Eric D. Snider

A Crock of Buttars

Snide Remarks #573

"A Crock of Buttars"

by Eric D. Snider

Published in EricDSnider.com on February 25, 2008

I occasionally miss living in Utah. One of those times is when a state senator refers to an unpleasant bill as a "black baby -- a dark, ugly thing," apologizes to blacks for his remarks but makes a reference to lynch mobs in the apology, and then exasperatedly refers to African-Americans as "those people."

As a satirist, I have occasionally tried to make up characters as befuddled and clueless as Sen. Chris Buttars (R-West Jordan), but I've never come up with anything this funny. Here's what happened: On Feb. 12, while debating a school-funding bill, one state senator called it "the ugly baby bill," i.e., a thing nobody wants. Playing off that little joke, Buttars said, "This baby is black, I'll tell you. This is a dark, ugly thing."

In Buttars' defense, both "black" and "baby" have multiple meanings. "Baby" can be a slang term to mean any object -- as in, "Man, this baby is ugly!" or "Let's set that baby on fire!" Also in Buttars' defense, he's 65 years old and has lived in Utah his entire life. It's quite possible he's never even seen a black baby.

The problem is, the other senator called it "the ugly baby bill," obviously using "baby" in the sense of "a human infant." The debate had also included references to the biblical story of King Solomon offering to split a baby in half. So when Buttars called this "baby" black, dark, and ugly -- well, he didn't leave a lot of wiggle room there for alternate meanings.

Buttars said later that day that he didn't intend for his remark to have racist overtones, but that he could see how people could take it that way, and he apologized. But the damage was already done. It didn't help that in 2006, he told a radio interviewer that Brown v. Board of Education -- the landmark Supreme Court case that did away with segregation in schools -- was "wrong to begin with." With that already on his record, Utah's civil rights and minority groups were quick to condemn him over the black baby incident. Many people all over the state called for his resignation. I don't know if Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton made official statements, but I assume they at least knew about it, since an alarm goes off in their bunker any time the word "black" is used in public.

After a week of lying low, Buttars granted The Salt Lake Tribune an interview on Feb. 18. During this interview, he expressed disbelief at how vitriolic the attacks against him had gotten. "I thought ... the first couple days, 'Well you're getting beat up but you deserve it, you made a mistake.' But then they started getting meaner and meaner and meaner to the point it is just a hate lynch mob."

Oh, Buttars. Buttars, Buttars, Buttars. You're in the middle of a highly emotional controversy about a perceived racial slur you made -- and then you use the term "lynch mob"? What is the matter with you? Again, I grant you, the word "lynch" does not automatically refer to mobs of Klansmen who killed hundreds of blacks in the United States in the 19th and 20th centuries. But surely you are aware that the term is frequently, perhaps even predominantly, associated with such infamy, and that it has recently been discussed in highly public forums. Surely you know that the term "lynch mob" has very specific connotations for African-Americans. (Remember? The people you were trying to apologize to?)

Then again, maybe he doesn't know that. After that remark fanned the flames even higher, he told the Tribune, "Lynch mob is a Western term. You wouldn't find one person in 10,000 in Utah that thinks that's a racist term.... That's not a racial term in my opinion." And then the clincher:

"How do I know what words I'm supposed to use in front of those people?"

At this point everyone stopped being angry and just sort of shook their heads and sighed. The prospect of explaining to a 65-year-old man why the term "those people" might be problematic in this context was wearying at best.

What Buttars has amply proven throughout all this is that he simply doesn't think before he speaks, and possibly not even after. That's not a crime, and he's certainly not the first politician to suffer from foot-in-mouth syndrome. So why did this become such a big deal? Because a lot of Utahns already thought he was a jerk, and now they had something solid to hold against him. It was like arresting Al Capone for tax evasion: not his worst offense, but we'll take what we can get.

Buttars, first elected in 2000, takes all his marching orders from Gayle Ruzicka, president of the Utah chapter of the ultra-conservative Eagle Forum. Buttars is a Ruzickatista, one of her flying monkeys that do her bidding to make sure the Utah legislature passes plenty of laws governing "morality" and "decency," defined here as "things Gayle Ruzicka agrees with."

