Boy, why all the speaking gaffes by Geoff Davis and others now?

Have you ever been at, say, a football game and you notice the TV camera turn toward the crowd in Section 14?

And suddenly what seemed like a fairly normal group of people -- except for the two fat guys with no shirts -- turns completely bonkers: waving, displaying ESPN signs, pointing to their sweatshirts, holding up one finger (no, the forefinger) and yelling things that no one will hear because there's no microphone within 50 yards?

That kind of disease must be spreading these days to those people who are handed a microphone. There's something about holding one of those electronic voice-amplifiers in your hand and looking out at a political crowd that turns on the stupid lobe in many a frontal cortex.

We've had so many examples this election season of folks whose egos seem to get amplified instead of their IQs. And they come out with amazing words that the immediate crowd might cheer. But pretty soon, thanks to the Internet and blogs like this, their words get read or heard by others.

And they find themselves apologizing in very embarrassing circumstances.

The latest is Geoff Davis, a Kentucky representative few beyond Paducah ever heard of until today, when his Saturday night....

remarks to a Republican crowd seeped out. Davis, who has two GOP challengers in his May 20 primary, has earned his 15 minutes of infamy by saying of the leading Democratic presidential candidate, "That boy's finger does not need to be on the button."

Now, "boys" is a funny word, kind of like "girls." Girls can call each other girls regardless of age. But when girls get together, like Sen. Hillary Clinton and Ellen DeGeneres did the other day, and start talking about "the boys," it takes on a whole new meaning.

Likewise, say, Barack Obama could start talking about Clinton as the girl in the race, but then he'd be apologizing pretty soon.

Same for boys. If you're gonna play poker with them tonight, it's a fine word. Davis could have said he and the boys were talking over at the VFW about this young fellow Obama and they weren't so sure about him.

But for a 49-year-old man to refer to a 46-year-old African-American candidate as "boy" is instantly racially-charged, unacceptable and reminiscent of a time in America that fortunately is slipping from the memory of most. Boy, aren't you glad you're not some immigrant trying to learn all the irregular meanings for the little word "boy"?

So, of course, Davis was out today publicly apologizing, as he must. "My poor choice of words is regrettable, and was in no way meant to impugn you or your integrity," Davis wrote in a letter delivered to Obama's Washington office this afternoon. "I offer my sincere apology to you and ask for your forgiveness."

Yeah, fine. Last summer Obama apologized for staffers who sent out a background sheet on Clinton's ties with Indian-Americans. Clinton's New Hampshire co-chair apologized for bringing up past drug use which Obama has written about in a book. Same for the BET guy later. And ex-Rep. Geraldine Ferraro had something unapologetic to say about race.

Baptist Mike Huckabee slyly asked a leading question about Mitt Romney's Mormonism and said he meant nothing by it. Bill Cunningham repeatedly used Barack Obama's legal middle name, presumably implying he's a Muslim. And John McCain apologized for it.

A questioner of Clinton in Missouri referred to President Bush as "a bastard"; the crowd cheered and Clinton nodded and smiled.

A liberal talk radio host named Ed Schwartz called McCain a warmonger and refused to apologize. So an Obama spokeswoman dutifully came out and said, of course, he's not. And another liberal talk-show host, Randi Rhodes, called Clinton and Ferraro ______   ______s. And she got suspended indefinitely.

When you skim over the 1850s reports of the Lincoln-Douglas debates --there were actually seven of them, each three-hours long -- you don't see any ________ or even __________. When you listen to early recordings of William McKinley, Howard Taft, William Jennings Bryan and Theodore Roosevelt speeches, what's striking is how not-booming Teddy's voice was. He sounds much smaller than his historic image.

Also, it's amazing how few bleeps -- like zero -- you hear on those old recordings.

So we can discern from all this that this election's growing problem of misspeaking must somehow be tied in with these more modern ________   microphones.

-- Andrew Malcolm

                                                                              Photo Credit: AP

Comments

[Christopher]

________ well stated!

[Debmood]

Oh this is no surprise. We've always known what white people say when there are no black people around. I have 4 cousins who actually pass for white. They give us the inside scoop.
Boy, nigger, arrogan boy, arrogant nigger...but the new one to all blacks is the elitist. Therefore we know you're saying boy or nigger when you call a black man, or woman for that mater, an elitist? uppity? arrogant?
Hillary, CNN, FOX and a host of Internet newspapers has made white people so comfortable they just blurt these ugly terms out. In other words, we'll brand the nigger and make him lose. Elitist is an insult to any African American. Though not all white people are like this, the majority are.

