Confrontation on the National Mall

[fraurosena]

Interesting discussion on different aspects racism, @Drala and @formergothardite. 

For me, racism, misogyny and homophobia are in essence the exact same thing. Feeling superior to another human being because of x-difference. Be it racial ancestry, sex, gender or who you love. And in feeling superior, feeling entitled to belittle, demean and hurt that other person by whatever means at your disposal.

Are there nuances? Sure. But it's still all the same thing really. 

[formergothardite]

3 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

And in feeling superior, feeling entitled to belittle, demean and hurt that other person by whatever means at your disposal.

That is how I feel. You can see the disdain in their faces when looking at Native Americans. The picture of students in black face taunting a black basketball player again shows how they look down on people who aren't white.  The video of them downplaying rape, again shows people who think demeaning women is okay. 

The racism and hate they show isn't special because of their ancestors immigration status, their behaviors are just the average behavior of racist. Having an openly racist president that they clearly look up to probably just helped them think that they don't need to try and hide their hate. 

[GreyhoundFan]

"The Covington students and the calculated art of making people uncomfortable"

Spoiler

“Rorshach test” already feels like such a weary metaphor for what happened last weekend on the Mall between a Covington Catholic High School student and a Native American elder. But it’s hard to think of another recent incident that’s metastasized so quickly and been interpreted so disparately — an insight into how you see the world and how you understand your place in it.

Meanwhile, the story grows, or maybe it finishes: On Wednesday morning Nick Sandmann, the smiling teenager at the center, sat for an interview on the Today show. “My position is that I was not disrespectful to Mr. Phillips,” he told Savannah Guthrie. “I respect him. I’d like to talk to him. In hindsight I wish I could have walked away, but I can’t say I’m sorry for standing there, listening to him.”

We could quibble about his word choices — is “standing there, listening to him” what really happened? — but that’s the point: We quibble. Conversations unravel. All week long, personal experiences have been unpacked like suitcases and brought forth as evidence.

A man I know who went to an all-boys Catholic school saw only typical adolescence in the videos: a group of kids, already hyped up by an encounter with the profanity-yelling Black Hebrew Israelites, firing off testosterone like careless sparklers. If sparks landed on the Native American protesters, my friend thought, that was incidental.

I floated this with another friend, a woman, who raised an eyebrow. Maybe some of the other students were caught up in a fog of poorly supervised hormones, but Sandmann wasn’t, this friend pointed out. He wasn’t screaming. He was making the conscious decision to stand in Phillips’s path, and to smile.

It's the smile that we've been dissecting all week.

Sandmann meant it to defuse the situation, he told Guthrie. He said he was trying to communicate to Phillips that, “This is the best you’re going to get from me.”

That was an interesting sentence. It implied Sandmann thought a senior citizen with a drum was trying to “get” something more from him. In Sandmann’s mind, Phillips had come to provoke, rather than bring peace.

Is provocation a chant and a drum, or is provocation a flat smile and a decision not to move? (“As far as standing there, I had every right to do so,” Sandmann said). Which one of them is the peaceful act, which one could be misinterpreted?

Here’s where the Rorschach test comes in: as much as we might try to see what happened from Sandmann’s perspective, or from Phillips’s, the perspective we’re ultimately seeing it from is our own.

The most insidious bully in my junior high wasn’t someone who stuffed smaller kids in lockers, but a smaller kid himself: slender, handsome, with a last name that appeared on a building in town. What he would do, mostly, was stare. Stare and smile, and walk very close to his less-rich, less-handsome targets. Not touching, but close enough to show that he could have touched them if he wanted to.

Complaining to adults was useless, because he insisted he wasn’t doing anything, and teachers — reading the letter of the school handbook rather than the spirit — were forced to agree.

And it’s funny, how awful “not doing anything” can feel to the person it’s not being done to. How infuriating or unsettling.

