Forget You, You Motherforgetter!

March 1, 2012 9:24 AM

James Inman rants about former city attorney Mark Sidran to Seattle City Council members after getting arrested for saying the "f word". Warning: may be offensive to some, including Swatch watch collectors and John Tesh fans.
posted by schleppo (45 comments total)

So... what's that all about?
posted by BigLankyBastard at 9:49 AM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Wow.

Major props to the council for not interrupting and entering the comments into the proceedings. Also, getting arrested for language is ludicrous.

That said, you catch more flies with honey...
posted by Benny Andajetz at 9:49 AM on March 1, 2012

Ummm... amusing at first, then annoying and redundant. I agree that getting arrested for language is ridiculous but dang. Forget this guy.
posted by kinnakeet at 9:53 AM on March 1, 2012

you catch more flies with honey...

Something tells me Inman is more of a swatter than a catcher.
posted by R. Schlock at 9:58 AM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Why do people want to catch flies?
posted by filthy light thief at 10:01 AM on March 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Got to do something with all this honey.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:05 AM on March 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

Although it runs counter to almost everything I believe in, arresting people for using the F-word really appeals to me, just because maybe people would reach a little further and find a more interesting way to express themselves. That's just my inner language Nazi speaking, however, and I realize that ultimately it would just end in tears and betrayal.
posted by mecran01 at 10:14 AM on March 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Somebody needs to invent a James Inman text generator, stat!
posted by jonp72 at 10:16 AM on March 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

That's not a deputation. This is a deputation!
posted by bicyclefish at 10:21 AM on March 1, 2012

Seattle is a beautiful city run by everything that so-called 'small government' republicans might actually have a point about.

Yay, Mr Inman.
posted by lumpenprole at 10:26 AM on March 1, 2012

You may snark all you want at John Tesh's expense, but he was once a klingon warrior.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 10:34 AM on March 1, 2012

Oh, I love a good rant...wait, did he use the word "black?" Can you do that?

Never mind. Outrage expressed is surely cathartic.

On the other hand, bad manners is not necessarily a criminal act.

Every time I do something like that I feel sooo much better.

I can't make up my mind.

Forget it.
posted by mule98J at 10:41 AM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

"The F-Word"? I've done it better.
posted by oneswellfoop at 10:42 AM on March 1, 2012

I so don't get this place sometimes. Language should not be a crime? So are we against statutes criminalising hate speech now? That's just language too.
posted by three blind mice at 10:48 AM on March 1, 2012

Wait... oneswellfoop is wendell's sockpuppet? THE WENDELL?
posted by symbioid at 10:49 AM on March 1, 2012

three blind mice: "I so don't get this place sometimes. Language should not be a crime? So are we against statutes criminalising hate speech now? That's just language too."

Only if it's Breitbart.
posted by symbioid at 10:50 AM on March 1, 2012

Is somebody who's really clever at using the word "fuck" a fuckwit?
posted by kmz at 10:50 AM on March 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

Really wish he would have done all that in a thoughtful way. If he had attached arguments to that speech, it would have been absolutely brilliant. Instead, he just ranted - there's no clearly articulated point.
posted by justalisteningman at 10:52 AM on March 1, 2012

Instead, he just ranted - there's no clearly articulated point.

He forgot what he really wanted to say.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:55 AM on March 1, 2012

"I so don't get this place sometimes. Language should not be a crime? So are we against statutes criminalising hate speech now? That's just language too."

I see your confusion.

See, there's a lot of people on Metafilter with a lot of different opinions.

Sometimes, one group of people might express a specific sentiment in one FPP that differs from a sentiment that an entirely different set of people express in a different FPP.

We're not a homogeneous group, but if you're imagining we are, then it becomes easy to get confused when different individuals within the group have different opinions, standards and beliefs.

Hope that clears things up.
posted by Joey Michaels at 11:03 AM on March 1, 2012 [7 favorites]

actually flies really like vinigar and you can catch lots of flies with it because they love the taste and smell just put some small holes in the lid of a jar with vinigar and they follow the smell to get in but get stuck and / or drown but yeah vinigar works better than honey actually
posted by idiopath at 11:07 AM on March 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

I'd be a lot more sympathetic myself if he weren't such an abelist deuchebag.
posted by Blasdelb at 11:10 AM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Really wish he would have done all that in a thoughtful way. If he had attached arguments to that speech, it would have been absolutely brilliant. Instead, he just ranted - there's no clearly articulated point.

Aw c'mon, that was pretty enjoyable. He was one COMMUNIST GANSTER COMPUTER GOD away from Francis Dec territory. The rant is an art form in and of itself and should be treated as such; to mangle another analogy, I'd say this guy is no pro, but he's cleaning up in the minor leagues.

Nice find, schleppo.
posted by Chichibio at 11:10 AM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

My sainted granny always used to say: "You can catch more flies with piss than you can with vinegar."
posted by Floydd at 11:13 AM on March 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

Too bad Mark Sidran didn't reply with "I'm calmer than you are."
posted by spikeleemajortomdickandharryconnickjrmints at 11:17 AM on March 1, 2012

mecran01: That's just my inner language Nazi speaking, however, and I realize that ultimately it would just end in tears and betrayal.

.... and cursing, I imagine. :-)
posted by Malor at 11:28 AM on March 1, 2012

"I so don't get this place sometimes. Language should not be a crime? So are we against statutes criminalising hate speech now? That's just language too."