[Debmood]

Oh this is no surprise. We've always known what white people say when there are no black people around.
Boy, nigger, arrogan boy, arrogant nigger...but the new one to all blacks is the elitist. Therefore we know you're saying boy or nigger when you call a black man, or woman for that mater, an elitist? uppity? arrogant?
Hillary, CNN, FOX and a host of Internet newspapers has made white people so comfortable they just blurt these ugly terms out. In other words, we'll brand the nigger and make him lose. Elitist is an insult to any African American. Though not all white people are like this, the majority are.

[Small Town Born and Bred]

Nice try, but you can't play the race card with 'elitist'. Obama honestly earned the title because he went to Havard and Yale (the most elitist educational institutions in the USA) and considers the unwashed and uneducated bitter masses living in the backwoods of PA as clinging to guns, religion, and antipathy towards those unlike themselves.

Not sure where you're from, but I have yet to hear any of the phrases you mention above for about the past 20 years. And I live in TX. Oh wait, maybe because that's because I don't listen to rap? Don't get me wrong, I hate the KKK just as much as the next guy, but you're overreacting.

I'm afraid you've got it backwards, some whites are racist, but most are not. And that's just the plain truth, like it or not. Makes it tough to pick out who's a jerk and who isn't..but just assuming we're all out to put you down will get you treated in kind. I guess you could say that many have some deep subconsious racial biases..but that one cuts both ways. Wright? Mugabe?

[Jim]

Hillary, Geoff Davis, James Carville, Anne Coulter....

when the decibel exceeds the IQ, you know something is wrong....

(In Hillary's case she always speaks as if she hears SNIPER FIRES and is trying to get the last word out before she has to duck her head and run for the building!!)

[tony Philips]

I disagree most heartily. Your stereotyping is just as bigoted as his "boy" If a black man calls me boy, its fine but the other way around, its hate speak go figure.... Its just an excuse to hate. and I feel sorry for you...

[jennifer potenciano]

oh boy, what a facile, totally erroneous "analysis" this andrew malcolm did on kentucky rep. geoff davis, who the other day called obama "boy."

in his long, rambling commentary, malcolm got cross-eyed. a freshman law student at the university of the philippines can readily see that malcolm MISSED davis's point.

i remember, when i dropped by one day in the 1970's at the u.p. college of law, which was named after JUSTICE MALCOLM (if i recall it right) of the US Supreme Court, i remember seeing, embossed at the law school's lobby wall, the engraved quote from the u.s. justice, which says, "the business of a law school is not simply to produce lawyers. it is to produce great lawyers in a great way."

similarly, i thought that the business of a newspaper is not simply to put out news stories, but to put out excellently done stories written by brilliant journalists. & i thought andrew malcolm is more than a puede pasar newsman; reading his account on the trial of barack's "confidante," rezko and blagojevich (did i get it right, boy?) & obama, i had the impression that malcolm is intelligent enough.

look again, andrew. better yet, read again, malcolm, the transcript of davis's utterance--& you'll understand.

there's nothing for the kentucky congressman to be sorry for, or to ask for obama's forgiveness. davis was just telling it as it is. why should you take a person to task for telling the truth, more so if the manner of telling it is not in the "bitter" style?

davis meant that, despite obama being reputedly knowledgeable on may things, by his actuations & spoutings, particulalrl on foreign affairs, obama just might not fit the bill to a t, just might not be mature enough to handle a foreign crisis in the manner that the legendary john f. kennedy did. the bay of pigs & the cuban missile crisis were just two of the most serious foreign affairs crises that jfk excellently handled.

you might perhaps remember that russian president krushchev was the first one to blink in his eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation with jfk, as the young u.s. president called the russian bear's bluff. that's why when the conspirators assassinated jfk, many people around the world--including filipinos in the philippines, who had deep respects for jfk, cried ariver, mourning a loss that the entire world shared.

