VA-SEN: Mike Stark Details Allen Tackle Episode; Faults Media's Soft Coverage Of Race
So I just had a longer interview with Mike Stark, the man who was thrown to the ground today by staffers for Senator George Allen for asking their boss a couple of questions. He said he was acting out of frustration that the media is refusing to press Allen for answers about his two unexplained appearances in court records in the seventies and his refusal to unseal his divorce records. And while the Allen campaign today attacked Stark for "screaming" and "pushing" an Allen staffer, Stark claimed that the first physical contact was initiated by Allen staffers. More from Stark after the jump.
Today the Allen campaign sent out a press release slamming Stark for "screaming" at Allen, and charging that "Stark has a history of violent outbursts." The Allen release also noted that Stark's blog, "Calling all Wingnuts," is subtitled "Kickin' ass on the lyin' side: A never-ending battle against stupid, ugly, deceitful and corrupt right-wing water carriers." The Allen release charged that Stark "pushed" an Allen staffer.
But Stark claimed that the altercation was initiated entirely by the Allen staffers. He says the first physical behavior came after he approached Allen, and, standing a few feet away, asked Allen a question about the court records. At this point, he claims, Allen's staffers started pushing and shoving him.
Stark says that at this point, all he did was "stand my ground," without retaliating. "I didn't obey their physical coersion" is how he describes what he did. "I never raised my hands...They were actually physically pushing me away when I shouted to him, `is it true that you spat on your wife'? That's when they said, `now you're getting personal' and tackled me."
Stark described what he did as a legit effort to engage his elected representative. "I got involved in the civic process," Stark said. "This Senator, true to form, had his people bully me. And this time it got physical."
So did Stark heckle Allen? That's what the Washington Post reported in its news coverage of the scuffle. The paper called Stark a "heckler."
"Not once have I heckled him," Stark said. "Hecklers interrupt speeches. I waited till he was done. I wait respectfully until the end of his speeches."
Stark, who says he moved to Virginia to go to University of Virginia law school and intends to live there for three years, has confronted Allen in the past, particularly over his racially-charged remarks. He says he started confronting Allen because he felt the press wasn't pressing Allen hard enough on various questions, most recently on the court records and on rumors about what's in his divorce file.
Stark compared this media reticence with the constant media chatter about Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky before all the facts were known. "Everybody was talking about that on all the news when that was a rumor," he says. "Why aren't they talking about these rumors?"
So that's where we are now.
Good for him for standing his ground. I believe that he's got every right to ask these questions exactly as he did.
I've said here before that the calls to have Allen unseal his divorce papers is not the right thing to do--that is a private matter. But asking questions shouldn't get you tackled.
Isn't this exactly what terrorists do?: Physically intimidate others to try to silence them?
October 31, 2006 8:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
It should be noted that the article now on the Post website, which will appear in the print edition tomorrow, refers to Stark as a "Democratic activist" rather than a "heckler".
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/31/AR2006103100948.html
October 31, 2006 8:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
The AP also called him a heckler.
Here's the email I sent them (info@ap.org):
The headline on your article on George Allen's campaign stop claims, "Heckler Subdued at George Allen Event." That makes it sound like this person was trying to attack Allen and had to be subdued. It's biased and should be changed immediately.
"Allen Staffers Tackle Questioner" might be a more accurate portrayal of the event. It's on video, for goodness sake. You can't just slam someone into a wall like that for asking you a question that you don't like, and the Allen staffers can't just take the law into their own hands. They should let the police deal with it if they need assistance, not grab people and attack them.
Also, the man was a former marine. Why didn't you mention that fact along with the other biographical facts that you included in your story? I think it's of equal relevance to the fact that he is supposedly a "liberal blogger" and a first-year law student at UVA.
October 31, 2006 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
The headline still says that they "subdued" him, which is obviously false and misleading. It implies that he needed to be subdued in the first place. What they did was to tackle him. Assault or attack would also be accurate descriptions.
Subdued is taking sides. But it's typical of the WaPo.
October 31, 2006 8:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
It also says heckling further down in the text. This initial description is accurate. I hate to think what they would have said if the incident wasn't on video!
"A Democratic activist who verbally confronted U.S. Sen. George Allen at a campaign rally in Charlottesville yesterday was shoved, put into a headlock and thrown against a window by three men wearing Allen stickers, according to a widely disseminated video of the incident."
Lots of goon squads out there these days. Did you see the video of Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) goons?
October 31, 2006 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
the right-wing spin on this will be that Stark was being deliberately confrontational in order to manufacture a controversy just before the election. Few will bother to watch the video for themselves and make up their own minds.