It’s funny, what a slender rich kid’s vehement denial can do to your mind-set: Maybe he wasn’t doing anything. Maybe he was just smiling. Maybe he was just smiling even when you made it clear you were trying to pass, and you were on the verge of tears? Maybe he was trying to defuse the situation, and you’re the one who was crazy.

That scene in front of the Lincoln Memorial was a circus; I’m glad I wasn’t there.

That interview with Nick Sandmann was measured, and filled with the right words: “In hindsight,” “respect.”

But I don’t think my friends and I were crazy in junior high. I think our classmate knew exactly where the line was, and how to walk up to it. I think making people uncomfortable wasn’t the point; the point was making sure the uncomfortable people knew there was nothing they could do about it.

He was also, we’d be sure to point out now, “just a kid.”

How do we talk about kids? How do we talk about the distinctions between teenage cluelessness, and bad behavior, and bad behavior that's really racism?

How do we use that word, “kid,” when we’re talking about white boys and white girls and black boys and black girls and rich kids and poor kids?

The Covington Catholic students were minors who were apparently mature enough to participate in the abortion debate — one of the most complicated issues of our time, and what brought them to Washington — but not mature enough to walk away from hecklers.

“I wish we could have just walked away,” Sandmann said a few times on Wednesday, while saying he wished Phillips “would have” walked away: a tiny linguistic quirk implying he didn’t have the option to leave, but Phillips did.

But I quibble.

How do we parse out blame, when some of the players were minors and some were adults? Does it matter that the Black Hebrew Israelites were shouting awful, homophobic things (anyone in D.C. knows these men are trolls), but there were only five or six of them, and dozens of Covington students in MAGA hats?

Does it matter that they were in MAGA hats? It’s hard for me to imagine anyone wearing them now, in 2019, wouldn’t understand they’re not just a sartorial choice.

But I quibble. I know I quibble.

It’s hard for me to talk about what happened on the Mall without bringing in every experience I've ever had: the knowledge that people who are used to having power know how to wield it in subtle ways. The knowledge that I’ve been on the receiving end of it, and once or twice, the giving end of it. The frustration of thinking, Can’t you see what’s happening? While at the same time wondering if I could trust myself to know what was happening.

The story grows. Conversations unravel.

Maybe you think Sandmann didn’t do anything and is a victim of an Internet mob.

Or maybe you think, as Savannah Guthrie wondered aloud in the interview Wednesday, that standing there was its own act of aggression. The appearance of doing nothing while actually doing something.

It’s hard to imagine anyone’s minds changing by this point, though. We’re all tugging around our personal experiences. They’re very heavy.

 

[Vivi_music]

I have seen a lot of people online claiming that now that we have the whole side of the story (several videos), that the public have judged the students too fast.

I went to see the videos... seriously I do not think it excuses them at all. It is interesting to have context yes and to see that other groups were involved in the altercation. In fact it seems Mr. Phillips entered the confrontation to try to defuse it. Weither that was a wise idea or not, the attitude of the students when Mr. Phillips came to the scene was still full of arrogance. The young man said he wasn't disrespectful, but respect is not just in words. It is in the attitude that you project. The whole thing seemed at least laughable to him.

From what I have read, Mr. Phillips has reached out to the school, to engage in discussions with the students. I think it shows his true character.

I am not even gonna talk about the fact teenagers were present at a March solely intented on controlling grown women's bodies... that is just.... ?

[Drala]

2 hours ago, fraurosena said:

Interesting discussion on different aspects racism, @Drala and @formergothardite. 

For me, racism, misogyny and homophobia are in essence the exact same thing. Feeling superior to another human being because of x-difference. Be it racial ancestry, sex, gender or who you love. And in feeling superior, feeling entitled to belittle, demean and hurt that other person by whatever means at your disposal.

Are there nuances? Sure. But it's still all the same thing really. 

