To the editor:
The Bucknellian recently announced the Bucknell Conservatives Club and FLAG&BT are inviting Tammy Bruce to come to campus to give a canned speech she has been delivering, for substantial remuneration, for years. The BUCC’s president apparently believes that the collaboration of these two seemingly disparate student groups in the organization of the event is itself some evidence of its legitimacy, but even the slightest glance at what Bruce actually says and writes makes clear that she is not an acceptable speaker at a university.
Many readers will likely wonder just who Bruce is. She is a right-wing talk radio host and frequent Fox News contributor who has made a career out of vicious and borderline racist verbal attacks against African-Americans with whom she disagrees. She was (rightly) fired from a mainstream radio job in Los Angeles in the 1990s for calling Bill and Camille Cosby a barrage of offensive names in response to Camille Cosby’s op-ed following the murder of her son. Bruce then realized that the right-wing populist mass media is in constant pursuit of people who will say such things for pay on the air and seamlessly transitioned to that virulent community. Recently, on her syndicated radio show, she has demonstrated her vision of political discourse by calling President Obama a “bastard” and a “freak” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Anrw9nNVUoY) and denigrating both the President and his wife Michelle as “disgusting and contemptible” (http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200907100031) “trash in the White House” (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/23/tammy-bruce-calls-the-oba_n_178109.html). She has also suggested that the President “secretly wishes the nation to be harmed” and that his mother “certainly did” (http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200906190006).
Her festering hatred of the Obamas, and indeed of anyone with whom she disagrees, cannot be understood in any way as respectable political dissent. Unwilling or unable to muster any substantive intellectual arguments, Bruce simply repeatedly calls them vulgar names. This is unfortunately more or less normative for populist right-wing media these days. Whenever one thinks the bottom has been reached, a Tammy Bruce or a Michael Savage emerges to prove that further descent is indeed possible.
Reasonable political debate and dissent should of course be more than tolerated in a university; they should be embraced. But there is simply no room for someone who speaks in the register of a Tammy Bruce at a university. The University should not be providing her a forum. She does not represent a reasoned, respectful position in political discourse, and her presence cannot serve to do anything positive here, though it certainly might do some harmful things, such as suggesting to students the acceptability of this kind of vapid, malevolent speech in civilized debate. If it acquiesces in this unreflective decision by two student groups rather than endeavoring to educate them by explaining why a university is no place for such uncivil speakers, the University administration would be acknowledging Bruce’s vile rhetorical style as a legitimate option in intellectual debate.
Alexander Riley
Dept. of Sociology/Anthropology
13 replies on “Letter to the Editor”
Dear A Riley
Uh.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Obviously you have never read anything Tammy Bruce has written — her three books are excellent and one is available for download off iTunes — and your characterization of Bruce is so… so… dated. It’s like the pre-internet political correctness when the Left could basically get away with murder and there was no voice given to the right except Limbaugh.
So quit living in 1992. Thanks. The KGB archives were opened, Hiss was on Stalin’s payroll and the Left has been on the wrong side of history since 1945, face it. Oh, and the violent rhetoric? The Daily Kos posted it wanted to “kill” Gabby Giffords for her “no” vote on Pelosi in November. Right before Tucson. And the violent union thugs in WI just lost. Americans are sick of the left.
After you grow up and smell the reality, try to actually LISTEN to Tammy Bruce. (I remember those “sociology” courses from college, btw. Forced Marxist indoctrination camps with tuition.)
Plus, you got the quote wrong on Obama. She didn’t call him a “bastard”…
She called him a dumb bastard.
Mr Riley,
I must say, the way you’re going after Ms Bruce is almost comical, if it wasn’t so trite. You need to look Deeper. She has been where you are.
Don’t tell anyone that she was President of the LA chapter of NOW. Don’t tell anyone that she’s a lesbian. Don’t tell anyone that when she questioned the actions of the left she was excoriated for her views. Make sure that no one finds these things out, as they’ll negate your arguments.
It isn’t that she is racist. She is a huge fan of Allen West and does not speak badly of people for their race, religion or any other reason that might seem discriminatory. She rails against the Obama’s because they are trying to grow the government and create even More of a Nanny state.
So, before you go making comments about someone, perhaps you should be sure that the person you’re attacking hasn’t been on both sides of the argument.
Mr. Riley,
Oh, the horror! Someone who does not drink your brand of kool-aid is being allowed to speak on campus! Of course, you have never listened to Tammy Bruce’s radio show, you have never seen her on Fox and you have no idea that she has written three (excellent and thoughtful) books. No, you just googled her name and regurgitated some hateful left-wing tidbits. Shame on you for your vile, biased and unintellectual stance.
