Redacting KTK: The DC Hummer Incident
Posted by
tgirsch
KTK writes about the DC Hummer incident, and almost immediately takes crap* for it. The problem, as I see it, as that KTK’s, umm, invective, gets in the way of the point, which is actually a good point, in my opinion. In this case, people focused in on KTK’s anti-hummer remarks and ignore the larger point, that this is getting way-undeserved attention. So what follows below the fold is my revised version of KTK’s post, with the anti-Hummer stuff and most of the name-calling deleted. I’m curious to see how (or if) it changes the overall tone, and if it changes anyone’s opinion of the message.
———
A 32-year-old man who lives in his mother’s townhouse in an expensive part of Washington, DC, bought a Hummer too big to fit in his mother’s garage. He then paid extra to have it jacked up and fitted with super-sized tires. He justifies it by saying he needs it to create the right “image” for the “sports marketing” company he wants to start. He parked it on the street, and within a week somebody vandalized it, slashing all the tires, breaking all the windows, and keying “FOR THE ENVIRON” [sic] into the paint.
I’m all for the environment, but vandalizing ridiculous cars is probably not the best way to deal with the issues. And if whoever did it gets caught, they should be made to pay restitution fully.
All that being said, however, why exactly did the Washington Post give this story more than 20 column inches in today’s paper? A man in NW DC got his car vandalized? That’s the lead story in the B-section of the paper that broke the Watergate case?!
It’s the complicity in this guy’s insular sense of entitlement that bugs me about this. The Post seems to think that his financial inconvenience (and, by extesnion, he himself), is more important than everything they didn’t write about that day.
Washington, for those who don’t know, is divided geographically and economically. The Northwest map quadrant is the affluent section; it houses Georgetown and American Universities, the trendy neighborhoods and popular bars and clubs, the legal and lobbying industry clusters, much of the federal government real estate, the foreign embassies, the exclusive residential neighborhoods like this guy’s street, and almost all the white people. The Southwest is mostly governmental. The Eastern quadrants are heavily residential/commercial, almost entirely black, and largely a wasteland. Everything you hear about upper-class Washington - the Georgtown political parties, the Embassy Row receptions, the catered fundraisers, the insider salons - that’s Northwest. Everything you hear about ghetto Washington - the local-government bungling, the murders, the drugs, the ravaged school system and dilapidated hospitals - that’s Northeast.
The idea of the Washington Post devoting 20 paragraphs and an anguished photo to the story of a single car vandalism in the NE would be gut-splittingly ludicrous. Murders go unreported there, by the dozens. Every lesser crime, every imaginable urban misery, occurs there in handfuls, or scores, or hundreds of repetitions on a daily basis. The political destruction of local government by Congressional Republicans, and that government’s own ineptitude, are an ongoing, deadly story. Almost none of it makes the hometown paper. Certainly anyone who called the Post City desk and said they lived near the University of the District of Columbia (NE), and not American University (NW), and they’d had their tires slashed and wanted the paper to send over a reporter and photographer to run a sympathetic profile about how they’d been victimized by those mean liberals would be laughed off the line; the reporter could dine off the story of that prole’s presumption for months. But one aggrieved white guy on the border of Chevy Chase is news no matter what happens; the fact that he’s unhappy about anything is reason enough to give him all the attention he wants.
I think this reporter should be required to log at least two dozen human-interest bylines from within walking distance of the Brentwood Metro station before she’s allowed to write about white people again.
———
* Small digression: Why is it that so many conservatives always want to imply that the actions of a few knucklehads like this are somehow reflective of the environmental movement as a whole, but when it’s conservative Christians interfering with a Hindu invocation, or an Eric Rudolph or Tim McVeigh incident, we’re supposed to write them off as one-off incidents that in no way reflect poorly on the Christian Nation or Pro-Life or anti-Big-Government movements? Why the double-standard? I know that double-standards from this type of conservative shouldn’t surprise me any more, but sheesh! — tgirsch
It is getting too much attention but I think people are using it as a springboard for the whole enviro-whacko terror schtick.
But that point was lost because of KTK hating those mean ol’ people who disregard the environment and who are also probably retuglicans.
Comment 7/19/2007
>Why is it that so many conservatives always
>want to imply that the actions of a few
>knucklehads like this are somehow reflective
>of the environmental movement as a whole
Because Say Uncle isn’t, for example, making posts about how he doesn’t personally think abortion doctors deserve to be shot, but do they have to whine about it when they’re just getting what they deserve?
Comment 7/19/2007
Of course they are. But why is the Post giving such an obvious ploy such a prominent place?