& jfk was only in his late 40's then! this u.s. president showed maturity beyond his years--& beyond mere words, unlike obama today.

yet, nobody, just nobody called jfk 'boy.'

thus, for davis to call obama 'boy' amounts to a 'loaded' statement, as if to lambast a man for being a 'spoiled brat,' a vain, conceited, egoistic person, for one.

for geoff, barack isn't simply up to the challenges that the position of the world's only superpower pose, that barack can't hack it as the u.s. commander-in-chief.

given this premise, davis's calling barack 'boy' is a justified branding. & thus, an apology for barack is simply not required. ( i, for one, ended my recently posted one blog by also calling obama, 'boy,' conscious of the impression that davis obvously shares with me. i blogged in some u.s. papers way ahead of davis's 'boy' calling obama.)

so, what's the big fuss? what's the big deal here? what reason is there for davis, or anyone calling obama 'boy,' for that matter, to be apologetic for?****

[jeffmissouri]

Thank you for writing about this incident. What is telling to me about this story is how the media is not making a big deal about this comment. There is no media frenzy regarding this mean-spirited comment. Doesn't look like many poeple are blogging about it either.

[VarsityBlueNYC]

After listening to the audio of the segment of Davis' speech it is clear that calling Obama a boy was not misspoken but part of the ignorant and condescending tone of the speech.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdOSoaSm6wc

Bringing back memories of Fuzzy Zoeller's belittling statement to Tiger Woods after his first Masters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ufpU3X-t4w

The message was clear back then and it is clear now.

[Sal]

I'm white, and it's striking how many white people here and elsewhere refuse to admit that calling Obama "boy" was very wrong. I think people who refuse to admit it forget, or are tragically ignorant of, the fact that slave masters used to call grown black men "boy" to mean that they were inferior: a black male could never be a "man." Later, when slavery ended but segregation and racist attitudes continued to prevail, the term remained in use. Anybody who does not acknowledge this fact, if not because of forgetting or tragically not knowing, probably doesn't care because such a person does not support Obama- yet when Hillary is told to "iron my shirt," people suddenly remember the meaning of oppression.

[scan58]

OK - this MAN's finger does not need to be on the button.
I'll say it. I don't think this man is fit to defend the country.

[Michael]

Reference Obama's on speech on race. It's going to be hard to run a post-racial campaign when we all know those feelings are out there and they aren't always acknowledged or understood at a conscious level. That doesn't diminish the value of TRYING to run a post-racial campaign. Obama deserves a lot of credit for trying, and for trying to run a campaign that is about the real serious issues facing the country instead of the personality-driven trivia that passes for news on Cable news channels as we have seen again the past few days.

[Deward Bowles]

This man should resign from public office.

The politics of fear and hate are coming to and end in this country.

I am bitter, angry and frustrated. I am mad has hell and I am not going to take it anymore.

Senator Obama has my vote.

[amp]

jennifer potenciano, you miss the mark completely. Not so long ago, and especially throughout the South, one of the many ways that whites chose to demoralize/dehumanize black men was by referring to them as "boys." These black men were sometimes in their 50's or even 60's, had worked all their lives to support families, had children and sometimes even grandchildren for whom they were responsible!

To look at the "boy" comment in isolation, as you have done, and then to ascribe a completely different meaning (i.e., "davis meant that, despite obama being reputedly knowledgeable on may things, by his actuations & spoutings, particulalrl on foreign affairs, obama just might not fit the bill") is just plain silly and leads many good-hearted people like me who read your comments to be cynical.

To look at the “boy” comment in its proper context, just follow the picture link that I have provided you below for the popular "I Am A Man" campaign, where black men, seizing on the fact that they had been called "boys" and emasculated by whites -- especially southern whites -- for so long, rallied against this sort of treatment:

http://rootsblog.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/10/18/sanitationstrikewhithers.jpg

jennifer, most racism (and sexism for that matter) isn't explicit. You raise the bar so high before you will realize that something racist has been said or done that you excuse evil and, by extension, tacitly condone it. If Davis' use of the word "boy" to describe Obama, an accomplished, highly educated African American presidential candidate in his mid/late 40's with whom Davis merely disagrees isn't racist, then what is? Will only the use of the n-word word suffice? Is that not enough for you, or possibly even explainable? Perhaps you'd shrug off or explain away a nuse? Does a swastika not fit the bill?

In the end, jennifer, call it what it is -- racist, and uncalled for in this presidential debate.