I think there's a difference between belittling, demeaning and mocking people based on differences in race, culture, sexual identity, age or disability status versus supporting, promoting and defending unjust laws and wholesale social disenfranchisment.  It's one thing to call me a vulgar name or disrespect me, it's another thing altogether to deny me equal civil rights or restrict me from equal access to resources such as education, employment, or property ownership.

[Howl]

The Guardian has nailed it: 

How conservative media transformed the Covington Catholic students from pariahs to heroes

[Briefly]

The student in question is now saying that he was smiling, not smirking.  He says he was attempting to defuse the situation and show respect to the Elder.  But that did not look like a smile to me, it looked like a smirk.  He could have spoken up, said something nice or supportive of the Elder.

But he didn't do that. He just stood there.  Smirking.  Or at least that is what I got from it.

[formergothardite]

58 minutes ago, Drala said:

e, it's another thing altogether to deny me equal civil rights or restrict me from equal access to resources such as education, employment, or property ownership.

Judging from the MAGA hats these guys will vote for Trump like people who will be attempt to strip rights away from minorities. I doubt that they will stand up against oppression of minority groups. They support an open racist whose most recent oppression is military members who are transgender. Maybe they will change, but since they apparently live in a bubble of racism and at such a young age they are being so openly racist I don't think that they will be voting for people who will be pushing for minority rights.

39 minutes ago, Briefly said:

But that did not look like a smile to me, it looked like a smirk.  He could have spoken up, said something nice or supportive of the Elder.

Oh he was smirking. You could see the hatred in his face. But this guy will have a nice long career as a GOP member if he wants where he can start making laws to oppress all the people he looks down on. 

[Drala]

@formergothardite  I can only hope that the national scrutiny will prompt the Diocese of Covington to examine cultural norms and open up the community to inter-racial dialog.  Racism is a serious sin, according to church social teaching.  Problem is, in an insular community like Covington Catholic, the church doesn't do much teaching on what racism is and how white privilege reinforces systemic racism in society.  There's not an emphasis on cross-cultural awareness like you might see in other, more ethnically diverse communities. 

[GreyhoundFan]

"Nothing justifies what the Covington students did"

Spoiler

There were a few lessons I only needed to learn once when I lived in New York City from 1990 to 2007. Never have the bagel-cart guy put sugar in your coffee (it’ll be too sweet). Never hail-a-cab-while-black on an Uptown avenue (they usually don’t stop). And never, ever, walk by the Black Israelites, especially with your white boyfriend (you’re just asking for trouble).

That last lesson came to mind as I watched the one hour and 46 minute video posted by one of the members of the Hebrew Israelites here in Washington. It shows the before, during and after of the now-infamous encounter at the Lincoln Memorial between Omaha Nation elder Nathan Phillips and teenager Nick Sandmann of Kentucky’s Covington Catholic High School. Sandmann was in town for the annual March for Life. Phillips was in town for the Indigenous Peoples March. Both took place on Jan. 18.

As has been my experience, the Black Hebrew Israelites hurled racism, homophobia and worse at anyone and everyone who crossed their path. Before the Covington kids came on the scene, an African American man was threatened and called an Uncle Tom several times. When the students came on the scene, they were called everything but a child of God.

The seeming lack of judgment by their chaperones was curious. If the ranting and raving Black Hebrew Israelites are the kind of folks who necessitate my crossing the street or altering my path before I make it into their line of sight, why would the Covington kids and their minders think it’s okay to engage crazy, hateful people raising hell in a national park? They should have ignored the Black Hebrew Israelites the way most everyone else does when they are at their usual perch outside the Gallery Place Metro stop in Chinatown.

At first, the Covington students kept their distance. By the time, Phillips drummed his way into the situation they had moved much closer to the Black Hebrew Israelites. And at various points, the young men gave as good as they got. The Black Hebrew Israelites called the young boys “school shooters,” and one asked, “What, you about to go postal?” A student clad in gray sweats and a blue hooded sweatshirt tartly replied, “No, I’m going to go take a s---.”

