Last updated on February 8th, 2013 at 12:10 pm
An established pattern of systemic Tea Party hatred toward women exists and is further evident in the legislation they push, and yet they just can’t help themselves from projecting.
Just look at how the late Andrew Breitbart treated alleged O’Keefe victim (number? ) Nadia Naffe.
To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.
After Nadia Naffe, a now reformed James O’Keefe Gonzo-ette, was kept in a barn on O’Keefe’s family property, drugged and unable to walk, she called “good friend” and now deceased Andrew Breitbart for help. Shockingly, Breitbart sided with the CNN boat kidnap caper planner and left Naffe stranded at O’Keefe’s mercy.
Naffe filed a criminal complaint against the already on federal parole O’Keefe, who lives with his family. Yes. Lives with his family. Naffe told the judge that after she got home O’Keefe harassed her with messages and tormented her by posting a video online in which he referred to her as “dirty”. Naffe testifed, “He made me out to be a tramp. He used other people to torment me.”
But her complaint was tossed out because of jurisdiction issues. That didn’t stop the Right from smearing her and claiming the judge had basically told her to shut up, you weren’t raped.
The judge did not say anything of the sort.
This was all Naffe’s fault, however. See Breitbart on Twitter:
@AndrewBreitbart: There is no ‘rape plot’, you slanderous, libelous wannabe Media Matters smear junkie. @DavidShuster @jamesokeefeiii
To which the now rather isolated Nadia replied:
@NadiaNaffe: Now, your an expert on ‘rape plots’? I called you that night I was held in the barn to ask for help @andrewbreitbart @DavidShuster
Then we follow her Tweets as she references other O’Keefe creepiness, like his plot to get then CNN reporter Abbie Bourdreau alone on a boat so he could humiliate her sexually (if you’re not sick to your stomach yet, let me remind you that this is the party that refused to sign the Violence Against Women Act and has been busy “redefining rape”). Apparently O’Keefe also allegedly went to poor Izzy’s apartment (the brave young woman who warned the CNN journalist about the nefarious O’Keefe love boat plot) looking for what passes for ‘love” in his disturbed mind, causing her lawyer to issue a demand letter.
Nadia had the nerve to point out on her blog that in the wake of Breitbart’s Occupy accusations, this was hypocritical of him. “A parallel had been drawn between what happened to me at James O’keefe’s barn in New Jersey and Breitbart’s characterization about the treatment of women in the Occupy Movement. Breitbart’s detractors would claim his statements appeared disingenuous, hypocritical — and they were right.”
Rape plot or just kidnapping and drugging? Huh. But oh, boy, those Occupiers…. Truth be told, I never gave much weight to Breitbart’s accusations due to his previous record, but I would imagine that when a segment of the 99% get together, some crime might occur; after all, they represent the 99%. We also have crime in the 1%, but we don’t smear the entire 1% with Bernie Madoff’s crimes. And we’re not talking about civilian members here, we’re talking about leaders of the Tea Party and gonzo journalists who have ruined other people’s careers and driven a often times false narrative with their “leadership”. Hence, the equivocation is at best a desperate attempt to deflect and smear.
I suspect O’Keefe doesn’t even really want sex; but rather, he gets off on the power of sexual intimidation and humiliation, which of course is the psychology behind rape.
One commonly believed myth is that rape is primarily a sexual act. Persons with this belief often unintentionally place the victim on trial. Her motives, her dress and her actions become suspect not only to law enforcement officials but also to her family and friends…
Their findings have shown that rape is a crime of violence, often regarded by the woman as a life-threatening act in which fear and humiliation are her dominant emotions. Sexual desire is less a motivation for the man than violent aggression.
Now, read this statement and guess whom it represents, in either in words or deed (legislation attempted to pass):
X “believed that the prevention or avoidance of rape was the responsibility of the women. Their advice, perhaps sexist, nonetheless advised women not to go out alone, not to hitchhike, not to drink alone and to learn self defense.”
Do you want to know who said that it was a woman’s job to avoid being raped back in the 1980’s? Sexual offenders. Rapists. “Offenders interviewed by members of the Institute at a maximum security state mental hospital.” These incarcerated offenders kind of sound like the modern day Republican Party, only less rabid.
And finally, who rapes and why?
A more widely accepted theory is that most rapists seem to come from a subculture of violence whose values may be different from those of the dominant culture. Therefore these adolescents and young men may be demonstrating their toughness and masculinity in a more violent and antisocial manner.
A sub-culture of violence, you say? Gee. Where oh where can I find such a sub-culture?
It could it be the Tea Party activists who….
