Column
Rammell: It’s GOP Leaders’ Fault That I Refuse to Apologize
Rammell claims a call from the CIA; the agency says it never happened.
By Jill Kuraitis, 9-01-09
“I will not apologize for making an innocent comment,” said Rex Rammell, Republican candidate for governor of Idaho.
Eastern Idaho veterinarian Rammell held a press conference in Boise this morning at which he defiantly refused to apologize for his remark about “Obama tags.” I think.
Rammell began by reading a press release out loud in which he denounced the Republican leaders who admonished him. He thinks they are overreacting, a theme which stayed with him to the end of the event. “Instead of tearing at my flesh like the political wolves that you are, over something as insignificant as a response to a jest taken out of context, why aren’t you doing something to make Idaho a better place to live?”
Rammell insisted that because his remark was “taken out of context” that he shouldn’t be condemned.
Local TV reporter: “So you’re not going to apologize?”
Rammell: “No.”
The reporter responded that Rammell apologized to him a few days ago and quotes Rammell’s remark.
Rammell: “Yes and I’ll stand by that.”
Reporter: “So you’re sorry, or you’re not sorry?”
Other reporters tried to get clarification about the apology-or-not confusion, but Rammell didn’t clear it up.
Rammell: “If people think I want to assassinate President Obama, I’ll apologize for that all day long. That is not my intention,” Rammell said. “But I will not apologize for making an innocent comment.”
NewWest: “What would you say to schoolchildren in Idaho who heard that you said this kind of thing?”
Rammell: “Well, um, school children should have their parents to explain to them that sometimes jokes are taken out of context and become bigger than they should. Mountains are made out of molehills and that’s exactly what happened in this case.”
NewWest: “You don’t think a parent should say we don’t talk like that, ever, about any president?”
Rammell: “Oh, it’d be okay, looking in hindsight, to say you know, we really shouldn’t joke about these things, because see what it can do?” (He meant the fuss over his comment.)
NewWest: “Are you sorry? Would you apologize to the children of Idaho?”
Rammell: “I didn’t do anything wrong, Jill. I was being polite to the lady that said it. You’d have to have been there to understand the context of the whole thing. That’s what’s wrong with this. The only people condemning me were the people who weren’t there.”
NewWest: “Is there a context that’s appropriate for saying that kind of thing?”
Rammell: (defiantly) “Yeah, the one I was in. But you wouldn’t know, because you weren’t there.”
Reporter Betsy Russell of the Spokane Spokesman-Review brought up the schoolchildren in Rexburg who chanted “assassinate Obama.”
Rammell: “Apples and oranges – kids don’t joke. I mean, they were mislead – I’m assuming probably by their parents. You take an adult like me that’s running for office, mine was purely purely meant in jest. No harm intended. I think the kids were probably pretty serious.” He said if he responded today he’d tell the children not to do that.
Russell: “Couldn’t incidents like the chanting have led to the remark by the lady?” [at the barbeque who make the remark to which Rammell responded]
Rammell answered by talking about animosity toward President Obama and his policies: “Yes there is underlying animosity and I think that’s what came out in those comments. To openly suggest we want to harm the President of the United States, only the people that weren’t at the barbeque could read that into those comments.”
NewWest: “Do you think that the casual way in which the exchange happened could influence someone else down the road to think it’s okay to speak casually that way about the President?”
Rammell: “I think there’s been such a big deal made out of it I think people are going to be pretty careful. I had no idea it would be blown out of proportion to this extent. It really was an insignificant comment in my opinion…and the people that were there. This country is so sensitive…they just don’t know how to respond to a little humor.”
TV reporter: “We might be sensitive because we’ve had a lot of political assassinations…”
Rammell: “…not recently...when was the last assassination attempt?”
Reporter: “Well, there was Ford, there was Ronald Reagan…”
Rammell: “That’s a long time ago.”
NewWest: “….why won’t you step up to the plate and say I never should have said that?”
Rammell: “I’ll tell you the main reasons why I won’t apologize, it’s because of the over the top comments by the GOP leaders. That infuriates me. They’re the ones….because of their condemnation of a simple comment taken out of context I refuse to apologize. If you want to blame someone for me not apologizing, you blame Otter, Simpson, Crapo, Risch and Batt.”
TV reporter: “So you haven’t apologized. I’m not sure where you’re at on this, you did say you were sorry…”
Rammell: “I am not sorry for saying the comment; I am sorry that everybody took it incorrectly.”