Mr. Riley,
Tammy and I both made our transition from the fever swamp that is the so-called “progressive” left at roughly the same time, that is, the early 1990s. We did so for very similar reasons: she in response to NOW’s shameless water-carrying for O.J. Simpson because in the PC hierarchy black trumps female, which trumps gay, ad nauseum. I, because I went back to college and was confronted with the totalitarian, anti-intellectual drivel which characterizes the P.C. crowd, and their complete willingness to shut down speech with which they do not agree.
As a gay man who saw the light and realized that the left is not only wrong but, frankly, EVIL, I have yet to have your level of vitriol directed at me from a fellow conservative. In fact, the most hateful rhetoric to be seen in our times comes overwhelmingly from the left, as evidenced by your screed.
Your scribbling simply confirms the old adage that there is no great concurrence between education and wisdom.
Are the above three comments actually written by real people, who truly believe the laughable things they write? One would like to believe they are in fact sock puppets created by critics of the illiterate populist right, if only to avoid despair at the sad realization that such wholly misinformed people exist.
If they are real, however, these three responses make the letter writer’s point for him quite nicely, don’t they?
In the race to the bottom, here we have three front runners.
Incoherent, hyperbolic, bald assertion presented as demonstrated proof, inability to even endeavor to understand an argument completely before blindly attacking according to the dictates of a kindergarten ideology–it’s no wonder they love Tammy Bruce.
Way to go, Mike! You have confirmed
everything I’ve ever thought about the
totalitarian left.
Elitist and smug much?
Mike,
I have never before been called a sock puppet. Thank you. I have, though, been called a Nazi (after attending a Tea Party), which is odd, since I am an Orthodox Jew, and my husband is an ordained Rabbi. Oh well, the Left cannot be bothered by these little details, I suppose. I am also a Ph.D clinical psychologist and a graduate of a Manhattan analytic institute. I did not use my real name because I know how vile and vicious the left can be (Wisconsin, anyone?) so I needed to protect my anonymity. I was very impressed with your vocabulary, but unfortunately, just stringing together some big words (I am so glad you own a thesaurus) does not make for a cogent argument. You tried to win an argument by name-calling? How very Left of you! Bravo!
Speaking of vocabulary, I am amused by the aggressive verbiage both sides are using, and generally to denounce the idiocy of the other. Personally, I find such tactics nearly instantly derail any attempt at reasonable discourse. And we wonder why there is so much hostility between the left and right. Certainly a well turned phrase or pointed remark is quite useful in a debate, but one’s credibility is suspect when “mud” is being slung.
p.s. You’ll note I didn’t take a side, and I won’t until some credible facts are made and I have time to look into both sides.
The Dark Lord,
Fair enough. So, here is the real issue: Someone is invited to speak at a college campus, and a faculty member is outraged because he does not agree with the speaker’s views. Riley “agrees” that “reasonable political debate and dissent should of course be more than tolerated in a university; they should be embraced. But there is simply no room for someone who speaks in the register of a Tammy Bruce at a university.” In other words, he believes in free speech, as long as he approves of the speaker’s views. So, he does not really believe in free speech. Voltaire said: “I may disagree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it” and this was once the view of classical LIberals. Sadly, Riley represents the new Lliberal/Left stance — “I may disagree with you, and therefore you are not welcome on my campus!”
Dear Mr. Mike:
Please keep on thinking we’re sock puppets for Tammy Bruce.
Peace, love and David Cassidy,
TwoLegsGood
Ok, here’s the deal. Step by step breakdown of everything everyone said:
1. Tammy Bruce has said racially insensitive things.
2. Calling Obama a “dumb bastard” was not a good thing to say, and probably warranted an apology (I do not know if one was ever provided).
3. The mere fact that a person has said offensive things should not, I believe, disqualify that person from speaking at a non-mandatory talk sponsored by groups withing the Bucknell Community. Hate-mongering would be a completely different matter, but there absolutely is not a consensus that Tammy Bruce is a hate monger. In the absence of this agreement, we must err on the side of freedom of speech, and the freedom of the student organizations to host their choice of speakers.
4. The University, in fact, thrives on debate and discourse from people who have done morally questionable (while still legal) things. Remember when Ron Jeremy came to campus? I would bet that there is a large group of people who finds his actions more abhorrent than anything Tammy Bruce could ever say.
5. TwoLegsGood: I have no idea what you’re talking about in your 2nd paragraph. There has never been and never will be an agreement about which party is better; it is the constant assertion of statements that are not necessarily true as fact (see: “…the Left has been on the wrong side of history since 1945…”) that makes everyone who doesn’t talk about politics sick of everyone who does talk about politics.