When the Black Hebrew Israelites declare, “I don’t see one black person in the crowd,” the boys all turn to the one with them. What made the moment even more troubling was when the Black Hebrew Israelites said “Y’all got one n----r in the crowd.” One of the boys turned around and said, “No, we’ve got two.” Later, the Israelite yelled, “That’s the only one y’all could bring to the front?” A kid in what look like black track pants and a blue sweatshirt responded, “We got one at home but he ain’t here.”

Having been put in that position of being singled out as the “only one” in a crowd, I can only imagine how that kid who emerged felt, especially after the Black Hebrew Israelites incessantly referred to him as “n----r” in front of his classmates. But all this took place after Phillips made his way to the crowd of boys, where he would eventually come face to face with Sandmann. Even the Black Hebrew Israelites recognized Phillips was moving in to try to keep the peace. “Here comes dad,” the main voice on the recording says as Phillips and others with him move in between the Black Hebrew Israelites and the Covington Catholic high schoolers.

A video made by the Indigenous Peoples March shows the pivotal moment, and you catch your first glimpse of Sandmann at about nine seconds into the 224 seconds of footage. At 46 seconds, Phillips moves toward an unmoving and smiling Sandmann. At about 2:23, a male voice can be heard asking, “What’s going on?” To which a woman can be heard responding, “You guys are acting like a mob. That’s what’s going on.” Adding with sarcasm, as the camera pans to her, “It’s awesome. You guys are what, 16? How old are you?”

Many on the right are using the equal opportunity bigotry of the Black Hebrew Israelites as a way to excuse the disrespectful and obnoxious behavior of the Covington boys. Others, such as Kyle Smith of the National Review, wag their fingers at the teens. But Smith added something else in reaction to the backlash received by Sandmann and his classmates that irked me to no end. “Until about ten minutes ago, it was broadly agreed in our culture that kids are allowed to do some dumb things because they’re kids,” Smith wrote. “Should these kids’ lives be ruined because some of them responded to obnoxious provocation by being a bit rude themselves?”

Let’s be clear: This assessment only applies to white kids.

As Stacey Patton wrote so eloquently in a 2014 op-ed in The Post, “In America, black children don’t get to be children.” If Smith were right, Jordan Davis, 17, wouldn’t have been killed in 2012 for playing loud music in Florida. Tamir Rice, 12, wouldn’t have been killed in 2014 for playing with a toy gun in a Cleveland park. A bikini-clad Dejerria Becton, 15, wouldn’t have been manhandled by a Texas police officer at a pool party in 2015. And those are only the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

“To be honest, I was startled and confused as to why he had approached me. We had already been yelled at by another group of protesters, and when the second group approached I was worried that a situation was getting out of control where adults were attempting to provoke teenagers,” Sandmann wrote in a statement that defies the video evidence. “I never felt like I was blocking the Native American protester. He did not make any attempt to go around me. It was clear to me that he had singled me out for a confrontation, although I am not sure why.”

“Respect your elders” was a constant refrain from my mother and other relatives when I was growing up. And it was reinforced during my own years in Catholic schools. It didn’t matter whether you knew them or not, whether you were related to them or not. A child and an adult are never on an equal playing field. And yet, for me and many others, Sandmann’s actions and those of his classmates were those of disrespectful children toward an adult. No amount of rude, homophobic, racist, anti-Catholic invective from loons like the Black Hebrew Israelites justifies what they did.

 

[fraurosena]

9 hours ago, Drala said:

I think there's a difference between belittling, demeaning and mocking people based on differences in race, culture, sexual identity, age or disability status versus supporting, promoting and defending unjust laws and wholesale social disenfranchisment.  It's one thing to call me a vulgar name or disrespect me, it's another thing altogether to deny me equal civil rights or restrict me from equal access to resources such as education, employment, or property ownership.