Asked about Idaho getting a “black eye” from his remarks, Rammell was scornful: “Give me a break, I don’t buy into that at all.”
NW: “There are thousands of people who would disagree with you….”
RR: “Yeah, most of them from the hard left. I’ve been getting their emails, they are hard left, people, that are so defensive…you can’t even mention his name without them crying hate.”
Rammell said that the CIA contacted him and wanted to interview the woman from the barbeque, and that an agent talked to him about his remark. Rammell said the agent was ordered to check it out. The Idaho Statesman’s Dan Popkey questioned whether it was really the CIA, which “doesn’t have authority over domestic matters. You sure it was the CIA? Did he call you? Phoned you? Could it have been a hoax?”
RR: “Oh, no, this guy was legit.”
Popkey: “What was his name? What was the CIA agent’s name?”
RR: “You know I probably shouldn’t say, out of respect for him.”
The CIA’s press office says that nobody from their agency has spoken to Rammell.
Rammell told a story about his lawyer getting a phone call threatening Rammell if he didn’t drop his bid for governor: “The morning I announced he said Rex, I promised to keep this confidential, but I received a phone call that said if you run to be the governor of Idaho, these people are going to destroy you. Maybe you oughta reconsider.” UPDATE: Dan Popkey’s report in the Idaho Statesman includes a quote from Rammell’s lawyer, who doesn’t remember it that way.
Rammell said he told his lawyer he wouldn’t reconsider because somebody ought to do something about cronyism and corruption.
He said he “assumed” the call came from the office of one of the leaders who condemned his statement.
Popkey asked why Rammell’s attorney wouldn’t tell him who the call came from.
Again, Rammell told of his assumptions (which won’t be repeated here because Rammell offered no proof.) “I’m telling you, these guys are worried about me!”
_________________________________________________
Even though this report isn’t the entire transcript of the press conference, it’s almost all of it - enough to illustrate the general direction it took.
“Wolves tearing at my flesh?” The CIA called me? Threats from other unnamable telephone callers? GOP leaders want to destroy me because they fear me?
Readers?
[End of article]
You forgot to ask him which planet he spends most of his time on.
Comment By Greg Taylor, 9-01-09"equal opportunity nut case" ...but I quote myself.
Comment By Serephin, 9-01-09"Weasels ripped Rammell's flesh" -- Frank Zappa
Shorter Rex Rammell: "Honey, I love ya, and you know I wouldn't have to punch you in the face if you just wouldn't make me angry. So I'm sorry, so very, very sorry you made me angry."
Remind me again why the Gem State GOoPers haven't already anointed The Guy With The Porn Name as Idaho's Governor? Geeeez, what more does he have to do to satisfy them? Live human sacrifice?
Kids chanting "assassinate Obama" on the school bus don't make that up. They're channeling their parents. They clearly feel supported by their community if they're comfortable calling for the assassination of the POTUS. When a leader of the community validates that thinking by agreeing that, "aw shucks, sure, buy Obama tags", it's not a joke, it's extreme and irresponsible.
Fortunately, the majority of Americans are moving away from the Republican Party leaving 25% of voters at the extremes. Unfortunately, it only takes one nutcase, egged on by his candidate or his pastor to take it upon himself to act. Incitement is a crime.
White supremacy is at the heart of Republicanism.
Comment By Mike, 9-01-09What a complete embarrassment. It seems Idaho is a fertile breeding ground for serious nut jobs.
Comment By the real mike, 9-01-09Rex Rammell is such a total disgrace; he is so bad that I can't even, in good faith, blame his disgusting behavior on Idaho, the GOP, or even the dominant local cult and that's saying a lot given my contempt for those three institutions. Nevertheless, it is incumbent on all three institutions, including every Idahoan, Republican, Democrat, or Independent of every ethnicity and faith, to repudiate him, everything he says, and everything he stands for, totally and immediately.
Comment By O'Really, 9-01-09Please tell me I just read a script from Saturday Night Live.
Hilarious!!!
The thing that must be understood about Rammell's candidacy is that Rex is still fighting Jim Risch, Idaho's new Senator who was elected in 2008. During his short term as interim Governor, after Kempthorne was chosen to be Secretary of the Interior by Bush, Rammell's elk escaped from his game ranch.
Rammell had several earlier run-ins with the Idaho Fish & Game Dept. about his bad record keeping and inattention to his fencing, and Risch ordered all his loose elk shot, from the chance that they may have had disease or red deer genetics, which would weaken the pure native wild elk.
Since Rammell had been very lax in his ear tagging, there was no sure way to telling which elk were his from the wild elk. The fight between Risch and Rammell was on, and Risch won.
