“There is more to be said about Gatemouth's piece…particularly about the unsubtle allegations that Harrison is mentally ill, a homophobe, and a rightwinger….please don't complain about rough handling when you accuse people of being mentally ill…you have a track record…that places all of this into a context, and that context is that Gatemouth will say whatever comes into his head as long as he thinks it's of some use, and the more over the top, the better. Why stop at mental illness when you can go for child molestation and drug addiction? Seriously, why?”
Michael Bouldin in The Daily Gotham (TDG)
Gee, and I thought the comment in question (contained in this piece) was so obviously meant to be tongue in cheek as to not require further explanation. Obviously, I’ve got to learn to make the jokes funnier.
The question was how to explain the numerous contributions by so-called “progressive” Congressional candidate Steve Harrison to the Conservative Party, and rightwingers Vito Fossella (who he now seeks to oppose), Marty Golden and John Faso. One possible explanation was that, sometime in his fifties, Harrison suddenly experienced a late-life political conversion to left-liberalism. But Harrison, who used to introduce himself as a “conservative Democrat”, has never acknowledged such an experience, so we must take him at his word. What then?
There were really few other possibilities. Harrison must either be a sincere conservative in sheep’s clothing, an opportunist, or some combination of the two. Beyond that, there seemed only one other possible explanation why a supposed liberal would expend their money in such a manner, and so I wrote:
“The other possibilities include mental illness. I am reminded of my graduate school days, when a friend called me depressed about the state of her life, and said she was contemplating suicide. A couple of days later, she called to let me know she’d met someone and was better now. “Karen”, I warned her, “wild and extreme mood swings are not necessarily a sign of good mental health.” But apparently, they are all the rage among the right sort of “progressive”. Do me a favor though guys, before you vote for Harrison, make sure he’s had his meds. It seems clear in Harrison’s case that sincere conversion to anything resembling a “progressive” philosophy is highly unlikely, as that usually requires one to stay put, rather than emulating a pin ball bouncing all over the place on its way to tilting.”
My initial thought was that anyone who really believed I was accusing Harrison of mental illness might need medication themselves. I thought the joke was clear. If anything, it was giving the man the benefit of the doubt, since being proven a conservative or a strumpet was far more damning to a Democratic Congressional candidate than being proven a loon. Being nuts doesn’t preclude one from serving in Congress—just ask Tom Tancredo or Dennis Kucinich; hell, they’re both running for the White House.
But then I had a conversation with a Harrison supporter who is prominent in the "progressive community".
He told me “I'm actually happy, because all I have to do going forward, if someone were to mention those checks, is point out that the person who wrote about it also called Steve mentally ill, so that can be disregarded. And I can pull that argument off easily, so in a way, you're doing me a favor… It's like John McCain and the 'How do we stop the bitch' question; notice how nobody's talking about anything but the 'bitch' part of that? I'm comfortable with the way this has developed. You have ample cause to be less so. You've single-handedly taken the question of Harrison's contributions off the table, because you contaminated it with a no-doubt-enjoyable further personal attack. Make no mistake: the Harrison campaign is laughing about all this, and they're right to do so. The storyline is simple: 'Steve was attacked by the machine, and they even called him mentally ill'."
Hence, the crocodile tears shed about my "evil" but essentially non-existent remarks; the truth be damned.
Still, I’m feeling a bit guilty. Much of the left is afflicted with a painful lack of humor and inability to grasp irony, so, doubtless, there are some folks who took me seriously. So let me make it clear. While I am not a psychiatrist, and cannot say anything here with a professional level of certainty, I HAVE NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT STEVE HARRISON IS MENTALLY ILL. I lean towards the conservative explanation, refusing to believe Harrison is a total prostitute, but I am not infallible, and am willing to concede that people who do believe that Harrison is a political streetwalker are not being unreasonable.
As such, I have altered my piece. I have searched far and wide to find alternative wording to describe, in a manner inoffensive to the delicate sensibilities of the readers of TDG, the phenomena of reactionary behavior I consider to be unfathomable.
A favorite tab on TDG for people who engage in such behavior is “Barking Crazy Rightwingers”. A google search indicates that there are 3870 entries for the term “barking crazy”, 2140 of which appear in conjunction with the term “Daily Gotham”. “Barking Crazy Rightwingers” appears 2490 times on the web, 1930 times in conjunction with TDG. A search of the tab “Barking Crazy Rightwingers” on “The Daily Gotham” site finds 195 pieces listed under that term. Coincidentally, the oldest TDG piece appearing with this tag is authored by TDG's own Emily Post, Michael Bouldin.
Clearly, I have found a description for the conduct of Steve Harrison that falls within the range of civilized discourse as defined by TDG, and I’ve altered my piece accordingly, so as to no longer be "over the top". The offending sentence now reads: ‘The other possibilities include that he may be 'barking crazy'". In deference to my new found sensitivity to the mentally ill, later on in the piece now appears a further clarification: “My actual conclusion is that Harrison is not crazy…”.
Sad to say, since this eliminates Harrison’s best excuse; we are left with only the following from Bouldin, obviously acquired, in the manner of a virus, from the Harrison campaign itself: "your entire charge is based on a total of seven checks, if I count correctly [HE DIDN’T]. Five of these went to Golden, and are indicative of his support on the land use and zoning issue. Coincidentally, that measure passed, and was instrumental in revitalizing that part of the community, so it was money well spent. The intent of those checks was clear, and had nothing to do with wishing to aid Joe Bruno…"
The whole argument is disingenuous. Yeah, Marty Golden was right on "land use". BFD! Il Duce was right about mass transit, but that's no excuse for writing him a check either. Anyway, if it were really about zoning, wouldn't the community have been better off with if Golden stayed on the City Council? In a similar vein, the checks to Fossella, Faso, and the Conservative Party are defended as being in connection with a "Fusion ticket". Hogwash! A coalition of the Republican, Conservative and Right To Life parties is not "Fusion", it is an axis of evil.
More importantly, the argument that it was all done for the good of the community could have come straight from the mouth of Carl Kruger, who, by virtue of his dealings with Joe Bruno, brings home more bucks for his district than any other State Senate Democrat. This cash does much to revitalize Kruger's district. Does that get him a free pass?
I don't think Bouldin really believes this, because, as I recall, he reprinted, with approval (on "The Albany Project"), my quote that Kruger should be buried up to his neck in excrement and beaten with a baseball bat (a statement which, if taken literally, amounted to felony level criminal solicitation). In fact, Mr. Bouldin cited that quote as an example of why my presence in the blogging world was so missed.
Apparently, in that case, Mr. Bouldin was somehow able to grasp that my remarks were not meant to be taken literally. I note that I've heard no complaints from Senate Democrats that the remarks reprinted by Mr. Boudin have in any way damaged the arguments made against Mr. Kruger's conduct. And I've heard no reports that Mr. Kruger's supporters now respond to allegations concerning his perfidy by answering "Carl's opponents are saying he should be beaten with a baseball bat." Funny that.
Strangely, the arguments justifying traitorous conduct, as being done for the good of the community, could also have come from sycophants of the pre-County Leader version of Vito Lopez, excusing his support for the likes of Al D'Amato. As a result, D'Amato brought money into Lopez's district that helped to revitalize parts of the community. Was that excusable? I think not.
Perhaps Bouldin is about to defend Vito Lopez from the wrath of Gatemouth. Perhaps he will even point out that selling out for anti-poverty funding in impoverished Bushwick, however inexcusable, is far more understandable than doing the same over land use in Bay Ridge.
Don't hold your breathe.