October 31, 2006 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I guess we'll have to wait and see if the maintrickle press reports that Stark's intent was to raise questions about Allen's past that it won't. Don't hold your breath.
October 31, 2006 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
oh and the "Roger and Me" reference in Mike's latest post prior to the Allen assault has not gone unnoticed - he's now being called "inspired by Michael Moore".
October 31, 2006 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now that Allen's first wife has inserted herself into the campaign (she released a statement today), she should simply be asked whether it's true or not.
She could have solved this mystery a long time ago if it weren't true.
October 31, 2006 9:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't matter -- you still can't assault him!
He's a former marine, and he definitely showed great restraint!
October 31, 2006 9:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand - but it's a spin game now.
Can Macacawitz be tarred with his staff's behavior as violent thugs beating up a constituent who wanted to ask a question??
Or can Mike be painted as a potentially violent, radical Michael Moore blog activist who was looking to provoke a situation, thus getting what he deserved?
That's the game being played now.
October 31, 2006 9:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
And the reaction should be that Allen and his Republican cronies think it's perfectly reasonable to confront (free) speech with violence, even when that speech does not contain any of the historical "fighting words." The only constituents of Allen's who are safe from physical harm are those who don't ask difficult questions.
October 31, 2006 9:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Releasing a statement isn't the same as agreeing to open up private and sealed divorce papers. One doesn't abdicate all privacy simply by being political or involved in a race.
Your last line has a decidedly Republican feel to it--if you're not guilty you have nothing to fear...
October 31, 2006 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not defending Allen in anyway, and I hope he suffers a humiliating defeat in the election.
But I would not necessarily put too much stock in sealed divorce records from the 70s. He may have hit his wife or spit on her, but he may not have as well. Sadly, divorces are ugly things and often times the police and courts are manipulated by one or both sides. And if Allen was in a no no-fault divorce state at the time, he and his wife may have even collaborated to accuse him of domestic violence, as that was a common method of getting divorces in a fault-required state.
Even now, calling the police on a spouse is still a very common tactic and a way to get a court order for a temporary restraining order that can be used to gain leverage over the other side. It is relatively common occurrence in a custody case that means less than it seems.
I would probably find some way to either respect his privacy and/or ask his ex-wife about it.
If you don't like that, then you need to act to reform divorce and custody issues.
That said, I hope Allen loses, and I hope his thugs are put in jail.
October 31, 2006 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I worked in Allen's opponent's campaign when he ran for governor of Virginia in the early '90s. This thug-lie behavior of his goon entourage was typical. His goons -- in those days they were young kids we called the Hitler Youth because of their attitudes and actions -- would routinely beat up and bloody opponents who demonstrated or made less than worshipful comments to Allen. He seemed to encourage their behavior, and it looks as if nothing has changed. He was a boor and a bully then who coasted to office on his fleshy, redneck looks and his father's reputation as the "sainted" legendary football coach of the Redskins. It looks as if nothing has changed, except he's grown more arrogant with an even greater sense of entitlement.
October 31, 2006 11:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
True, the system is flawed, but hopefully, we can agree that domestic violence is a serious issue, not merely a ploy used in divorce or to get a protection order. Folks who need protection orders often find knuckleheaded, and unsympathetic judges ... just ask the MD woman whose husband set her on fire last year weeks after a judge rescinded her protection order.
The problem clearly, is that we are left to speculate about what's in the sealed records. The combination of Allen's unwillingness to divulge the records, plus the overreaction of his staffers suggests that something is plenty rotten in Denmark.
Also, WJLA, the DC ABC affiliate is running the on their site the AP story that uses the slightly more neutral words "blogger" and "grabbed." They also just used those words in the "teaser" that previews the piece they are about to use on their piece at 11 p.m.
October 31, 2006 11:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Neither of the two George's (George Allen and George Bush) appear to like having people with opposing viewpoints at their political events. Allen responds to the tackling of a constituent with the comment "things happen". A judge has recently sided with three people who complained about being removed from a GW event dealing with Social Security reform.
Both Allen and Bush have demonstrated that they only want to hear from, and talk to, people who agree with their positions. If you disagree, doesn't that mean that you want the terrorists to win?
Why did Joe Lieberman just pop into my consciousness?
November 1, 2006 8:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is this guy really a "blogger"? I know I heard the always accurate Megan McGrath refer to him this morning as one on Ch 4. She used the term in a ugly manner, as if it wasn't so bad to treat a blogger this way since they are so radical and out there on the fringe.
November 1, 2006 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, he is. Calling All Wingnuts is Mike Stark's blog, and he also frequently cross-posts to Daily Kos (his ID is his name.)
November 1, 2006 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink