Colmes noted inconsistencies in accounts of Steele's alleged Oreo cookie incident
Fox News' Alan Colmes noted the inconsistencies in media accounts of an alleged incident in which political opponents of Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele -- an African-American Republican -- purportedly threw Oreo cookies at him. Media Matters for America has previously documented the many conflicting -- and often contradictory -- accounts of the alleged Oreo incident offered by the media and by Steele himself.
On the April 25 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, co-host Alan Colmes noted the inconsistencies in media accounts of an alleged incident during which political opponents of Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele -- an African-American Republican -- purportedly threw Oreo cookies at him. Media Matters for America has previously documented (here, here, and here) the many conflicting -- and often contradictory -- accounts of the alleged Oreo incident offered by the media and by Steele himself.
The Oreo incident is alleged to have occurred at the September 26, 2002, Maryland gubernatorial debate between Democrat Kathleen Kennedy Townsend and Republican Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. As Media Matters noted, members of the media have characterized the purported incident as a racial slur of Steele, who is now running for U.S. Senate -- Oreo cookies being "black on the outside" but "white on the inside." But initial accounts of the debate by the media and Steele himself made no mention of Oreo cookies. The Oreo allegations originated well after the debate -- made by members of Ehrlich's staff -- and are disputed by eyewitnesses present at the event.
In interviewing Steele, Colmes referred to "a story about you being 'pelted' ... with Oreo cookies," but noted that "then the Associated Press said that as you left this particular debate, where this allegedly happened, there were Oreos rolled up on the floor and that pelting didn't exactly take place." He then invited Steele to offer his description of what took place at the debate.
As Media Matters previously noted, the allegation that Steele was "pelt[ed]" with Oreos originated in a November 2, 2005, Washington Times article by reporter S.A. Miller, who later backed away from his story. Members of the Ehrlich administration had not previously alleged that Steele was hit by Oreo cookies. Colmes apparently also referred to a November 14, 2005, AP article in which Steele was quoted saying that Oreo cookies "fell on the floor" and "rolled up next to my shoe" as he left the debate.
In his interview with Colmes, Steele offered a description of the alleged Oreo incident similar to the account he gave to the AP. But as Media Matters previously noted, this is only one of the several versions of the story Steele has offered -- one of which included the allegation that Oreo cookies "hit my shoes," while another included the statement that "I've never claimed that I was hit."
From the November 14, 2005, AP article:
Steele told The Associated Press Monday that Oreo cookies were tossed in his general direction as he left the debate at Morgan State University.
"They fell on the floor; two rolled up next to my shoe," Steele said. "I remember turning to someone and saying, 'Anyone got a glass of milk?"'
Ehrlich said he did not personally see cookies thrown at Steele because he was on stage. He also said he doesn't know who might have thrown them. But spokesmen Greg Massoni and Paul Schurick, who were with the governor in College Park, reiterated Monday that the cookie-throwing had occurred.
From the April 25 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
COLMES: Let me ask you this. You were -- there was a story about you being "pelted" was the word used, with Oreo cookies, which is a terrible thing. It shouldn't happen.
STEELE: Yeah.
COLMES: And then the Associated Press said that as you left this particular debate where this allegedly happened, there were Oreos rolled up on the floor and that pelting didn't exactly take place. How would you describe what actually happened?
STEELE: Well, what actually -- and, you know, let's just be clear about what happened since I was there. When I finished -- when we finished the debate, this was for the debate for Governor Ehrlich and myself for this office in 2002.
When the debate was over, I was leaving. As I was leaving the auditorium, I noticed at my feet Oreo cookies, and they were there. There were two or three there. I turned to a friend and said, "Got milk?" You know, I was like, "Hey, what's up with this?"
I got the joke. You know, here is a guy, he's black on the outside, white on the inside, ha ha. It happened.
But what it speaks to is this -- a certain sadness by some who don't understand that that's what people hate about politics. They hate that kind of political behavior that seeks personal destruction as opposed to let's battle it out on the ideas of the day, to come to some consensus on how we move together and move forward.