Rammell has been after Risch ever since. He ran against Risch in the 2008 Republican primary, and lost, so he ran as an independent and only got 5% of the vote. This year, he first declared as a candidate for the 2nd district Representative seat against Mike Simpson, who is quite popular, and about two weeks later, dropped that one to run against Butch Otter, the current Governor.
Rex was roundly booed at the first Tea Party in Idaho Falls when he announced his run against Simpson, has declared bankruptcy, and is widely disliked by folks in general here in S.E. Idaho. The voters see his vendetta as just that, and also see he lacks any capacity whatsoever to be Governor. Everything he has said and written this year only reinforces his lack of support, but his hubris keeps him going. In terms of popularity, he's running neck and neck with Pro-life Richardson, another wack who runs for every open seat. (and that's Pro-life's legal name.)
Idaho's leadership is a real mess for sure. The state is run by one party, and the Republicans are rotting away at the root, but Rex is loathed by all. Don't believe for a second that he has any realistic chances of winning the primary, but expect to see him run as an independent when he loses. He's an egomaniac, pure and simple, and Idahoans see him for what he is.
I am from Idaho and I voted for Obama not just because I am a democrat but because the first time I saw Obama I told everyone that he would be the next President and guess what? Now for you Rammell and I don't even say Mr. I think you should apoligize to the Idaho people as well as to the President. I think that was a very immature statement and I can not see after saying that, that you would even have a chance in hell to win. I would certainly not vote for you even if I was a republican and yes we Democrats have a sense of humor but this was not the least bit funny. It just shows your age as well as how stupid all republicans are. Grow up and do the manly thing and aplogize. You will feel better and people will like you again. Maybe. I know I will still not like you. You really can not take back words even by apoligizing.
Comment By Lynn, 9-02-09Just for some info - I would not consider Rex Rammell a leader in the community or that well respected. The majority of the people in the community, and probably in all Idaho for that matter, are annoyed and embarrassed by him. Even members of the local "cult" as the real mike called it.
Comment By Chris Volk, 9-02-09Rammell is a wolf in wolf's clothing who doesn't know that hunting season has opened up all around him. Actually, this analogy bemeans the noble wolf. At first I was amused. Then I was incensed. Now I'm beginning to feel the first inklings of pity for the man. If we didn't have such a legacy for harboring dangerous crackpots in this state, I wouldn't be so concerned. Please, Rex, go back to the elk ranch. Just walk out of the spotlight and take some time to reflect on forces more powerful than hate, like respect, dignity and love.
Comment By boomer, 9-02-09Hi, Smitty....
I am not sure if your post was in response to mine or not- I made no mention of Mr. Obama in mine, but no one else but you did, either. If you take me for a Rex supporter, you're sadly mistaken.
I'm a lifelong Idaho Democrat, and I also voted for Mr. Obama- twice. Once in the caucus, where I joined his Idaho campaign, and again in the general election. I'm 65, so I've been voting the Idaho Democratic ticket for quite a while now.
I loathe Rex Rammell, and I've known the guy distantly but personally for well over a decade, long before he decided to run in 2008.
My piece was done only to provide back story to his present campaign, but I would rather be beat on the lips with a hammer than vote for him. I completely agree that he has no chance to win, and like you, I'm completely disgusted that Idaho gets nailed once more with the belief that we are all crazy inbred Nazis here.
I think that the only way to counter the snickering about Idaho's reputation for electing crazies and perverts is to provide the real story. In Rex's case, that story is nothing but greed, revenge, and egomania. Everyone understands that stuff.
After a re-read, aplogies to Smitty. We're both on the same side, but I misunderstood his post.
Serephin may have really nailed Rex... I can't imagine what his personal life is, but I'm very sure his home is not a happy place.
When he declared bankruptcy this spring, he promised, for the third time, that every debtor would be repaid and he would quit politics.
The Post-Register uncovered that he had stiffed the major investors in his failed elk ranch, but spent $180,000, more borrowed money, on his huge motor home used in his campaigns. He's so short of money now that the RV is now a just a mobile billboard that is parked for long periods from town to town across the state.
We'll all see if he quits after the primaries. I'm not holding my breath that he will, and I won't be surprised if he's able to play his Mormon card once more and hang in as an independent until he's whipped for good in the general election.
TV reporter: “We might be sensitive because we’ve had a lot of political assassinations…”
Yeah, you think?
