flap, you're wrong about Rush attacking Chelsea Clinton the same way you're wrong about a lot of other things.
However, let's examine someone who is truly full of hate speech and attacks those whom he disagrees with on a routine basis.
Article....
rollcall.com
Stark's Latest Rant Sparks Watts' Fury
Two Members Nearly Come to Blows on House Floor
By Ethan Wallison
For years Rep. Pete Stark (Calif.) has rattled, rankled and sometimes astonished colleagues with his penchant for invective that is so short on politesse that a capital magazine once dubbed him "the Democrats' answer to Earl Butz," the one-time Agriculture secretary with a knack for off-color humor.
House Republican Conference Chairman J.C. Watts (Okla.) was among those who weren't amused by Stark's latest Butz-like performance.
What Stark apparently considered a clever observation about alleged and observed sexual peccadilloes in the GOP leadership -- and by Watts in particular -- led to a sharp pre-recess confrontation on the House floor that threatened to come to blows, according to witnesses.
"[Watts] was a visibly angry man," one Democratic source close to Stark said. "It took Pete aback."
A Watts aide acknowledged that the two lawmakers "had a discussion about what was said" at a subcommittee hearing, but would not further characterize the encounter.
The confrontation took place at a May 22 hearing before the Ways and Means subcommittee on human resources, which was studying the intersection of welfare policy and marriage.
When it was his turn to speak, Stark suggested there was some irony in the topic. He then referred to a "current Republican Conference chairman whose children were all born out of wedlock," and remarked that "the two previous Republican Speakers both had extramarital affairs."
Stark was apparently referring to ex-Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and one-time Speaker-designate Bob Livingston (R-La.), who was never actually given the job.
"So you have got the leadership from the right group to lead you," Stark told the witnesses, according to an original transcript of the hearing. "I think this is great."
Watts didn't share his Democratic colleague's enthusiasm, to say the least. For one thing, the substance of the remarks was wrong; Watts has five children, but only the first was born out of wedlock.
Then there was the implication that Watts' children were evidence of a problem with abstinence.
"Stark's comments were both shocking and way out of line," one GOP leadership aide said.
The subsequent confrontation unfolded May 24 in the chamber, where several lawmakers were still milling about after a morning vote. While accounts differ slightly, witnesses said Watts approached Stark, who was standing in a corner of the well, and angrily demanded to know why his children had been used as fodder for the lawmaker's remarks in committee.
Watts, who evidently was told that Stark had referred to "four" illegitimate children at the hearing, also noted that the number was incorrect. Not at all contrite, Stark, according to one Democratic witness, replied, "Then how many were there?"
At that point, Watts was led away by other lawmakers. Witnesses said there was no physical contact between the two men, though one source close to Stark said the lawmaker believed that Watts had seemed threatening.
"Pete certainly didn't feel comfortable," the source said. "He definitely felt he was not facing a person who was there to have a calm conversation or anything like that."
Stark's loose tongue has thrust the lawmaker into a series of controversies over more than a decade.
Several years ago he accused Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-Conn.) of learning all she knows about health care through "pillow talk" with her husband, a doctor. He later called Johnson a "whore" for the insurance industry.
In 1991 he singled out "Jewish colleagues" for special blame in their support of the Persian Gulf War and referred derisively to one, then Rep. Stephen Solarz (D-N.Y.), as "Field Marshal Solarz in the pro-Israel forces."
A year earlier he called then Health and Human Services Secretary Louis Sullivan, who is African-American, "as close to being a disgrace to his race as anyone I've ever seen." He also used his sharp tongue to make a cutting remark about Eloise Anderson, a former director of California's welfare agency, saying she would "kill children if she had her way."
The latter remark, made in 1999, prompted the conservative Weekly Standard magazine to observe, "In this era of the Third Way and the New Democrat, Stark is a throwback, an embodiment of that old party symbol, the jackass."
"Pete's one of the more erratic Members of the House," one anonymous California colleague told The Los Angeles Times in 1994. "There's something about him that makes you wonder if it goes deeper than just being hotheaded."
More recently, Stark focused his ire on the Bush administration, calling its spending plan, released during Easter week, "the embodiment [sic] of the Antichrist."
"It turns its back on the poor, it turns its back on education and health care for young children," added Stark, a Unitarian. "The holiest week of the year, to release this budget that flies in the face of all Christ's teachings is infamy."
While he has offended other Members with some regularity, Stark has not been quite as forthcoming with apologies.
When Sullivan, for instance, demanded an apology, saying he doesn't "live on Pete Stark's plantation," the lawmaker said Sullivan was correct, "he lives on John Sununu's," referring to the White House chief of staff at that time. Stark eventually delivered a formal letter of apology.
As for the confrontation touched off by Stark's comments about Watts, a Stark spokeswoman said the lawmaker has put the incident behind him.
"If he overstated the number of children involved, he apologizes," the spokeswoman said.
She added, "It's worth pointing out, however, that Mr. Stark made his remarks at a Republican-organized hearing promoting government support for abstinence, marriage and family values. In that context he thought it was worth noting what is already a matter of public record -- that Republican leaders have not always practiced what they preach." |