And, you know, it's just part of what you have to go through as a black Republican, where people are afraid of your message and how you deliver and the response you're getting from people.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
And, you know, it's just part of what you have to go through as a black Republican, where people are afraid of your message and how you deliver and the response you're getting from people. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Why would anyone be afraid of his message? Not agreeing with it doesn't mean it scares me. All the man talks about is money. I think he's attarcted to the Republican party for the same reasons porn star Mary Carey said she is. It's the money party.
the fact that you assume he was attracted to the republican party for money is pure prejudicial conjecture on your part. you have no validity in saying that, do you? maybe he was attracted to a party which, before bush, used to be about less govt., low taxes, reduced spending, etc. that was the reason i was a republican up until now. to say it was for money is an unwarranted slap at the man.
"maybe he was attracted to a party which, before bush, used to be about less govt..." More Money".. low taxes..."More Money "...reduced spending ..."More Money
Of course it's about money. There's only two traditional reasons to be a Republican. One is piety; the desire to snoop in the private sex lives of others. The other is greed, whether in the form of reduced taxes for individuals or tax giveaways for corporations.
Now, maybe you can argue that he's a Republican for the former reason. He really is interested in the sex lives of other people. That may be true. Either way, he's disgusting.
that was the reason i was a republican up until now. to say it was for money is an unwarranted slap at the man.
Steele is my LT governor so he is covered extensively here. Every time I have ever heard this man speak it’s always been about money and building legacy wealth. You know other than the fact that Steele speaks Standard English his message is very similar to that of say a gansta rapper. Now legacy wealth is great in fact I'm all for that; but I prefer leaving my descendants with a wealth of character that includes compassion and honesty. That's the legacy I was given and I've tried to impart that lesson to my daughter and I hope she carries it on to her future children. Now if she builds monetary wealth along the way while maintaining her strength of character without becoming consumed with the size of her bank account to the exclusion of everything else that would be great.
I really did mean to write Right On.
How sad that this clip is the only thing MMFA came up with to show Alan (the potted plant) Colmes taking on a right-winger! Holy Moley , what a heat exchange! You really showed him AC! BLAMO- POW-ZAP!
Colmes is a joke, a FOX waterboy, and full-time defense player.
ON TONIGHT'S HANNITY & colmes....YOU WON"T BELIEVE WHAT JANE FONDA ORDERED ON HER SALAD! "Some say" she's hurting the moral of the troops!
You are correct sir. Steele is all about the dollar, dollar, bill, yo! Take his appearance on Bill Maher show last year where he said caustically( I think that's the right word) that a couple each earning $150,000 per year were not rich. Here's the transcript of Bill Maher's 4/29/05 show:
STEELE: [overlapping] They're not! Who are the rich? Who are the rich?! Come on, Bill, who are the rich? Who are you talking about?
MAHER: Who are the rich?! They're the people with f****** money!!
STEELE: But who are you talking about? [audience reacts] [applause]
MAHER: What are you talking about, who are the rich? [voices overlap]
CHIDEYA: Hey, okay – Bill, Bill—
MAHER: What sort of a non sequitur , red herring question is that?
STEELE: Bill, if you take a man and a woman—
MAHER: “Who are the rich”
STEELE: [overlapping] If you take a man and a woman living in Middle America , each making $150,000 a year with a combined household income of $300,000—
MAHER: Okay, let's get off this.
CHIDEYA: Well, no, no, let me just say before we move on—
STEELE: [overlapping] But I'm just saying that's what you're talking about.
CHIDEYA: [overlapping] Social mobility – social mobility—
MAHER: [overlapping] They're richer than the people who are getting thrown off Medicaid.
CHIDEYA: [overlapping] Social mobility in America is going down.
MAHER: But go ahead. [applause]
CHIDEYA: Social mobility in America is going down. Social mobility is the Horatio Alger story where the guy who has nothing but his shoelaces somehow pulls himself up. That trend is going down. How, if people are being empowered to lift themselves up, are we actually seeing less mobility of poor people to the higher levels? [applause] [cheers]
STEELE: I disagree. I think we are seeing it.
CHIDEYA: It is absolutely going down.
SHORT: But those are the facts, aren't they? I mean, truthfully, Michael, I mean, I'm – I'm – truthfully, I'm an actor, I don't know. But aren't these just simply the facts?
