I received an e-mail from Susan Demas, who wrote the original article in the Enquirer that started the Ken Brock controversy. She has since given me permission to post her e-mail. It adds some context, and I'm sure that it'll give everyone a lot more to talk about.

The e-mail:

I'm surprised at the attention one line in my latest column has received both in Michigan and across the country. What I wrote on Mr. Brock wasn't the main point, but it did reinforce my belief in restoring decency to politics.

I'd like to clarify something with you, since we've corresponded in the past. These were not paraphrasings or quotes taken out of context. Here are the complete quotes from Mr. Brock:

"Berryman is lazy and he knows that. He promised us he'd do better. ... But you look at his fundraising and his excuses and he's not getting it done. ... The Lord helps those who help themselves."

“David Nacht, people are not going to vote for a liberal, Jewish trial lawyer from the east side of the district.”

In a 35 minute interview, which Mr. Brock requested from me, he repeatedly castigated both Mr. Berryman and Mr. Nacht. That is why I included the quotes. I am not interested in going after Sen. Schauer or Mr. Brock any more than I am interested in going after Congressman Walberg. I call them as I see them. And when politicians of all stripes cross over a line, I think it's the media's job to report that.

I do not profess to know Mr. Brock's heart or intentions. But what he said was not accidental and there was no apology to me or request for a retraction. And no, I don't think it's a minor issue. Mr. Brock was bombastic throughout the interview, holding Mr. Berryman and Mr. Nacht in contempt. As the Senate Minority Leader's chief of staff, his words and actions are a reflection of his boss.

Certainly Republicans are jumping on this for political gain. But after covering politics as long as I have, I can tell you that Democrats would be up in arms if Tim Walberg made the same comments, many of whom would be posting on your site.

As journalists, we have to report what we think is right and hold leaders accountable. That's all I have ever tried to do.

Susan

So. How does this change things? Does it?

Labels: 2008 Election, Ken Brock, Mark Schauer

I'm sure everyone is getting tired of hearing this, but the transcript of my conversation with Senate Minority Leader Mark Schauer is coming soon. Labor Day weekend and today were busy for me. But soon, I promise! Really!

Last week, the following appeared in Susan Demas' weekly column:

Here in the 7th District, fundraising is a way of life for Walberg, R-Tipton, who used to drum up dough for the Moody Bible Institute. If all else fails, he always has his steadfast sugar daddy, Washington anti-tax lobby Club for Growth.

Democratic state Sen. Mark Schauer is psyched to take him on, vowing to amass $3 million by next year. His chief of staff, Ken Brock, seemed to channel the odiousness of Karl Rove earlier this month, bragging that only Schauer can raise that kind of money, unlike "liberal, Jewish trial lawyer" David Nacht or "lazy" Jim Berryman, for whom Brock twice worked.

(Emphasis added.)

It's that last sentence that caught a lot of people's attention-- particularly, the bit about David Nacht. At best, this was a poor choice of words when describing the state of the race. At worst, it was a borderline anti-Semitic comment, which has absolutely no place in political discourse or in the America of the 21st century.

So which was it? From the sounds of it, it wasn't meant to be quite as "odious" as Demas says:

Brock said today he already had apologized to Nacht, and he has no intentions of resigning his post over the comment.

“The moment I saw it in the paper, I knew I had to call him,” he said. “I knew I was wrong the moment I said those words. I was further saddened they were printed in the paper, and I apologize to anyone else who may have been offended.”

And what about Nacht? He was, after all, the target of the comments.

Nacht said he knows Brock isn’t anti-Semitic. He said he believes Brock was using religion, profession and political orientation in a political analysis, not as a personal attack.

“It’s a tricky thing to talk about a candidate’s religion in an analytical way without being accused of being prejudiced,” Nacht said. “I don’t think my work as a lawyer nor my religion would have been a barrier to my being elected. So I disagree with the substantive aspect of the comment that it was something negative, but I think he was trying to legitimately point out weaknesses in my campaign.”

(Emphasis added.)

And:

In another twist on Tuesday, Nacht said he’s endorsing Schauer in his congressional run against U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Tipton. Schauer first will have to beat two other Democrats, former state Sen. Jim Berryman of Adrian and organic farmer Sharon Renier of Munith, in the August 2008 primary

None of this has stopped Republicans from making it an issue:
So, let's recap. Mark Schauer's chief of staff Ken Brock was giving his thoughts on the Democratic primary, and said something stupid. He says that it wasn't meant to be offensive, and apologized to David Nacht and everyone else. David Nacht says he wasn't offended, and has endorsed Brock's boss.

I, personally, think that this district could have elected a trial lawyer, and it could have elected someone with liberal values. And, yes, I think it could have elected someone that was Jewish, too. That said, I can see how some might see that as a potential political liability-- not that there's anything wrong with being Jewish, but this is still a conservative district, where some folks aren't as tolerant as others. I don't think those biases would have been a factor, but I suppose Ken Brock did.

Don't get me wrong, it was still a stupid thing to say. Ken Brock has been working in politics for years, and he should have known better. But he says he didn't mean it in an offensive way, and the guy he was supposedly insulting wasn't offended.

To me, that ends the controversy right there.

Now, it's your turn to tell me why I'm wrong in the comments.

Labels: 2008 Election, David Nacht, Ken Brock, Mark Schauer