It's true there's a difference in what a person does when treating someone they deem 'less than'. Some things they do are worse than others. But no matter what they do, the feelings that are the source of those actions are the same. That was the point I was trying to make. 

If anything is to be done about it all, then the root cause of it should be tackled. Otherwise it's only combatting symptoms.

I agree with you that the insularity of (religious) communities contribute to 'social blindness', and in my opinion it also contributes to those feelings of superiority. Religion does have that effect in general. I know the true path to (insert deity of choice) and therefore am better than you, is not a sentiment that is conductive to an inclusive world view. And insulating yourself from the rest of society only exacerbates those tendencies.

[Palimpsest]

13 hours ago, Drala said:

I think there's a difference between belittling, demeaning and mocking people based on differences in race, culture, sexual identity, age or disability status versus supporting, promoting and defending unjust laws and wholesale social disenfranchisment.  It's one thing to call me a vulgar name or disrespect me, it's another thing altogether to deny me equal civil rights or restrict me from equal access to resources such as education, employment, or property ownership.

They are both aspects of racism and discrimination.  The difference is that the first is individual and overt and the second is institutional or systemic racism.  Institutional racism is more subtle, insidious, and in many ways harder to combat.  Where is Stokely Carmichael when I need him.

12 hours ago, formergothardite said:

Oh he was smirking. You could see the hatred in his face. But this guy will have a nice long career as a GOP member if he wants where he can start making laws to oppress all the people he looks down on. 

That was definitely a smirk and the stare was aggressive.  And I agree - this nasty kid could grow up and be put in a position to reinforce, if not exacerbate, institutional racism.

13 hours ago, Howl said:

The Guardian has nailed it: 

How conservative media transformed the Covington Catholic students from pariahs to heroes

Excellent article.  Thank you.

[apple1]

For the record - Covington is across the river from Cincinnati and is firmly within the greater Cincinnati metropolitan area. I said all that to say - Covington is not some isolated monastery-like community in the backwoods where news of the world and world views might not penetrate.

"We didn't know" and "not our world" are not excuses.

I have lived the largest part of my life in the greater Cincinnati area. Yeah, a private Catholic boys' school may be its own isolation. But overall there is no excuse for excusing them for not realizing that there is a larger world.

(And yeah, from time to time, some CovCath "controversy" pops up in local and regional news, when something egregious happens there. After a bit, everything goes quiet and it seems nothing has changed.)

[mamallama]

6 hours ago, fraurosena said:

I agree with you that the insularity of (religious) communities contribute to 'social blindness', and in my opinion it also contributes to those feelings of superiority. Religion does have that effect in general. I know the true path to (insert deity of choice) and therefore am better than you, is not a sentiment that is conductive to an inclusive world view. And insulating yourself from the rest of society only exacerbates those tendencies.

I was just thinking about this regarding an arguement I was having with a Republican friend and former Fox news parrot.  His position was that being gay or trans was a mental illness.  My position was being overly concerned about other people's sex lives and genitals was a mental illness.  But I started to reflect on how the way Christianity is practiced today.  It seems like so much of it is just reassuring it's followers that they are superior in everyway to anyone else.  

[Drala]

Obstinate ignorance is an explanation for the atrocious behavior of the Covington teens, not an excuse.  Explanations are not excuses.  Trumpist conservatism is the "larger world" that impacts kids in the Diocese of Covington.  I block one of my Northern Kentucky relatives--also a Covington Catholic alum--on my FB feed because I can't stomach his Trumpist "pro life" propaganda. They pretty much live in a lilly white enclave, unlike urban Cincinnati, which is more diverse but also has issues with racial segregation due to a history of red lining residential property.  My experience of Covington's catholic community is that they have a parochial world view and are not interested in knowing or understanding a whole lot about the broader world.  If there's a positive to come out of the confrontation on the mall, it's that the smug, self-satisfied Covington catholic community has been dramatically confronted with the challenge of living in a diverse country.  I expect many of them will retreat to their enclave and double down on the MAGA hoo-rah.  These are hard-headed (stubborn) people not inclined to much self reflection or soul searching.  For some, however, the controversy may open a crack in the wall.  As someone with family members in that community, I think it's useful to understand the nuances of their racism. Labeling them as racist may be accurate, but it's also a nonstarter if the aim is to encourage or support a cross-cultural dialog.  In their simplistic view of race relations, White supremacists are racists, and because catholicism does not support white supremacist ideology, a good catholic can't be a racist.  They are, by definition, good catholics--which is why Nick Sandmann made a point of saying he attended mass regularly.    