Ok- I will accept this account by Steele of what happened. Tossing cookies near the man was probably not the best way to express displeasure with him. A less passive-aggressive way would be to rally against him and call him a sell-out to his face, but if this is what happened so be it. So Sean Hannity and others, can we give up the tall tale of a cookie pelting now?
A loathsome thing for somebody to have done for sure, but in Wingnut World rolling two or three cookies on the floor becomes a pelting. A modern conservative never gets a cut finger. It has always been cut to the bone. The way I've always heard this story before Steele was pelted by a barrage of Oreos. I'd have been peeved too; Hydrox is a much better cookie.
Is he, or isn't he an Oreo? Was it, or wasn't it an Oreo? We he pelted, or did the alleged Oreos roll close to his feet? Was it one foot, or all four of them? Did a security camera happen to catch the alleged Oreo pelting or rolling incident? Did anybody from the crime lab find any prints on the alleged Oreo? Is this case too old to turn over the Cold Oreo Files? Yeesh! Who really cares?
Will I get in trouble for linking a rebuttal to MM's Oreo story?
Well, here it is anyway: The Truth about the 2002 Michael Steele Oreo Incident
As Media Matters noted, no one said Steele was "pelted" until 2005. Steele himself has never said he was "pelted." There are eyewitnesses supporting Steele's allegation (see the link above).
My humble belief: He wasn't "pelted," but Oreos landed near him. Of course there are minor inconsistencies in the story. The event was well over three years ago (!), and people's focus that evening was on a debate, not cookies.
My 2 cents.
Did you read the article you provided a link to? The article does nothing to challenge anything MM has asserted. The site refers to an article written in the Baltimore Sun article days after the debate that cited Schurick (Ehrlich and Steele’s Communications Director) saying the audience distributed Oreo cookies. First of all, the site does not provide a link to the actual article but they refer you to a site where the accurate text copy can be found and the following is the accurate text copy:
The above is the accurate text copy (LOL). And the site doesn’t even mention that it was the Communication’s Director of the Steele campaign that made the claim.
The story was made up by Schurick after the debate and that’s why the people in Ehrlich and Steele’s entourage are the only ones who can recall the “incident” in what was a highly attended debate.
1. " The story was made up by Schurick after the debate ..."
That's a baseless accusation. You cannot support that at all. In addition, Steele spoke about the incident in a small feature on him after the election here, in 2002! Why would he make up something like this after winning an election? It doesn't make sense.
=-=
2. "The people in Ehrlich and Steele's entourage are the only ones who can recall this 'incident' ..."
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Here is an Eyewitness Report to the 2002 Michael Steele Oreo Incident. This person was a plain-ol' atendee.
Charges that this incident was just "made up" are baseless. A full presentation of context and facts support the truth that this incident actually happened (not "pelting," but that there were Oreos tossed in the direction of Lt. Gov. Steele).
Not exactly a neutral source huh? And why didn’t she write her eyewitness account long before this. As an advocate for the promotion of Black Republican Candidates, I would have expected her to make the rounds on the wing nut media circuit recounting this ad nasuem. I don’t buy it ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Who is the Author:
Amy Ridenour is President and Chairman of The National Center for Public Policy Research. whose mission is "New Leadership for Black America: Elevating the profiles of conservative and moderate voices in the African-American community through an aggressive earned media campaign is the task of The National Center's Project 21. Participants are regularly featured in national and regional media, advancing the causes of economic and social conservatism while supporting new leaders within the black community" As the founding chief executive officer, she has since 1982 promoted the conservative and free market perspective on U.S. domestic, foreign and defense policy issues. She frequently speaks on public policy issues and political organizing techniques and has done so across the U.S., in Central America and in Europe. Since 1997, her op/eds have been syndicated by Knight-Ridder. Her articles have been published hundreds of times, including by by USA Today, the Sacramento Bee, the Dallas Morning News, The Washington Times, The Houston Chronicle, The Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel, The Los Angeles Daily News and many others. She has also served as a guest-host on the nationally-syndicated Michael Reagan Talk Show and is a popular guest on radio and television talk shows, appearing on such programs as Politically Incorrect and on the Fox News Channel, CNN, CNBC and MSNBC. Amy Ridenour also is a member of the board of directors of Black America's PAC, a political action committee that works to help elect more African-Americans to Congress and other elected offices, and she served as the chairman of several of the conservative movement's strategy meetings, including the Stanton meeting (foreign affairs and defense issues) and the Family Forum meeting (social policy issues). Amy Ridenour also served from 1993-1994 as co-host of Scoop, a public affairs show seen weekly on the public affairs television network National Empowerment Television (subsequently known as America's Voice). Amy Ridenour has served as Vice-Chairman of the International Youth Year Commission of the U.S. (1985); as Deputy Director of the College Republican National Committee; as Regional Coordinator for the Reagan/Bush 1980 campaign; as Chairman of the Maryland Federation of College Republicans and on Maryland Republican State Central Committee. Ridenour received the American Hero Award from the National Defense Council Foundation in 1988 and the William Paca Award from the Maryland Republican State Central Committee in 1979. A native of Pittsburgh where she was born in 1959, she studied Economics at the University of Maryland at College Park. Amy Ridenour lives with her husband, David, and three children."