He's in favor of outlawing abortion. He would make exceptions for cases where the mother's life is threatened -- but only if it's her life at stake, not merely her health. He said in 2007, "If you just consider the health of the mother, is it 'Will she just be tired more often?' or is it something much more serious in the ladder of health deterioration?" Because as you know, the main reason the liberal media is always encouraging women to have abortions is that they hate listening to pregnant women whine about how tired they are. No more of those hasty, tiredness-alleviating abortions under Chris Buttars' watch!

He's against the teaching of evolution in schools and has frequently mentioned how evolution teaches that we descended from monkeys ... which means, after all, that he actually has no idea what evolution teaches. He wants only abstinence to be taught in sex-ed classes, and is furiously opposed to Planned Parenthood being involved in any way, lest the students learn how to avoid catching STDs. I assume he figures that if students aren't going to be abstinent, it's only fair that they get gonorrhea as punishment. (I assume.)

It's the gays that Buttars has targeted most often. He's got a real problem with them. A few weeks ago he led the charge when the Salt Lake City council unanimously approved a new system that would allow unmarried couples (gay or straight) to prove they live together and depend on one another financially. This registry would serve as a resource for businesses when determining whether to issue insurance benefits. It's a way to go "on the record" about living together and being financially intertwined without actually getting married. Buttars opposes the registry on the grounds that if we're going to start collecting the names and addresses of gay people, it should be to exterminate them, not give them insurance benefits.

No, I have exaggerated. Buttars opposes it because in his mind it's too close to a "civil union" or a "gay marriage" -- never mind that about 75 percent of those who would benefit from the registry are straight unmarried couples. Buttars went so far as to call the registry "repugnant," though he stopped short of calling it a "gay, ugly baby." Why, if people who depend on one another financially are allowed to share one another's insurance benefits, then the next thing you know heterosexual marriage will be outlawed and only gays will be allowed to vote.

You might think that Buttars is overreacting, and that people sharing each other's insurance benefits has no impact whatsoever on him or anyone else. But that's just what the gays WANT you to think. The fact is, insurance benefits are one of the major reasons that people choose to be gay. They see all those perks waiting for them, and they figure that while it's going to be tough to retrain themselves to be attracted to members of the same gender, it will be worth it to get those insurance bennies. But by taking a clear stand against such perks, Utah sends a message to its citizens, and that message is: Don't be gay! It will avail you nothing. And the result is that over time, fewer and fewer Utahns will choose to be gay, and eventually the state will have an entirely straight population, and all the community theaters will close, and there won't be any more "American Idol" contestants from Utah, but I think you'll agree that's a small price to pay.

Anyway, the state legislature had hearings about this registry thing, and local lesbian Christie Gleave testified about how she was unable to visit her partner in the hospital because she wasn't on her insurance. On Feb. 12 -- the same day that Buttars would make his fateful "black baby" statement -- The Salt Lake Tribune ran a photo of Gleave speaking as Buttars looked on, and the expression on Buttars' face would appear to speak volumes.

Photo by Scott Sommerdorf, The Salt Lake Tribune

Now, I don't know exactly what was happening when this photo was taken. Maybe Buttars was in the middle of a belch. Maybe Gleave was saying something particularly vile, like "I want all of you to imagine Chris Buttars naked," or "I stand outside of preschools and recruit young girls to become lesbians," or "I vote for Democrats." Maybe in context the look on Buttars' face is entirely appropriate, the same reaction you or I would have had. I don't know. All I know is that out of context, it looks like an expression of pure, unfiltered hatred. He would appear to have so much contempt for this woman that he can't even hide it. If looks could kill, the flags at Home Depot would now be flying at half-mast.

So these are hard times for Chris Buttars, who is viewed by many of his constituents as a cranky old bigot. (Of course, to some voters, that's a selling point.) He says he's running for re-election in November. We'll see whether he gets to stay, or whether people use this debacle to finally get rid of him. Personally, I think his career as a state senator has been dark, ugly, and black, just like a Filipino baby.