[formergothardite]

I understand that they don't view themselves as racist. I live surrounded by people who don't view themselves as racist. To accept that they are privileged and are behaving in a racist way is very difficult especially since most of these people, and I would include the Convington community in this, do actually hold racist beliefs.

IMO, having people react in horror and outrage to their racist ways is probably a really good way to help stop them from continuing to delude themselves into thinking that what they do is harmless and not racist. 

 

[NotQuiteMotY]

A further thought: a whole lot of discussion centers on that smirk Sandmann has in the initial video. The responses seem to be split between "he's just trying to smile with a drum in his face" and "cocky, smug, knows he'll get away with murder". I wonder how much of it comes from having been either the bully or the bullied in the past? Because I'm not the only one who's seen a smirk before on someone who knows that he can bug you all he wants- up to a point- and if you react, you'll be the one to get in trouble or seen as crazy/overreacting. Dealing with black men and a Native American group, who do you think would the police land more harshly on if it devolved? After all, they're "just" some good Catholic boys...

[mamallama]

Exactly! and that's just what the tRumpers did.  The second they had any evidence of wrong doing it became the fault of the "black Muslims".

[Palimpsest]

@Drala, I really don't understand the argument you are trying to make here.  

Quote

 As someone with family members in that community, I think it's useful to understand the nuances of their racism. Labeling them as racist may be accurate, but it's also a nonstarter if the aim is to encourage or support a cross-cultural dialog.  In their simplistic view of race relations, White supremacists are racists, and because catholicism does not support white supremacist ideology, a good catholic can't be a racist.  They are, by definition, good catholics--which is why Nick Sandmann made a point of saying he attended mass regularly.    

There are not many "nuances" to racism.  And most decent people don't like being called racist.  If these people are still sitting on their lily-white behinds in their protected little enclave thinking that racism=white supremacist ideology - then they need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

Racism is racism and oppression is oppression.  If the Diocese, school, and community don't accept that and do something about it, personally or as a community, then they are very much part of the problem.

We don't need to put it into  dainty sounding words to "encourage" them to think harder about it and have a "diolog."  Call it what it is.  Overt and systematic RACISM:  a failure of spirituality, of education, and of social justice.  And the RCC likes to boast about its commitment to social justice..  

As for this delusion that "good Catholics" can't be racist  - that is pure bunkum.  If the Diocese (and the school) do not make efforts both to condemn and to educate the community - then they are absolutely at fault.  And a huge part of the problem.

It seems that the Covington Diocese has issued some condemnations of the students' behavior.  Perhaps reluctantly and with the gun of outrage to the Bishop's head, but still. 

If the Covington Diocese doesn't come down really hard on this then perhaps it is time for the Archdiocese of Louisville to step in.

[mamallama]

What the notion of two different kinds of racism does is it allows both types to point to the other and say, "I'm not a racist.  A racist does what those guys do and I don't do that."

