat then there is something wrong here.
I know you libs hate the Blaze, but if you want to talk about disrespecting the President, then check this out:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/gay-activists-visiting-white-house-take-photos-of-themselves-flipping-off-reagan-portrait/
It’s disgusting people like these that give their group a bad name.
You’re trying to get me to play whack a mole. You can continue to bring up examples, but that’s not the question at hand. Gay people have very legitimate qualms with how Reagan conducted himself while in office and these gay people did a very poor job of expressing that. Likewise, I think you’d agree that the Tea Party for example has qualms with the President that are legitimate, but they don’t express themselves in the best ways at all times either.
I’m asking you if you believe the examples that Dana cited are an acceptable way to engage with the President. You complain about a double standard but the engage in it and defend it! You can’t have it both ways.
I don’t believe in disrespecting any of the Presidents. I don’t believe in demeaning the office of the President. I DO, however, believe in expressing disappointment or disagreement with the President’s policies and activities, but the expression should be respectable.
And don’t start your diatribe about me disrespecting President Obama, because I haven’t. I disagree with his socialist policies and do believe he’s the worst President in the last century, but I still respect that he is the President of the United States, and will defend him if need be.
As for the gays that were invited to the White House by Obama himself, they are disrespectful and hateful, and they bring shame to the gay community. The gay community should denounce their actions and ex-communicate them. But, they won’t.
Finally, entering the Tea Party into the mix is juvenile. Go ahead and come up with pictures of Tea Party folks flipping birds or rioting or setting fires or destroying property or breaking laws to show they disagree with any elected official.
Gays aren’t a political party and you can’t be ex-communicated from being gay. Please stop being so ignorant.
It’s not juvenile to invoke the Tea Party. It’s called a comparison. Also, if that was juvenile, then so was you bringing up gay people. It doesn’t take Nancy Drew to find evidence that the tea party has some disgusting members in their ranks who have done and said some pretty terrible things.
You’re holding gay people, people you disagree with, to a different standard than you hold the Tea Party, people you agree with, to. That means you’re participating in and encouraging that problem you claim to hate — that double standard.
The Tea Party is not a political party, either. And I hold everyone up to the same standards.
But there is a Tea Party caucus and Tea Party leaders etc.
You do hold people you disagree with to a higher standard than you hold yourself and those you agree with to. That is plainly obvious in these comments you’ve posted today. Just because you choose to deny it or ignore it does not make all that evaporate.
In your initial comment you complained about double standards — you create those double standards yourself. That’s hypocrisy.
You might be right. I do hold myself to a higher standard than I expect others to meet. And I hold the Tea Party and Conservatives to a higher standard than the Progressives and Moderates. After all, Progressives and Moderates have a lower moral standard, so how can anyone expect them to live up to proper standards.
And the Tea Party is a movement, not a political party.
No, you misread what I wrote. You hold others to a higher standard that is impossible to meet. You fault them when they don’t meet it and blame them for things you do yourself. That’s hypocrisy. You seem to have a difficulty in taking responsibility for your actions.
No, you have it all wrong. I hold our elected officials to a standard that requires them to do what’s right for the country and the American people. And the Democrats and establishment Republicans quit doing what was right for the country and the American people decades ago. That’s why they’re getting voted out.
I also hold the American people to a standard where I expect them to quit being selfish and lazy and start working for the country and for themselves so they aren’t enslaved to the government.
That’s not too much to ask.
Your comments prove otherwise. You don’t get to step back from what you’ve said and done. Quit trying to change the subject and accept responsibility. You engage in the same double standard that you complain about. That’s fact.
You can’t be “excommunicated” from being gay. But gay conservatives are pretty lonely, and not by choice.
How can the BDN require no name-calling when they accept articles which contain what we, the bloggers, can’t use in our comments. Same old, same old … watch out I might be called a racist-not.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! I guess Dana and
the Wash Post are right on the money when it
comes to some nutjob going overboard but
conveniently neglect to even mention when
a libber goes off on women, presidents, businesses
or anything the Post is against. I guess she never heard
a thing while Bush was pres. I suppose it was racist
when the media and hecklers jumped all over him.
This article is all these libber media can do now,
whine since their hero who they propped up so much
is showing them that even they can’t hide the fact
that he is making Jimmy Carter look good. If the Post
and the media did their job, we may have been able to
find out the lies we were sold when Obama first ran.