[Tiber]

Part of me wants to say that experienced politicians should be better at not saying things that can be so easily misinterpreted, but mostly I'd just like to tell the media to stop with this sensationalism.
America finally sees the day when women and blacks have a decent shot at the oval office, and then it becomes a circus of apologizing and/or clarifying what someone else said because people have an issue because of how some people interpreted it! Why don't we just cut off everyone's mike and just show video of their lips moving, and then we can guess what they said and make a scandal out of that?
Please, can't we all just get back to the issues?

[stan]

I'm a white guy supporting Obama. I think the use of the 'boy' term was clearly wrong, but without knowing anything more about the guy who said it, it seems an apology is probably enough---I don't know that he has to resign from office. Might be a good reason for him to get voted out, though.

[David]

The tone of your articles, the titles make me sick. To put "boy" in the title of your article is a smirk. So many of your articles are smirks. I wasn't going to comment, but the title caught my attention. I have to remember that if it is latimes blog, the content is smirk, and avoid the article. And I don't care if you post this comment or not. I doubt that you hear what I mean. I'm as old as you are, and the last time I remember smirks like that is from some jerk in high school. You haven't grown up into caring individual adults.

[bigboy]

Fact check - isn't the name Ed Schultz, not Schwartz?

[Ellen]

Debmood, I'm not sure I believe you about the "inside scoop" from your cousins. I don't hear people talking like that when blacks aren't around. The majority of whites are like this? I run into a nasty person like this once in a blue moon, but the majority?!?! Your comment reminded me of the comedy bit about the guy, (was it Eddie Murphy?), who made himself up to look white and saw what happened when whites thought they were alone. Free stuff handed out, a party on the bus once the black person had gotten off etc.
"Elitist" isn't a term used to insult blacks. Kerry was labeled an elitist as was Gore and Dukakis.
Think about it Debmood, if the majority of whites felt like this towards black people, could Obama have gotten the majority of votes? My state, Washington, is a pretty white state. But every single county went for Obama. Every county! I think that seeing prejudice where there isn't prejudice can be harmful.
Yes, calling a grown man 'boy' is incredibly insulting. Calling him an elitist is a typical ploy of Republicans. How creepy of Hillary to use this label. Especially to use it on one of the poorest persons to run for president in ages.

[Al]

Debmood,
I don't know where you live, but fortunately in my area (KC Missouri) I don't hear any of those terms much anymore.
I learned when I was about 13 (I'm 43 now) not to use the term 'boy' to apply to any African American. A bunch of my friends and I thought it was funny to call each other 'boy' to show that the one speaking was a grown up and the one addressed was a little kid. I called my best friend 'boy' within his grandmother's hearing and got chewed out for what seemed like hours - never used it again.

[Gregory]

History proves itself the witness of our times.

Geoff Davis, as explained in this article's introduction, kind of let the moment seize him. People gaffe all the time. When they feel comfortable, the tongue lets go.

I am an African/part-Native-American who would accept his apology, hoping, America will take a lesson from it. It was racially-charged, though, I don't think he meant anything by it. It's the bumps the bus to a melting pot takes. I teach my children the proper use of the English language, and not to use slang or comfortable speak, when it can do harm to others.

Decades ago, after the colonizers of this nation sent the blacks and "Indians" west, the term "boy" was applied to cattle rustlers. This derogatory term, when said to an adult black male, was a term of disrespect. Now phrased as "cowboys", which folks in the west and the rest of America see as an endearment, was shunned by the originals.

We know it is demeaning, but can we see the media making a big, "Wright" deal out of it. No way. I applaud the writer for his article. He told it like it was. Each of us should tell it like it is and stop hiding behind our perceived righteousness.

Thanks to VarsityBlueNYC for the link, which I will post again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ufpU3X-t4w

Did Tiger, another AMERICAN of mixed ancestry, deserve that? No way. Zoeller meant that, and Davis' statement is inherent in his make-up.

There's a lot of work to be done in this country, and I'm glad Obama has taken the risk (yes, the risk) to stand up make all Americans face their xenophobic, racist, and ignorant ways. Yes, I'm speaking to my Black, White, and Native American brothers, too!

[George Thomas]

I guess I'm just "a typical white person." I just don't know what all the fuss is about. When are all the race-grievance people going to end this silliness? It just causes more bitterness which will lead to more clinging of guns and religion. Considering Obama's lack of experience and his naive belief that simply talking to our enemies will solve our problems, he is a boy and the term is appropriate.

[Walter]

What is Geoff Davis doing spewing to the public the contents of highly classified national security meetings?