6. Cernunnos81: Tammy Bruce was the head of NOW LA. They voted to censor her for “racially insensitive remarks” pertaining to the OJ Simpson case. The statement “she does not speak badly of people for her race…” is directly incompatible with Dr. Riley’s statements. Which one of you is wrong? Both of you should get back to me with research. Far more likely, however, is that you have very different ideas of what constitutes racism as opposed to justified criticism. Such disagreement is fine. When you say, however, that “She rails against the Obama’s (sic) because they are trying to grow the government and create even More of a Nanny state,” you are falling into the sort of vacuous drivel that comes from both sides and, quite frankly, from anyone who does not care to take the time to explain his opinions (as I am attempting to do now).
7. NYJooo: I get the feeling that, as an academic, Dr. Riley would absolutely not submit something like this for publication had he not been very familiar with Tammy Bruce’s radio and television work. I would guess that your assumption that Dr. Riley merely “just googled her name and regurgitated some hateful left-wing tidbits” is simply incorrect, and actually could be construed as disrespectful.
8. bastiat fan: When any intelligent *or* wise person reads your statement that the left is, “frankly, EVIL”, that person is going to be seriously skeptical of anything else you have to say. If you truly believe that any more than a very small minority of people on the left, or on the right, or in any group, are EVIL – that would mean, I think, actively trying to harm others out of hatred, spite, or anger – then you’re at serious risk of being labeled a radical. Of course your fellow conservatives won’t direct hateful vitriol at you; they’re conservatives.
9. In general: if Dr. Riley’s characterization of Tammy Bruce was “hateful vitriol”, wouldn’t that make Tammy Bruce’s characterization of the Obamas as “trash in the White House” (yes, that is a real quote) definitely qualify as “hateful vitriol”?
10. Mike Furnas: You could have just said, “I disagree, because you don’t really lay out your points properly.” Or, you could have broken down their points, as I am trying to do here.
11. bastiat fan again: Yes, liberals are elitist and smug much. So are many conservatives I know.
12. Mike Furnas & bastiat fan: When both sides are proving the other side’s point, then we’re not really getting anywhere.
13. NY Jooo again: Ok. A single person on the left called you a Nazi, even though you’re Jewish and deplore everything that Nazism stood for. That was very, very wrong of that person. Similarly, Tammy Bruce called President and First Lady Obama “trash”, even though both of them have a J.D. from Harvard Law School, which is ranked as either the best or second-best in the nation by every major publication. That was very wrong of her.
14. The Dark Lord: Good statement. I’m trying to say something similar here, only in a bit more detail.
15. NYJooo for the third time: I agree with you when you say that Tammy Bruce should indeed have been allowed to speak on campus. However, I believe your characterization of “the new Liberal/Left stance” as “‘I may disagree with you, and therefore you are not welcome on my campus'” is very hasty, and even a touch silly. There are many people on both sides who repeatedly stymie attempts at the other side to make their voice heard. Dr. Riley’s point, as I understand it, was *not a freedom of speech issue*, per se. Dr. Riley judged Tammy Bruce’s speech to be *hateful*. If you read his letter, he gives his reasons for coming to this conclusion. He is not simply making up excuses to block someone who he happens to disagree with politically; rather than *politically* wrong, he believes Tammy Bruce’s ideas are *fundamentally* offensive. Although I do not believe that there is anywhere near sufficient agreement on that to warrant barring her from speaking (it’s 8 days too late anyway), to ignore Dr. Riley’s reasoning and to assume, because he disagrees with you, that he is simply arguing against this talk for reasons of personal disagreement, is simplistic and flawed.
Final, tangentially-related point:
16. Conservatives call Liberals bad people because they believe in abortion. Liberals call Conservatives bad people because they believe in the death penalty. So, the take-away is this: Every person you vote for is killing someone or something that is ostensibly human. So, let’s just all agree that we’re all bad people. I know I am.
Wow, gotta hand it to Riley to write the first article posted on here that gets more than 1 comment that wasn’t from the author’s Mom.
I agree with basically everything Joe Fish says. It’s so funny how emotional people get about partisan politics. I used to be the same way when I was like 15, its just that I grew out of it years ago. The fact that someone who has a PHD in clinical psychology (NYJoooo) gets so pissed at a 4 paragraph article is HILARIOUS.
The speaker in my opinion is a moron, but if students want her to come she should be allowed to come. It’s just depressing that there is no liberal group at Bucknell that is equally as active and passionate as the Conservatives Club. Why is a faculty member the one writing the letter to the editor? Where are the students on this? It’s sad, because I bet that most Bucknell students are basically opposed to the speaker’s politics, they are just to worried about getting an interview for their stupid accounting/management/finance job to care about anything else.
Riley is the man, coolest professor! RILEY 4 EVA!!
Perhaps speaking in front of the students will make her tone down her seeming hatred for others. I hope they will be able to deal with her objectively.