Wait a second, a reporter tried to ask the President a question? How dare he! Doesn’t he know what happens when Obama makes unscripted remarks? He probably “acted stupidly”.
Come on, that’s rude behavior regardless of whether it is the President speaking or not. There is a designated time slot for questions and mid-speech isn’t that time.
The age of civility……..
////
I agree completely. We as a people have lost something valuable along the way.
….
The Presidency deserves a respect that Obama doesn’t give it.
Point is that it’s wrong no matter who does it.
Carlson and that twerp in the Rose Garden ought to be locked in a two-holer for a couple of hours.
The teapublicans wail about Bush ducking a shoe, a weak Chavez “Devil” tweak, and being classified as a Chicken Hawk by the New Hampshire Gazette. But nothing compares with the stinking insults this president has endured over the past 3.5 years.
I fail to see how a dressed up outhouse (ridicule) or interrupting a speech (disrespectful, yes) compares to a thrown shoe (assault). I’m no expert here, but I don’t think anyone can find any President in modern times that has not been subjected to ridicule of one form or another. Our current POTUS is no exception. And even ridicule is protected under the 1st Amendment.
When we attempt to silence dissent then we cease to be free. I would first ask WHY the President is facing such vehement ridicule and being drowned out/shouted down by voices of dissension.The recently passed revisions of the Patriot Act and NDAA are contemptible for how they stomp on the Constitutional rights of all Citizens.
There is a sharp divide between hate and simple disrespect.
And there’s no shortage of haters on either side of the aisle.
Truth is, it doesn’t really matter if your GOP or Dem, left or right these days. Either way you get the same wolf. He just wears a different sheep suit.
The GOP under Koch Tea Party stewardship has manifested a hatred for this president since Day One. Following his inauguration, key republicans declared their one goal was to make sure Barack Obama served but one term. That was their only goal. Congressional business was brushed aside. Subsequently, instead of debate, we got hate.
Well, since several presidential historians agree that he’ll likely be remembered as one of America’s worst Presidents ever, one term is probably more enough. I don’t think we can survive another 4 years.
That’s because he actually deserves it
Funny people on the news said much worse thing about Bush ?
That said respect the OFFICE yes. People on the other hand have to EARN respect.
“Respect the OFFICE yes. People on the other hand have to EARN respect.”
Exactly. Obama has earned that respect. Bush didn’t.
Oh right, that’s the excuse the Tea Party used when they booed that gay soldier who was serving in Iraq.
After extensive reviews of the incident you cite, it was determined that no more than 3 people were booing, and they were in the back of the auditorium. They also could not make any link between the booers and the Tea Party. That’s why the mainstream media dropped the incident altogether. But, just like a loyal left-winger, you can’t seem to let it go. You jump on any opportunity to dump on the Tea Party. Why not look in your own back yard first.
Yeah, whatever you say EJP. People you agree with are all good and kind and those you disagree with are awful monsters. What was that double-standard thing you were screeching about yesterday? And what is that “no more than 3″ people were booing” garbage? Take responsibility and say it was wrong. You don’t have to defend people’s poor actions by making lies up just because you agree with them.
And can you really not recognize the reason why I brought up that example? It’s such a convenient excuse to say you have respect for the office or the service, but no respect for the person themselves. Grow up and have some dignity. Respect everyone, even those you disagree with.
Aaaand you’ve just proved the author’s point.
The “foodstamp president”? How the h*ll is Obama a “foodstamp president”?
Because the economy is terrible, forcing more Americans on welfare? You ignore the fact that Obama averted an economic disaster and that his actions have been successful in improving our economy ever since.
Because he’s a wealth-distributing socialist? Don’t be ridiculous. You don’t even know what those words mean. Ronald Reagan was a bigger socialist than Obama?
Because he’s black, and blacks are notorious for depending on welfare? Oh, you won’t come out and admit that’s what you mean, because you’re “totally not racist,” but it’s not hard to read between the lines.
I encourage everyone to criticize the president – provided you actually have a legitimate reason to criticize him. Otherwise you’re just a knee-jerking hater.
Why is everyone getting worked up about a Dana Millbank article? He does not have an objective bone in his body. His articles drip with bias and fully deserve to be ignored! He, James Farmer and Amy Fried are a cabal of like minded and hopelessly unobjective opinion!