As the toilet bowl turns...... (or the fun side of GOP Politics)
Rexy-boy is and has been delusional - in my opinion for some time. He has been caught lying to county sherrifes, IDFG personnel, Idaho Department of Ag, most of the press - including myself, twice within 20 minutes of a single conversation.... kinda like above. With Rexy it is always somebody else s fault or they are all in a conspiracy against him.
He's a wacko but plays to the hate-filled, conspiracy theory, flat-earth base that the Idaho GOP keeps around just to fuel the flames of talk radio drivel.
Truly I use to feel sorry for him.... he needs serious psychological help, but the Obama crack feeds the rest of the mentally challenged followers which hang on his every word. He should be relegated to dung heap of political wanna-be's Pro-life, david duke, bill sali, sara palin,.... my neighbors pet chihuahua....
This is nothing even approaching a news story, but a hack piece bent on defaming Rammell. I am *SO* tired of the POLITICS OF DESTRUCTION practiced by people who can't participate in a discussion in any civil way.
I heard this infamous comment in context. If I were in his shoes I would not apologize either. Piling on with hypocritical criticism complete with huge crocodile tears serve only to reinforce my opinion that political correctness is no way to run a country or participate in sincere dialogue.
You *say* you want honest politicians, then you trounce anyone who makes an innocent comment which can be taken out of context. No wonder politicians off all stripes quickly turn into mush-mouths and will do anything to escape giving an honest answer.
You get what you deserve.
OGolly, by reading your slime, it sounds like you want us to believe that Rammell is not a famed expert at practicing the "POLITICS OF DESTRUCTION" himself. So, you really think old Repugnant Rex just made "an innocent comment... taken out of context" and is now being trounced "by people who can't participate in a discussion in any civil way" do you? Well, if you can define Rex's comment, which is technically even illegal, as just "an innocent comment" and imply that Rex himself has ever demonstrated any ability to "participate in a discussion in any civil way," then I'm at a loss to even begin to diagnose your problem. I'll just have to revert to some advanced technical terminology and classify you as nuttier than a fruitcake yourself.
Comment By OGolly, 9-04-09"real mike":
Wow. That was an intelligent reply. Thanks, but I don't believe I have any "problem" requiring a diagnosis by a person of your qualifications.
You have addressed me elsewhere in this web-zine using a colorful collection of adjectives to describe my personal character. I have responded to you there, so will not burden this forum with redundancy except this (just to clear the record here):
You seem to assume I am actually a supporter of "old Repugnant Rex" (your description). I don't believe anything I wrote would give confidence to such an illusion. In fact, I am uncommitted this early on and, frankly, hoping for some better alternatives to appear. My post was written in opposition to the tactics of personal destruction instead of civil discourse for or against any proposition or action. Your response pretty well illustrates - and proves - my original point.
O'Golly...
You said you heard the comment in context, and later said it was innocent.
What other context can there be? The woman commented there should be an Obama tag. This is exactly saying she thought Obama should be legally hunted and shot.
And Rex agreed with 'we'd buy some of those.' What else could that reply possibly mean, other than agreeing that the President of the United States should be considered legal game and killed?
Do you have any other context that reasonably counters what came out of their mouths? What kind of people are these, who think that approving of killing our President is a funny joke? As a society, have we descended so low that we would laugh at something this serious?
I'm just asking.... you were the one who brought up The Politics Of Destruction. Apparently, you take this to be literal. And I can see no other original intent in your first post.
Maybe you approve of this, but remember that a bullet doesn't care who it hits. Once it leaves the barrel of a gun, it can't be recalled. Ammunition knows no party lines, and guns don't have any politics. A Democratic President is just as much a frail human as a Republican President is, and neither is bulletproof. Do you honestly want assassination to become an instrument of democratic debate?
Rex obviously does. He could have just as easily said No! That's wrong, and un-American! That he didn't deserves all the scorn law-abiding Americans can shovel on him.
You persist in applying a *context* to *content* (Mr. Rammell's jesting) that is neither factual nor truthful. Any linguist knows that context meaning may depend almost entirely on the content - or situation - within which it is spoken.
A easier understand example would be the simple phrase, "It sure is black in here." If uttered in a cave, the phrase is taken literally, and the meaning is clear: it _is_ "black in here" due to an absence of light. If uttered in a mixed racial and social content, and there is plenty of light available, it is easily understood as a common racial slur - and rightly so. The words didn't change at all - only the context in which they were uttered.