Peruse Amy's site if you dare <[link to www.nationalcenter.org]
An example of Amy's commentary:
<[link to www.webcommentary.com]
That's a baseless accusation. You cannot support that at all. In addition, Steele spoke about the incident in a small feature on him after the election here, in 2002! Why would he make up something like this after winning an election? It doesn't make sense.
****Ehrlich and Steele’s campaign are the ones who made baseless accusations. The first site you provided a link to debunk themselves by saying that the charge was made before the election by Schurick (Ehrlich and Steele’s Communications Director). In subsequent interviews after the election the Ehrlich and Steele’s campaign had to either call Schurick a liar or continue the lie and they chose the latter.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Here is an Eyewitness Report to the 2002 Michael Steele Oreo Incident. This person was a plain-ol' atendee.
****I apologize. It seems as though there was one person besides the Ehrlich and Steele’s campaign that saw the Oreo “incident” at the highly attended debate. We should all forget about the people who said that it didn’t occur and the cleanup crew who said they found no Oreos after the debate.
Charges that this incident was just "made up" are baseless. A full presentation of context and facts support the truth that this incident actually happened (not "pelting," but that there were Oreos tossed in the direction of Lt. Gov. Steele).
****What context and what facts?
"My humble belief: He wasn't "pelted," but Oreos landed near him. Of course there are minor inconsistencies in the story. The event was well over three years ago (!), and people's focus that evening was on a debate, not cookies."
Yes, the debate happened three years ago, but it has been refuted several times since then. This is not the first time the story has been shown to be COMPLETELY MADE UP and it won't be the last. Was all of the evidence showing it didn't happen not there 2 years ago? No, it was there and talked about. The ONLY people that can be found to say it happened were those in the candidate’s camp. As for the focus on the debate being on the issues, do you really think if there was proof of this it would have been ignored by ALL OF THE MEDIA THERE for 3 weeks? There are several conservative outlets in the DC/Baltimore area that would have had a field day with this, (just check WBAL) but for some strange reason, no one talked about it the next day... or for three weeks after. The event was covered very well by the media at the time and none of them present reported any Oreos "being passed around" "pelting" anyone "rolling at Steele's feet" or any other nonsense. Please stop saying this might have happened. These type of things (see also Swift Boat) not only need to be debunked (as this was has been several times) but those involved in spreading these lies need to be ridiculed for it.
I got a box of Oreos ready for his next appearance. The audience could get hungry you know.
I was going to put it into my "right wing"bookmarks, then realized that it's so whiny that it's not even a worth making fun of on a regular basis. Some of the articles are head scratching, numbingly non-partisan except for the writer's take. Some of the articles interpret bad reporting as slanted news. Hilarious.
Although I see the point about inaccuracy regarding the Oreo story, I still think the actual incident was racist, even if Steele didn't lose any sleep over it. Basically, the same as calling a white person a "wigger". A minor occurrence, but call it what it is.
Shouldn't we reserve these phrases, "I still think the actual incident was racist", for things like police profiling that leads to brutality, unfair hiring and housing practices and violent hate crimes?
You know, the stuff of which many right-wingers seem to be silent! This new insight the right has about racism is hilarious. Especially since it's curiously only about people who espouse their "values".
If Rodney King had been pelted by Oreos, would that have been racist? Are Oreos instruments of racism?