Can you really not tell the difference between dirty words and verbal terrorism?
posted by Sys Rq at 11:29 AM on March 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

So, I have to say, as someone who has sat through more than my fair share of municipal meetings, all he did there was waste four minutes. I would have been simply letting the verbiage wash over me after 30 seconds, even if I was the guy he was ranting about. The City Council just said "thank you and your remarks will be entered in the record" because that's what you say when someone has just wasted four of everyone's minutes with their own self-involved nothing. What it means is "I hope you feel better, because that's all that was just accomplished."

So I guess, I hope he felt better. But I'm not impressed.
posted by rusty at 11:35 AM on March 1, 2012

I guess it's not the most boring waste of four minutes I've seen, though.
posted by rusty at 11:37 AM on March 1, 2012

See what happens when you find a City Council meeting in the Alps?
posted by thelonius at 11:45 AM on March 1, 2012 [3 favorites]

I would like to officially remove myself from any comments I may, or may not, have made with regards to honey and its efficacy in the capture of flies. :)
posted by Benny Andajetz at 11:47 AM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

symbioid, it's not a 'sockpuppet'. I quit being "Wendell" very publicly. Maybe you're the last to know, or did you just forget?

Anyway, Inman is obviously auditioning to fill the opening in the Right-Wing Noise Machine left by Breitbart's death.
posted by oneswellfoop at 11:51 AM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

I'm the last to know. :( I'm *always* the last to know.
posted by symbioid at 12:34 PM on March 1, 2012

just because maybe people would reach a little further and find a more interesting way to express themselves

I dunno, if this video is any indication I'll stick with "fuck". It's a much more efficient use of everyone's time.
posted by Hoopo at 12:41 PM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Sys Rq: “Can you really not tell the difference between dirty words and verbal terrorism?”

It is a pretty obvious line, when you think about it.

On one side, we have "fuck you."

On the other side, we have "half-human, retarded stepchildren."

Guess which side of the line James Inman is on?
posted by koeselitz at 12:49 PM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

So are we against statutes criminalising hate speech now?

YES
posted by Edgewise at 1:03 PM on March 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

So are we against statutes criminalising hate speech now?

I'm a little surprised to hear anyone ask this, to be honest. This is a very polarizing question where I'm not sure you will ever find any sort of consensus. The US in particular has a spectrum of people willing to defend the right of people to utter anything at any time, to people who think political views they disagree with are treasonous. Actually some Americans hold both of these views at once, but that's another discussion. I mean even among people who support criminalizing hate speech, questions about which words would fall under the "hate speech" umbrella would probably generate endless debate. Then you've got places like Germany where for obvious reasons there are laws against hate speech.

So in short, yes there are likely a lot of people, even on Metafilter, who are against criminalizing hate speech.
posted by Hoopo at 1:20 PM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

Having sat through many such meetings, I would say that was not one of the worst four-minute, self-indulgent diatribes I've heard. Actually, it was a bit like slam poetry ... expressive.
posted by Surfurrus at 3:58 PM on March 1, 2012

I'm the last to know. :( I'm *always* the last to know.

Don't feel bad, I missed that meeting too. The more you know.
posted by scalefree at 4:03 PM on March 1, 2012 [2 favorites]

symbioid, it's not a 'sockpuppet'. I quit being "Wendell" very publicly. Maybe you're the last to know, or did you just forget?

...

I'm the last to know. :( I'm *always* the last to know.

No, that would be me. And I'm here a lot.

Yeah, he lost me after the fourth word: "retarded" - I turned it off.
posted by mrgrimm at 4:59 PM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

yes there are likely a lot of people, even on Metafilter, who are against criminalizing hate speech.

Yeah, count me among them.
posted by mediareport at 7:30 PM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]

So why was he pissed at this guy?
posted by cjorgensen at 9:32 PM on March 1, 2012

As this fellow is an American, I shall point out that laws prohibiting hate speech are unconstitutional in the United States, outside of obscenity, defamation, incitement to riot, and fighting words. If we wish to discuss hate speech laws in other countries, we have gone very far afield from the topic of this thread.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:48 AM on March 2, 2012

I shall point out that laws prohibiting hate speech are unconstitutional in the United States, outside of ... fighting words.

Care to explain the difference between "hate speech" and "fighting words"?

I'll get the popcorn. (It's like 1992 all over again!)
posted by mrgrimm at 1:46 PM on March 2, 2012 [1 favorite]

Care to explain the difference between "hate speech" and "fighting words"?

"Fighting words" is considered to be discourse with no political value that can be expected to induce violence on the part of the audience. It's similar to the idea of shouting fire in a crowded theater, in that it is considered to create an immediate physical danger without having any valuable content.

"Hate speech" essentially includes "fighting words" that creates a risk of violence towards people on the basis of membership to an identifiable group, but it also can include things that are simply offensive, insulting or demeaning to such groups.

Personally, I am not a fan of either doctrine, though they are distinct (if overlapping in certain places). If I had to pick one, however, it makes a lot more sense to restrict "fighting words." The reason I say this is that, when considered questions of inducing violence through speech, I see no reason to limit such restrictions to violence against specific kinds of groups. Conversely, I am not persuaded by arguments for restricting certain expressions merely on the basis that it makes certain people feel bad...even if it makes them feel really bad.

Even so, I see the idea of "fighting words" as an open door to censor something that makes a judge want to punch you in the mouth. Call me a free speech extremist if you want; I wouldn't be the slightest bit insulted. It's probably the only kind of extremism that I support.
posted by Edgewise at 9:39 PM on March 4, 2012