[Drala]

Once upon a time in an alternate universe, I was a youth catechist in a catholic high school.  Not in Covington, but in a community similar in its ethnic profile and not too distant from Covington.  One time we did an experiential learning exercise for youth group where we took the kids to a local prison.  Some of the prisoners shared their stories, starting with their teenage years.  Something we pointed out was how many of the prisoners were people of color.  We asked our students to think about stuff they were doing as teenagers and how that was similar to or different than the stories the prisoners told.  When the lights went on, a few of the kids realized that they were doing things that might have lead to the prison pipeline, except that the police in their community cut them a lot of slack and weren't particularly inclined to go after them because of who they were.  Let kids be kids works for white kids, but not so much for kids of color.  I don't think the learning experience would have worked very well if we had started out by labeling the kids racists who needed to shown the error of their ways.

There are people in the catholic church who take the social justice teachings seriously.  Many of them, like me, get fed up and leave.  I'll be interested in seeing what sort of "correction" the Diocese of Covington issues in response to this situation.  They've got to do something to save face, because the confrontation on the mall is a major PR fuck-up for a church that preaches social justice.

Many of my students were cocky, belligerent boys.  I experienced something akin to flashbacks watching the Covington Catholic boys on those videos.  Their behavior was so familiar. What ornery, bull-headed little shits.  That's what I see in Nick Sandmann's smirk--insecure, obstinate bravado.  I don't really see hate in that smirk, just a pig-headed, privileged, insecure bully.  I find it telling that Sandmann's self defense is, "I had every right to stand there."  What a stubborn little shit.  He also had an opportunity to be gracious and step aside.   In the whole of Sandmann's religious education, I can't believe that no one ever talked about the strength it takes to turn the other cheek if you're feeling offended by someone.  The light obviously never went on with that lesson..

 

  

  

[Alisamer]

7 minutes ago, Drala said:

That's what I see in Nick Sandmann's smirk--insecure, obstinate bravado.  I don't really see hate in that smirk, just a pig-headed, privileged, insecure bully.  I find it telling that Sandmann self defense is, "I had every right to stand there."  What a stubborn little shit.  He also had an opportunity to be gracious and step aside.   In the whole of Sandmann's religious education, I can't believe that no one ever talked about the strength it takes to turn the other cheek if you're feeling offended by someone.  The light obviously never went on with that lesson..

I think if it had been a kid just standing there, it might have gotten less traction. But that smirk... the kid looked smug and self-important and proud of himself, and has the most punchable looking face I've seen since Martin Shkreli. Almost identical to the smirk Trump gives when he thinks he's one upped someone. 

Standing in someone's way is rude, regardless. And when the other person is a native american elder, and the person in the way is a rich white male teenager with a big smirk that says "I know I'm technically not doing anything wrong" I can see why people got riled up about the rudeness and lack of respect it showed. And add a MAGA hat and the fact he was there for an anti-abortion protest? I hope his parents have sense enough to read him the riot act. It was just layers upon layers of rudeness, lack of respect, racism, sexism, classism, etc. all piled up into one big smug smirking pile of steaming manure. 

He looks like the sort of kid who expects the world to be handed to him on a platter, and expects the rest of the people (peons) of the world to accommodate him, without him every having to make accommodations for anyone else. And since we are dealing with exactly that sort of person in the white house causing all sorts of chaos, I'm not surprised people who rail against Trump also railed against this mini-Trump in training.

[Dandruff]

It'll be interesting to see what happens if Covington shows up for the March for Life next year.  Will some of the same teens be there?  Same chaperones?

 

[fraurosena]

3 minutes ago, Dandruff said:

It'll be interesting to see what happens if Covington shows up for the March for Life next year.  Will some of the same teens be there?  Same chaperones?

 

Still wearing their red MAGA hats?

[Briefly]

6 hours ago, mamallama said:

What the notion of two different kinds of racism does is it allows both types to point to the other and say, "I'm not a racist.  A racist does what those guys do and I don't do that."

I used to know someone (he's dead now) that was extremely racist.  His comment was always that he was not a racist, he was a realist.  Then he would explain that there was a difference.

Nope, no difference.  Racism is racism.  He was very wrong. But that may be the same mindset.