Mr. Rammell, whatever his other qualities may or may not be, was in what he considered a generally friendly, informal environment. The jests made about hunting tags were very familiar with a group of hunters and were never intended to be literal, nor were they received by the immediate audience literally. It was a COMMON euphemistic attempt to magnify expression within a familial setting.
We ALL speak in euphemisms. We do so to make our point more clear, or to attach emotion and meaning to a statement. The statement, "I'm so frustrated I feel like killing (so and so)" - especially when accompanied by easy going laughter - is NOT the same as the statement, "I _am_ going to kill (so-and-so)," accompanied with furrowed brow, clenched teeth and closed fists.
A famous civil rights leader once said, "You can put an old shoe in an oven, but that don't make it a steak." Context is everything. Location, location, location, as my old real estate teacher would have said.
Here's my problem with your argument: Euphemistic speech is understood by early grade-schoolers. But you are now trying to convince me that *all* speech should be taken literal, and should even be illegal! Or at least Mr. Rammell's. (But not your own, I assume)
Why do I have to explain that to this crowd? You expect me to take your argument seriously?
Mr. Rammell and those in attendance may be accused of political naïveté, and you may certainly disagree with him, but he was doing nothing more than using a type of speech YOU and VIRTUALLY EVERYONE ON THE PLANET engage in on a daily basis.
And you and every other writer of this forum _know that._ Methinks it is no more than the pot calling the kettle black. In fact, just about everyone in this forum has used MUCH more hateful and invective speech in describing Mr. Rammell's comments than Rammell himself ever came close to the day he spoke off the cuff to a friendly crowd.
This is the now well known tactic of the "politics of personal destruction." Take a stupid mistake or silly comment made in jest, frame it in a different context and then huff and puff and accuse the target person of being the most terrible person born since Hitler. Throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks.
In logic we call such tactics fallacies of relevance, "red herring" fallacies, "straw man" fallacies and the like. They are desperation attempts to win an argument when nothing else is working.
If you disagree with a proposition, ARGUE THE PROPOSITION, not childish ad-hominum attacks that prove nothing. USE FACTS, not tidbits blown out of proportion and applied to a different context. BE HONEST. If *YOU* regularly commit the same 'sin,' don't condemn another for your own behaviour. (And please, don't try to convince me you've never told someone to "jump in a lake," or "I hope you choke on it." Using YOUR OWN LOGIC, you should also be arrested and jailed for verbal assault.)
In your post you accuse me of approving of assassination as an appropriate debate tactic. Oh, please. Spare me the shame and embarrassment. What is your evidence? This is precisely what I am taking about. You purposely twist meaning to suit your ends because, I assume, you don't have the facts or reason to argue otherwise.
If I am wrong, prove it. "Show me the money" or shut up. Substance, boomer, I need substance. Otherwise I must assume you're all nothing but hot air.
Oh, and please spare me the lectures about guns and bullets. I remember the assassination of President Kennedy, his brother, Rev. King and the attempt on President Reagan. As a combat veteran I have seen close-up and personal the effects of guns, bullets and nerve agents on friend and foe alike. It wasn't pretty, nor is it something I am fond of reliving. Such petty attempts at superiority do not impress me.
Ah... so everyone at that meeting understood that the euphemism for presidential assassination was a contextual joke. That seems to be a mighty big presumption, but that's typical of Rex, a dedicated narcissist.
And at his press conference last Wednesday, Rex was above the politics of personal destruction? Maybe you should watch it...
http://www.kidk.com/news/56671477.html
This is all Rex's own words. I can provide another vid that was taken just before the presser when he went after two silent on-lookers if you'd like.
I think I can still dig up the video of him sobbing when he was booed off the Tea Party stage when he tried to use the occasion to announce his candidacy for 2nd District Congressman. That one lasted about two weeks before he changed his mind and decided to run for Governor instead. The Tea Partiers' disapproval of Rex seems to be pretty good evidence of what the man is about to me.
I need no ad-hominum attacks. Rex speaks for himself. if you think he's a good choice for Governor, feel free to vote for him.
Spare you? Please spare me the code speak. That comment from the woman was deadly serious, and Rex's reply was weakly couched as a joke. It was said in a public forum, and Rex's quick reply betrayed his true thoughts.
OGolly, you're a real spin master.
Comment By Mad, 9-08-09I just watched the Rammell video. What a tool. Typical republican blaming someone else and pointing fingers. Take some responsibility for once. Are we 6 years old again.
Comment By BRR, 9-11-09Rambo Rammell would not take a question from either of the two people from "the public" .... saying he didn't need heckling "today".
Vote for him Idiotics, Idaidiotics.