Comments & Reaction:

In case my fellow "South Park" fans were wondering, yes, it's impossible to talk about Buttars without thinking of the character by that name.

This whole story, where Buttars puts his foot in his mouth then makes it worse when he tries to apologize, all the while stymied as to why everybody's so mad, reminded me of "A Formal Apology," a column I wrote almost a year ago. It's a case of life imitating "Snide Remarks"!

You can chalk up all the hullabaloo to our living in a world where racial sensitivities are alarmingly high, and I'm sure that's part of it. But truly, I think this would have blown over fairly quickly if it weren't for the fact that people hate Chris Buttars anyway. A slip of the tongue like this couldn't have happened to a better guy.

If you want to hear the actual audio of the "black baby" incident, someone has posted it on YouTube.

In keeping with his policy of saying something stupid first and then apologizing later, Buttars eventually clarified his remarks on Brown v. Board of Education. Basically: The long-term effects of the decision were great, but it may have hurt minority students in the short-term.

Buttars' quote about abortion was from an April 19, 2007, article in The Salt Lake Tribune, originally found here but now filed away in the Trib's for-pay archives. The relevant part is quoted here, however.

Technically, the flags at Home Depot would be flying at half-staff, not half-mast. "Half-mast" is properly used only to refer to flags flying on ships or at naval stations. But "half-mast" is by far the more common term in regular people's lives, and you don't want to confuse readers with an unfamiliar-but-technically-correct term when you're trying to make a joke.

SnideCast intro: "Who's Sorry Now?," from the "Fosse" original cast recording; outro: "Baby Love," by The Supremes.

This item has 47 comments

karl says:
February 25, 2008 at 4:18 am
What a sad old man he is.
Joshua Steimle says:
February 25, 2008 at 4:26 am
Buttars tends to be a prominent and regular feature on local radio programs here in Utah, or at least news about him. He frequently wins x96's "boner of the week" award, which is no small feat since he competes against 20 other contestants for that honor. They also frequently use an audio clip from SouthPark of Kyle or someone saying "What's wrong with you Buttars!" which always makes me giggle.

But to tell the truth, even being from Utah I don't know much about the guy, except that every time he says something controversial he ends up in the news, and whatever else he says that isn't controversial flies under the radar, which of course shows you how biased the news media is, even in Utah.

Regarding the photo above and Buttars' wrinkle of disapproval, my wife and I just adopted a newborn baby girl and she makes faces like that when she's gassy, so perhaps that's another possible explanation. After all, he is 65 and you know what a visit to Golden Corral can do to their sensitive stomachs.
Turkey says:
February 25, 2008 at 5:01 am
My father is 65, but that doesn't make him retarded. The "He's old" excuse is no excuse.
your friend billy zane, a cool dude says:
February 25, 2008 at 6:05 am
Coupla things: Obviously Buttars is a man unfamiliar with tact, but all the news stories about this say that he called a bill "a black baby." That's not what he said, he said "This baby is black..." which is a point Eric made in this piece but is not mentioned by anybody else. Also, think about the possibility that what he was trying to reference was a "tar baby," a common term in politics although not excluded from Al Sharpton's List of Racist Terms (copyright).
Savvy Veteran says:
February 25, 2008 at 6:47 am
I don't think I'm very happy. I always fall asleep to the sound of my own screams...Then I always wake up in the morning to the sound of my own screams. Do you think I'm unhappy?--Butters
m says:
February 25, 2008 at 7:08 am
"...all the community theaters will close, and there won't be any more "American Idol" contestants from Utah..."

I'm pretty those are both benefits, not costs...
Honest Person says:
February 25, 2008 at 7:33 am
actual quote: "This baby is black, I'll tell you. This is a dark, ugly thing."

Innocuous really.