Comment 7/19/2007
See, Stormy, you’re reading that this guy “got what he deserved,” but I’m not seeing where KTK actually said that. He repeatedly calls the guy an asshole/dickhead/whatever, but thinking someone is a jerk is not the same thing as saying they “had it coming.” Maybe KTK does think this guy got what he deserved, I don’t know. But he doesn’t say that anywhere that I can see.
Also, setting aside the fact that you just equated vandalism with murder, I don’t see how anything KTK wrote justifies holding the entire group responsible for the actions of a relative few, so your “because” answer simply does not follow.
Comment 7/19/2007
I think your gloss is spot-on, T.
Comment 7/19/2007
THis is terrorism pure and simple. Whether these so called environmentalist realize it or not we still live in a free country, where people are still allowed to make their own choices for their own personal reasons. How is what they did any different than the wackos who try to smash and bomb clinics that perform abortions? How are these people any different than those who try to frighten us to do what they want us to by intimidation and bombing? It’s nice to see that we are trying to spread freedom abroad and willing tolerate it being lost.
Comment 7/19/2007
1.) I didn’t equate vandalism with murder; you’re the one who made the connection in your original question.
2.) KTK: “as if your tiny personal problem was of national significance and you were not only entitled to sympathy for it but simultaneously immune to answering for your own precipitating jerkitude . . .”
When implies both that the guy isn’t entitled to any sympathy for the damage to his car and that he precipitated the attack. That certainly comes across as if KTK thinks he deserved it.
3.) I don’t think anyone in the comments to either this post or KTK’s has implied that this reflects poorly on environmentalism as a whole, only that KTK’s response reflects poorly on him.
Comment 7/19/2007
[…] New Comments Dustin Metzger on Giving Liberals A Bad NameLean Left » Redacting KTK: The DC Hummer Incident on Giving Liberals A Bad Nametgirsch on Giving Liberals A Bad Nametgirsch on Giving Liberals A Bad NameDustin Metzger on Giving Liberals A Bad Name […]
Pingback 7/19/2007
Stormy:
1) Mea culpa. Although I did try to present a range of options (the prayer incident), my high end was probably a bit too much.
2) I can see how you’d read it that way, but I still think there’s a difference between saying someone “was asking for it” and saying “they had it coming.” Nevertheless, I see your point.
3) Look at comment #6.
Although I was primarily talking about a couple of the trackbacks to KTK’s original.
Comment 7/20/2007
La Tosha:
I have a vague hope that your post is satire. If it is, I apologize for thinking you mean any of what you just said.
THis is terrorism pure and simple.
That’s funny. You really can’t tell the difference between bombs and vandalism? Seriously, do you think this destruction property was done either (a) to inspire fear by those who consume too many resources or (b) to produce a change in political decisions about environmental policy? If not, then shut up about terrorism.
How is what they did any different than the wackos who try to smash and bomb clinics that perform abortions?
Hm, can we start with the fact that in one case, the attempt is to destroy an instance of a hated object, and in the other the attempt is to kill people? Property damage vs. murder. An individual object causing the problem vs. intimidation. Hm, see a difference yet? Oh, wait, maybe bombs are actually a medical tool for saving babies?
How are these people any different than those who try to frighten us to do what they want us to by intimidation and bombing?
An angry suburbanite with a knife destroying property. People finding unrelated victims to blow up. Gee, what is the difference?
It’s nice to see that we are trying to spread freedom abroad and willing tolerate it being lost.
That’s even funnier. Vandalism around here is as terrible as bombing innocents. But bombing innocents in other countries spreads freedom! Wait, are you saying that vandalism is a way of spreading freedom?
Comment 7/21/2007
I’ve got me some freedom spreadin’ to do.
Comment 7/21/2007
well actually i dont think that its too much attention. I mean i didnt know about it until i read this. So really if people think this got too much attention then please tell me why people are bringing more attention to it. In my opionion nothing ever has too much attention because no matter what even more attention is bound to come.
Comment 7/22/2007
One more thing if the attention is so way undeserved then why do we give it more attention. And everyone knows that if any of u got undeserved attention that you would probably go for it. And by the way why is your attention so undeserving? Clearly your attention is a whore and just gives to anybody
Comment 7/22/2007
Isn’t this a
thought crimehate crime?So the normal punishment for vandalism is not enough, right? Since his vehicle was vandalised for his beliefs the punishment should be especially harsh, right?
What would be a real story is if a gay environmentalist had his Prius vandalised. Then there would be some social relevance.
Comment 7/22/2007
KTK’s article is in no need of redaction.
Comment 7/22/2007
yet again more attention to it has come just as i predicted it would. STOP GIVING IT “UNDESERVED ATTENTION”!!!
Comment 7/22/2007
Am I the only one who keeps rereading this post’s title and thinking of Bill Clinton and Lewinski?
Comment 7/23/2007