If I were a politician, rather than "milking" the Oreo story for years and years and thus shutting out the opportunity to tell my political beliefs to potential voters, I'd want to shut the story down. The fact that Steele continues to permit this story to be his defining moment in politics says to me that that is what he wants as his political "theme song."
Of course, Steele's story has changed over time, as MMFA documents. The well known penchant of today's GOP to play victim (see War on Christmas, War on Easter, War on Christians) cannot be dismissed in this circumstance. This is doubly true when one considers the evil, prevaricating thug he works for: Bob Erlich's name is all over this fabrication.
Now there's acampaign theme of substanance. 'vote for me If you don't believe in pelting people with cookies.' But alas too many people are "AFRAID" of his message.
Where he really an "Oreo" he wouldn't have to invent a story.
He aspires to the label. He wishes the story true.
He needs their approval so badly he would make up a ridiculous story of his persecusion to self promote this insult.
This creature would melt in the presense of Martin Luther King, a man whom deserves respect from friend and foe alike.
Where did this imagery go afoul? When? Why?
No matter the solution begins with the title of this message and every message through the election so far as I'm concerned.
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
Where he really an "Oreo" he wouldn't have to invent a story.
He aspires to the label. He wishes the story true.
He needs their approval so badly he would make up a ridiculous story of his persecusion to self promote this insult.
There's a touch of Tawana Brawley in this in that (as you say) he wishes the story were true.
What reason, other than political gain, would anyone want to keep this so-called "story" alive? And if it did in fact happen, wouldn't the wingnuts themselves and their affiliated cheerleaders in the media want to find some wicked Democrat to blame? I mean, Maryland is a fairly progressive place and no one -- Dem, Pug, or Indie, would tolerate that sort of really ugly and savage behavior happening right before their eye -- not ever. There's an element, a profound element, of creepy self-loathing masked in Steele's sad little story.
What a sick and degenerate thing it is to be a cry-baby Republican, and the evil things they will do to score cheap, fleeting political hay points to a personality disorder of some kind -- Pugilitis, or worse, even.
He told what happen from his point of view. Do we now live in a time that we automatically assume that people are lying because they are a member of a certain political party??????
Some of us look at something a little more important, facts. In this case we have only a few people "seeing this happen" and a great majority of those present not see it happen. All of the media (remember, that would be local conservative media as well) have no accounts of cookies being passed around, (as he has claimed) pelting him (as others have claimed), or being there at all, and this includes those that cleaned up after the event. And last I checked, noticing things was something the media tries to do. We also have the strange case of the story not coming up for 3 weeks after the event. Now if I wanted to act like something happened that didn't, it would be in my best interest to wait, and then try to get the "story" out slowly and build (like going from rolled, to tossed, to pelted) so it is harder to track the actual facts of the event. This story seems to come up at very opportune times for Mr. Steele. When reports came out about him going to a whites only club for fundraising, bring up the Oreo story. When he is running for office, bring up the Oreo story. Make sure any black opposition to him is seen as racially, and not politically motivated. So here is the challenge that I have put out before and still have no takers. Show one shred of proof this happened. Find a photo, witness outside of the Ehrlich camp, a film clip (yes cameras were there) of an Oreo at the event. Anything at all and I will say it may have happened like Mr. Steele claims it did. 3 years later and still not one bit of evidence. I am not surprised.
Southern racist Jews and black republicans, the world is just crawling with them.
If one person threw some Oreos it says something about the person who threw them. If many people threw numerous Oreos then it might say something. Otherwise it is just race baiting in the reverse.
If a white man joined with Malcome X's group, would he be an Uncle Cracker? Black republicans are a strange occurance. It reminds me of Native Americans driving around in pickup trucks wearing cowboy boots, with an "Easy Rider" rifle rack in the back window and the truck bed filled with empty Coors cans.
Some people have a very short memory, it seems, as to who did what to whom. There have been experiments and examples in history that have revealed a tendency for some individuals who have been persecuted to take on the traits of their persecutors. This has been true with Jews, blacks, gays, prisoners, and the poor.
It apparently is a complication in the sado-masochistic nature of some human beings, but as a philosopher once said, "When one goes out to slay monsters, he must be careful not to become one."