There had to have been another reason for the lynching. This comment just wasn't enough to erit the attention. Was it the gay marriage registry? Maybe time will tell.
Paul Norman says:
February 25, 2008 at 7:51 am
As someone who lives and works in the Houston, TX metro area, which is one of the most multi-racial cities in the world, I must say that Buttars does NOT know what he is talking about. It seems to me that white babies are far more likely to be ugly than babies of any other racial persuasion (I am caucasion, BTW). I cannot recall ever seeing an ugly black baby, in fact. Am I some kind of reverse racist that I thing they are all cute? I have looked at more than one white baby and privately hoped he/she would outgrow his/her current looks.

I do hope any newbies reading this column can recognize sarcasm, e.g. "just like a Filipino baby" at the end. Otherwise, Eric is going to get a flood of Angry Letters for this column.

Maybe some of you medical types could clear something up for me. I have never had trouble visiting people in the hospital. I was told to stay away from someone who had his bone marrow killed and just had his blood stem cells re-injected, because there was little in the way of immune system. I don't think his wife was supposed to be in his room for a while either. Are there lots of circumstances where a spouse is allowed to visit, but friends are not? Are hospitals prohibited by law from allowing someone from designating someone to have "full" visiting privileges?
Michael says:
February 25, 2008 at 7:52 am
That's probably just his normal face.
David says:
February 25, 2008 at 8:07 am
Turkey,

Actually, being old kinda does make you retarded. The brain starts to atrophy with one of the first effects being in the frontal lobe, the part responsible for decision making, inhibitions, and impulsive behavior. Essentially, they have a harder time holding things back which is why old people are so curmudgeonly and racist. Growing up in a more racist time, even if they don't believe it, they have a hard time not saying what comes to their mind. It's like being drunk (I'm defending my own grandma here, not Buttars who sounds like he really thinks that way). So I think the solution is obvious...encourage smoking at a young age so we never have to deal with the "old problem".
Paul says:
February 25, 2008 at 8:32 am
Good thing the democrats never say anything stupid. I'm sure Eric is just working on the fiinishing touches of his piece on Hilary Clinton's use of the term Plantation to refer to the Republican led Congress in 2006.
Chuckwagon Breakfast says:
February 25, 2008 at 9:10 am
If anybody has ever read the opinion in Brown v. Board of Ed., you'll have to agree that the logic they used was horrid. It is a poorly written case. They use "social statistics" in a way that if used today, would totally discredit them and the opinion would be rapid overturned. Their opinion is based solely on the use of stats that amount to pure conjecture. Having said that, it's amazing that the opinion produced the desired effect.
BrianO says:
February 25, 2008 at 9:13 am
"It seems to me that white babies are far more likely to be ugly than babies of any other racial persuasion (I am caucasion, BTW). I cannot recall ever seeing an ugly black baby, in fact."

Paul Norman;

I find it hard to believe that babies of any color/shade/group/race/species/sexual persuasion don't have a healthy percentage of uglies. Maybe I'm jaded or something because I'm a Caucasian, but I find that babies who are unrelated to the viewer in any way aren't necessarily ugly - but they aren't always "cute" either.

But I digress.

I believe the point that Eric (and all those other journalists) was trying to make is that Buttars seems to equate blackness or darkness with ugliness. (It seems) he feels that a baby can be ugly not because of any arrangement of features, but just because of its melanin level.

That said, I think from reading his exact wording that he could very well have meant his original remark in a non-racist way, but after reading more of this guy's record I can only conclude that he is a Grade-A jerk nonetheless. Therefore...

