I hate it when liberals slur conservatives as less than human by calling them Neanderthals or, in this case, "simian," which American Prospect editor Mike Tomasky used to describe a Republican Senate candidate:
Note that on the flag-burning amendment, Robert Byrd voted against.
Even though he’s from red West Virginia. Even though Jay Rockefeller voted yea. Even though he’s involved in a potentially tough reelection campaign against a simian blowhard from my hometown named John Raese who will demagogue this to death.
Here's Merriam-Webster Online's definition of simian: "of, relating to, or resembling monkeys or apes."
Do you think Tomasky would like it if someone used that word to refer to African Americans? So why is it ok to describe conservatives as "resembling monkeys or apes"?
Because using it against African-Americans has a long and unseemly history related to a host of other arguments made about black lack, and that's not true as it relates to people who aren't African-American. Similarly, people are probably more careful describing Jewish people as "money-grubbing" than using the same term for non-Jews; that's a good thing.
Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | June 28, 2006 at 01:10 PM
Absolutely, but saying it's worse for certain groups doesn't mean it's acceptable to say it about anyone.
Posted by: Brendan Nyhan | June 28, 2006 at 04:21 PM
OTOH, we are primates and we do resemble monkeys and apes.
Posted by: Lettuce | June 28, 2006 at 05:38 PM
While we're on it, Digby at Hullabaloo has written something pretty nasty, too...
"...Rush Limbaugh likes to go to one of the underage sex capitals of the world with a bottle of Viagra in one hand and God knows what in the other..."
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_06_01_digbysblog_archive.html#115144895280481962
Just sayin'
Posted by: Jon Henke | June 28, 2006 at 06:05 PM