…threw a brick threw the window of the Democratic Party headquarters, stomped on a woman’s head and neck at a Rand rally, mailed white powder and swastikas to Rep. Grijalva and fired on his office on after ruling on the Arizona immigration law, issued death threats against Sen. Patty Murray after a yes vote on healthcare reform resulting in the arrest of the armed and angry perpetrator, invited Tea Party activists to descend upon the address of a Virginia Democratic representative resulting in the gas line at that address being cut, threatened California state Senator Yee, shot at Gabby Gifford’s office windows (before she was actually shot in the head in what was described as a “lone wolf” act), spit on highly respected black leaders in public, contemplate trying to make the working class unions look bad by using a plant to stir up violence in a large group of protesters heedless of the dangers (Walker only chose to not do this because it could backfire on him politically), shoot the police via a Glenn Beck paranoid listener, arrest of another Beck listener who was upset by congress “railroading the left-wing agenda” and was planning the Tides Foundation shooting, stabbing a cab driver after asking him if he was a Muslim…. The full list is actually too long to use as an aside. (see here and here for a Google map of right wing violence just during a six month period.)
Bad apples? Really?
The truth is that the Tea Party caters to this mentality. An established pattern of systemic Tea Party violence already exists (see list above).
And while humans are humans and all groups will be tainted with a few bad apples, that’s hardly the same thing as a pattern of systemic violence. This makes sense, when we look at how the movement was established and to whom it caters. The racism, the otherism, the inflammatory remarks, the notion that only they are the real Americans.
Somehow, for over 40 years, conservatives have been lobbing inflammatory rhetoric at everyone else, but when they are accused of doing so, they claim media bias and political attack. Somehow, it’s okay for them to put crosshairs on the districts of Democrats even as those Democrats are being threatened by the conservative’s own base – but it’s not okay for anyone to suggest that they have gone too far in their rhetoric. To suggest that they take responsibility for their rhetoric is media bias and blaming them for a “few bad apples.”
It seems no one has pointed out yet that when the entire purpose of the movement centers around legislation meant to keep certain segments from voting, to steal women’s liberties, and to empower only one race and one class at the expense of all others, we can expect a lot of bad apples.
It’s as if everyone is drunk on the magic Kool-Aid of the Right and no one will say it out loud. It’s not about their signs or the ignorant things they say. It’s all in the legislation.
The record of legislation tells the story of a party looking to excuse violence against women, gays, minorities, etc. and seeking to maintain dimming power over minorities.
What sort of people did anyone think this movement was going to draw, and how long will it take for the good apples to see that they are enabling bad apples? What kind of person justifies such behavior, like the stomping of a woman or now the alleged rape of another? What kind of person thinks it’s okay that O’Keeffe allegedly left this woman stranded and drugged, or that he wanted to imprison a CNN journalist on a boat?
Today on Twitter, I met a few of them. They think it’s okay that a Tea Party leader was arrested for rape and kidnapping because “Chappaquiddick” and “Weiner”.
So now we ask ourselves, what kind of person can only reply to serious charges with childish, decades old equivocations and distractions? James O’Keefe’s reply to Mediaite was similar in nature; he lobbed ugly smears at Naffe (not worthy of repeating, but thoroughly debunked by Mediaite). Nary a word about his own conduct.
These are the sort of people who refuse to take responsibility for themselves and their party, who refuse to condemn such behavior, who justify anything with attacks on others, who never have a moment of soul searching or doubt. These are not well people.
So the fact that a Tea Party leader was arrested for rape is not a surprise. The charges that O’Keefe imprisoned a woman after drugging her are not a surprise. The appearance that Breitbart not only left the female victim in the barn but also sent his goons after her on Twitter to humiliate her for asking for help is not a surprise.
These people come from a subculture of violence, and today it’s called the Tea Party. It used to be the Birchers. Before that it was tied to the KKK. No, that’s not angry rhetoric; it’s historical fact.
But the media is too afraid to call it what it is. For years, they’ve been pretending the Tea Party is a real political party, and not a get-out-the-vote tactic for the far Right wing that now runs the Republican Party. The War on Women rages on as the Republican Party does to women what they did to Muslims, Hispanics, African Americans and gay people: Vilify, marginalize, and criminalize. Meanwhile, Independents grow slightly more disgusted by the day by the rabid Right.
Image: Copyright @AzureGhost
Listen to Sarah on the PoliticusUSA Pod on The Daily newsletter podcast here.
Sarah has been credentialed to cover President Barack Obama, then VP Joe Biden, 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, and exclusively interviewed Speaker Nancy Pelosi multiple times and exclusively covered her first home appearance after the first impeachment of then President Donald Trump.
Sarah is two-time Telly award winning video producer and a member of the Society of Professional Journalists.
Connect with Sarah on Post, Mastodon @PoliticusSarah@Journa.Host, & Twitter.