Stone him!!
Brian says:
February 25, 2008 at 9:38 am
The evening he made the comment, KSL's Nightside Project broke the story on the radio. They began by saying that a "possible racist remark" was made on the Senate floor. My first thought was, "I'll bet it was Buttars." It's kind of sad that I, one who follows the Utah State Legislature not so closely, could have guessed that. Ah well, I hope his constituents in South Jordan or wherever wise up this election year and vote him out.
Clumpy says:
February 25, 2008 at 10:41 am
I confess that your little ironic throwaway jokes at the end of articles (such as the "Filipino" remark in this paper and jokes about the mentally disabled in others) consistently make me laugh. I love the new, more insightful "Snide Remarks", but that last sentence was the payoff that made the entire article that much better.
Aaron says:
February 25, 2008 at 10:56 am
Bah. This controversy seemed pretty manufactured. Buttars said something stupid, and followed up with 2 somethings that were not quite as stupid, but inadvisable given the situation (I would have totally overlooked the problem with the word "lynch" -- it has an entirely western/round-up-a-posse-for-a-lynchin' connotation for me). It all seems like a poor choice of words rather than out-and-out racism (nobody seems to mention the absolute tastelessness of describing something as an ugly baby that nobody wants). Maybe he deserves all the negative press for being a member of the Eagle Forum, though.

Also, except for coining the term "Ruzickatista", the article wasn't as funny as I would have hoped. Next week, I guess.
Heathergirl says:
February 25, 2008 at 10:57 am
I keep looking at that picture and imagining what Buttars looked like as a baby. It is giving me the chills, because he already looks pretty close to those terrifying pouty-face porcelin dolls that they advertise in the back pages of lady magazines.

It makes me wonder if his mother foolishly told him that he was a cute baby, forever skewing his perception of baby cuteness, white, black, or otherwise?

Mostly, I think Buttars has this ridiculous habit of using the most dramatic terms he can think of to describe his endless struggle as a small-minded angry little man. After all, don't "hate lynch mob" and "people who keep noticing what an idiot I am" mean the same thing? Because they clearly do to Buttars.

And could we please not mention Al Sharpton or Jessie Jackson? They've been refreshingly absent this election, and I'm hoping that they are like Beetlejuice- they can only come to haunt our world if we speak of them.
Davey Boy says:
February 25, 2008 at 11:02 am
#11 Paul: How is this a Republicans-vs.-Democrats thing? The only time Buttars' political party even gets mentioned in the column is in parentheses, and then there's one throwaway joke about the lesbian being a Democrat. How do you go from there to "the main reason Eric is making fun of Buttars is that Buttars is a Republican," which is what it sounds like your argument is. If Hillary Clinton (or anyone else) had made this same series of mistakes, I bet Eric would have written about it, too.
matt says:
February 25, 2008 at 11:56 am
Paul:

If thinking that black babies are way cuter than white babies is reverse racism, sign me up for the Reverse Racism Times (that's their newsletter, it turns out.)
Jen says:
February 25, 2008 at 2:58 pm
"It makes me wonder if his mother foolishly told him that he was a cute baby, forever skewing his perception of baby cuteness, white, black, or otherwise?"

Well said... I think that may be the case!
cincinnatus says:
February 25, 2008 at 3:30 pm
There are a lot of people who don't think of racial attacks when they hear the word lynch. They just think of an attack in general, hence the big hullabaloo with the Golf Channel and Tiger Woods. That lady was the same way. When I hear lynch, I think of the old west.

Maybe Buttars looks like that in the picture because he can't figure out why any woman would have that haircut. Maybe he's trying to figure out why someone named their boy Christie.

Are you outing David Archuleta? Or Carmen Rasmussen? Who's the gay Utahn on American Idol?
Dave the Slave says:
February 25, 2008 at 3:43 pm
wait wait wait....

...

...so you're insinuating there are American Idol guys who AREN'T gay?
Raul says:
February 25, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Wait, Utah has a Senate? Since when did we start letting Mormons vote?
Jacob says:
February 25, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Yeah, cincinnatus, what are you thinking? I can only think of one exception to the rule, and he was in season two . . .

Eric, the closing shot on Lesbians and Home Depot: you just made my day; thank you.
Momma Snider says:
February 25, 2008 at 5:03 pm
I don't think he meant the black baby thing to be racist, but it doesn't sound like he is capable of thinking before he speaks. It's one thing to be misunderstood once in a while, but when it's this often, maybe you need to be careful.

I really think that kind of extremism, as in teaching only abstinence and not teaching evolution at all, not to mention the gay bashing, does much more harm than good. Not only to the students, but to the reputation of conservatism. However, I have never heard of someone not being allowed to visit a partner in the hospital because they're not listed on the patient's insurance policy.
Leah Jane says:
February 25, 2008 at 5:20 pm
I'm not from Utah, but Buttars was a popular target for jokes in a book I read recently, but Eric did a better job than the author at making me laugh at the absurdity of this guy. It seems like he lacks a filter between his brain and his mouth.
The UnMighty says:
February 25, 2008 at 7:28 pm
This post was an ugly, black, mexican, gay, jew, midget, whore, crack addict, baby of a post with clubbed feet, a hare lip, and Spina bifida, and shouldn't have even seen the light of day.

Of course, I was using the second meaning for all those words, which means, I liked it.
He-Man says:
February 25, 2008 at 9:03 pm
I agree with Davey Boy in comment #18. How is this a Republican/Democrat issue? Oh well, almost anything can become political in the midst of an election.

In fact I read a funny blog today that made the argument that He-Man is Republican, Man-at-Arms is Democrat, Battlecat is Independent, and Orko is Communist (see it at http://mormonhusbands.blogspot.com). It's no Snide Remarks, but still pretty good.
Adam says:
February 26, 2008 at 12:37 am
Eric. This column was FUNNY. Especially the paragraph about benefits. "They see all those perks waiting for them," and the joke about Home Depot. LoL. I just SAW her in a Home Depot today in SoCal. She was working in the carpet section. (No, really.)
TinaBanina says:
February 26, 2008 at 7:31 am
Living in Utah, I've been enjoying this story for weeks now. This article was surprisingly informative. I've been thinking this whole time that his comments were in no way directed towards actual babies and he was just being attacked because he has so many unpopular (except maybe in Utah) positions. Thanks Eric for explaining how it can be legitimately assumed that human babies were the target.

My favorite line: "If looks could kill, the flags at Home Depot would now be flying at half-mast."

Oh, and anyone who thinks all babies are equally ugly just hasn't seen enough non-white babies - the other kinds are just cuter.
Ray says:
February 26, 2008 at 7:32 am
DUDE!

65 is no excuse! I bet he was a cretinous bigot at 35. I am 67 and I still get it. I'm perfectly able to understand what is happening in the world, and produce a reaction that doesn't hark back to a mythical 'good ol' days'.

1. The old days weren't all that great

2. I live in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, not Buttplug, Utah.

Maybe #2 is Buttars' problem.
Dave says:
February 26, 2008 at 7:55 am
#25: Momma -

I'm glad you haven't witnessed it. I have.

The main issue is this:

If a person is desperately ill and not able to express their own preferences (and doesn't have a legal document), there is an ethical pecking order for who are the decision-makers. For married folks, the first is line is the spouse; for the unmarried, the partner has limited or no rights - it goes through a list - parents, children, relatives, etc. If the main decision-maker opts to block the partner from the room and from the decision-making, the healthcare workers must comply. For most people who read this list, I would imagine this would never happen - they would recognize the importance of the partner and include them in decision-making. For others, there is no such compunction. I cannot tell you how terrible it is. The same kind of issue is true for financial decision making.
Aaron says:
February 26, 2008 at 9:17 am
#31: Ray

Way to go, genius. You've managed to look like a bigot while deriding bigots. That is all.
Kourtney says:
February 26, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Yikes! Apparently Buttars' mother never told him that his face would freeze that way.
Eric D. Snider says:
February 28, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Comments were getting eaten for a while, but we've fixed the problem now. You may comment to your heart's content.
Momma Snider says:
February 28, 2008 at 4:24 pm
#32 Dave: Thanks for explaining. I hadn't thought of that aspect, but I see it now.
Chad says:
February 29, 2008 at 11:22 am
Make a list to exterminate them ----------------- my kidney exploded causing my urine to get on my small intestine due to laughter.
Gregarious Chanting says:
February 29, 2008 at 1:01 pm
would we have cared if he said this issue is an ugly gypsy baby begging for money?

Democracy is for those to have a voice within the public's mores.
Rh1n0 says:
March 1, 2008 at 1:22 pm
I don't care what he meant by the ugly black baby statement and I don't doubt that he didn't mean it as racist. What matters to me is that he's gotten himself in trouble, keeps digging the hole deeper, to which I say... Go for it!

The deeper the hole the better. That is one joke of a politician I can do without.
Gouchyboy says:
March 3, 2008 at 11:59 am
#31, I do live in Utah, And I have never heard of a place called "Buttplug" But if there is such a place, I REALLY want a T-shirt from there.
Sheri says:
March 3, 2008 at 12:48 pm
He makes those comments because he IS racist. That's what upsets people. "For out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks". (mt 12:34)

It's like calling someone ugly then saying, "Oops - I'm sorry I offended you".

The apology is just a formality Buttars knows he has to offer but it doesn't change the fact that his real feelings were made painfully clear to everyone. And it's obvious he doesn't even understand why or how his comments show his true colors. A few of my grandparents were that way. One minute they'd swear to you they weren't racist, and the next, they'd tell you how they think "The Mexicans" living behind their house were coming into their backyard at night and stealing the oranges off their trees.
carina says:
March 4, 2008 at 12:24 am
I can't stand that man. Is it ironic that I hate a guy because he hates too much? Well, I'm going with it.

It seems like every time I hear about some crazy bill or amendment, Buttars' name is on it. Blech. Margaret Dayton? I'm onto you too.
Pumpkin says:
March 6, 2008 at 11:03 am
I just want to say how stupid the term "reverse racism" is. Racism is racism no matter who is being racist against whom. Saying "reverse racism" seems like a racist term itself because it implies that whites somehow own the term.

Also, I think Chinese babies are the cutest babies of any race. I spent a few weeks in China and never saw a single ugly Chinese baby.

Also, I think people should pretty much take with a grain of salt the silly things that come out of the mouths of curmudgeony old men. My grandparents were the same way (possibly accidentally but maybe on purpose saying racist things) and they were still good people. I don't know anything about Buttars, but I hate it when the media and other hypersensitive organizations go nuts when people say things like what Buttars said.
John Doe says:
March 8, 2008 at 8:37 am
Pumpkin,

When I studied sociology, I was told in no uncertain terms that minorities are 100% incapable of being racist. Racism is a society/institutional thing. Since minorities by definition is not in charge of "the institution" and have less power in society, they cannot be racist.

Is it the dumbest thing I have ever heard? Yes. Because if I were to go to Africa, these same sociologists would say I, as a white male, would be the only person capable of racism despite my being in the minority and having no power over "the institution".
Ruth says:
March 19, 2008 at 3:08 pm
How "snide" of you!! :)

My only beef is this:
"Christie Gleave testified about how she was unable to visit her partner in the hospital because she wasn't on her insurance."

What a bunch of baloney. ANYONE can go into a hosptial to visit without being on a patient's insurance. I can go right now and visit a friend. YOU could go right now and visit my friend, even though you don't even know her. SHE might not want you there, and might panic and call the nurse, wondering why some stranger was wanting to visit her in her room. :) But NO one needs to be on someone's insurance just to visit in the hospital. If that's what Ms. Gleave was really claiming, she was being dishonestly melodramatic to gain sympathies and wasn't telling the truth.
Ianerific says:
March 21, 2008 at 8:47 am
HEY! If I write angry letters will you write more Snide Remarks? I realize you probably have more important things to do, but I do miss my monday morning pick me up.
Workman says:
March 21, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Ruth,
Yes, anyone can go to a hospital to visit, but only during approved visiting hours. Family members have more rights. They generally are allowed to stay overnight and help make medical decisions. I don't know if being on that patient's insurance would make a difference, however.

Eric,
So a story like this makes you miss Utah? Makes me happy I got out.

This work may not be transmitted via the Internet, nor reproduced in any other way, without written consent from Eric D. Snider.