Across Florida
What's happening on other political blogs?

Allen West rips ‘cowards’ who walked out on his Middle East speech in Chicago

by George Bennett | April 22nd, 2014

Allen West at a Palm Beach County GOP dinner this year (BRUCE r. BENNETT / PALM BEACH POST)

Former Rep. Allen West of Palm Beach Gardens spoke about the Middle East at DePaul University in Chicago on Monday night and, according to West’s account, nearly half his audience staged a walkout.

“I guess the truth hurts,” West wrote on his website.

Conservative Republican West was no stranger to controversy during his stormy single term in Congress (here’s one example, and here’s another), and he seemed to relish ticking off a segment of his audience at DePaul.

“But I had my own fun at DePaul. As I stood waiting to speak and surveyed the crowd, it was easy to pick out the ones there to make some protest statement — especially on a college campus where the topic was the Middle East and the Israeli-Arab situation,” West wrote.

West said it was after he made remarks critical of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its late leader Yasser Arafat that about 30 people in the crowd of 70 walked out “at the command of some individual…To me they were cowards who refused to hear anything that countered their radical agenda.”

West wrote that the resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict must be based on “a recognition of the right for the Jewish state to exist. There has to be a renouncing of Islamic terrorism.”

19 Responses to “Allen West rips ‘cowards’ who walked out on his Middle East speech in Chicago”

  1. jebamoni4 Says:

    War criminal West not only would shoot his mouth but also can hurt you with the gun!!! Be careful with this thug!!

  2. Joe Says:

    So Mr. West racially profiled the students in the audience and knew which ones would stage some sort of a protest. Perhaps it wasn’t race but the beards and tunic’s that gave them away? So, if half walked out then only 30 or so people actually went to hear this man speak. Maybe Mr. West staged this protest himself in an attempt to regain some relevance. Seems to me this worked out in his favor. If not for the walk out we would not have this handy link to his web page or even know he was speaking someplace. He should be thanking these folks not calling them cowards. Perhaps they were just exercising their 1st amendment right to not listen to the ranting of a homophobic Neanderthal.

  3. Jim Says:

    What’s truly amazing is the 40 people who actually showed up and stayed to hear him.


    Allen West is West some insignificant man who thinks he’s another Farrakhan, Sharpton, Malcolm X, and “I have a Dream” Martin Luther. He is all rhetoric with no action and just wants to be seen and heard by the media, he actually gets off on it. Mr. West is in his own delirious dreamland, thinking that what he spews actually is of any importance whatsoever. Look the voters didn’t want you, neither does the audience that walked out as well. Give it up Allen, your 15 minutes of fame were over 14 minutes ago!

  5. timtopper Says:

    so what if some bearded people wearing rags on their heads walk out. Who cares if their feelings were hurt?

    On the other hand, west is old news. He just needs to go away.

  6. Bob le flambeur Says:

    Did Wild West stick around for a book signing?

  7. joe Says:

    Palm Beach liberals cannot stand an independent black men that has left the liberal plantation and denounced the liberal policies that have nuked the black family and black culture.

  8. and in other news Says:

    well that… and he’s certifiable.

  9. Sam Says:

    Joe – if you don’t like it we can give you directions to PBIA – they have many direct flights so you can find some backwoods redneck town to live out your days pretending its 1980 and hating the rest of america for how much they have progressed.

  10. Matt Lechner Says:

    Mr. West should be commended for bringing common sense to the stage, which is what he usually does. And a lot of the time, he has very good ideas and solid, respectable views on various things. It’s not really worth being upset with the people who walked out, because walking out on a decent speaker really reflects on them, not on Mr. West; some people just like to make a scene. If they wanted to leave, no problem, less wear and tear on the chairs.

  11. Audy Webb Says:

    Allen West for president!!!

  12. and in other news Says:

    … of Iran !

  13. Bob le flambeur Says:

    Too funny almost spit coffee on my keyboard.

  14. OBIWAN Says:

    @ and in other news

    Perhaps the most dangerous implication of barter is to believe that even in capitalist economies productions take place due to the urge to truck and barter. In other words, individuals would naturally engage in production simply because they want to exchange for what others would have produced, not because they want to make a monetary profit. In light of this, the classical dichotomy is legitimized. Since money is a veil that hides the urge to truck and barter, removing it would not affect production except for some efficiency costs due to the “double coincidence of wants” problem. Therefore, money is a neutral veil that only obscures the market relationships behind it. Economists thus ought to conduct a “real”, as opposed to “monetary,” analysis.

    Note that such conclusion is a “natural” manifestation only for economists believing in the barter relevancy for the present capitalist economy. Since money is merely a medium of exchange, it is almost by assumption that it cannot possibly affect the real economy (Smithin, 2003). This is evidently the case for the neo-Walrasian general equilibrium theory, real business cycle model, and neoclassical long-run growth model, etc. The monetarists model (as represented by Friedman), though apparently argues for short-term money non-neutrality due to mistaken expectation, nevertheless holds that money does not have long-term impact on real variables in its long-term economic model. Even in its short-run model, it is ambiguous whether the Monetarists truly recognize money non-neutrality since according to them what causes short-run fluctuations in real variables is actually “money illusion,” not money per se. In order to explain growth and unemployment, “monetarists simply assumed that there exists ‘natural’ rate of growth and unemployment, which are determined in the long run only by real factors of production” (Smithin, 2003).

    The implication of conducting a “real” analysis is powerful. To great extent it justifies the Monetarist concept of exogenous money and allows the Monetarists to blame the central bank if there is ever any inflation. Milton Friedman’s definitive statement, “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon,” is widely considered the truth, grounding itself on the fact that inflation can only be produced by a more rapid change in the quantity of money supplied. Again, the implicit logic is that since money only facilitates transactions, it must be powerless in affecting productions except when people are suffering from “money illusion” in the short-run. People only need the right amount of money to make purchases. But too much money printed by the central bank inevitably chases too few goods and bids up price levels. Therefore, the general causality in the quantity theory of money must run from the left to the right: MV=PY, where money supply only affects inflation rate in the long run. Hence, the best monetary policy, as the Monetarists further argue, is to target a stable money supply growth. Till now, readers may have found the name, “Monetarism,” deceitful because it actually assigns no significant long-run role to money. Money supply growth, as controlled by the central bank’s monetary policies, can only mess up the inflation rate while contributing nothing to the real economy in the long run. Hence, Monetarism essentially performs an apparent monetary analysis predicated on a “real” analysis, which is ultimately backed by the truth of barter and money neutrality.

    It is perhaps worthwhile to look deeper into the Monetarist analysis to see how exactly money is created in its model. A typical Monetarist would tell a story about money and banking similar to the following. The central bank determines money supply discretionarily via three operational tools: required reserve ratio, open market operation, and discount window. The idea is that banks will automatically decide to create loans based on the availability of the reserves they possess at the central bank’s balance sheet. Hence, open market operations and discount window set the “base money” by changing the level of reserves through interest rate targeting, and required reserve ratio (thus acts as a money multiplier) simply “leverages” such base money into a much larger pool of money that can then be used by the bank. This is another reason why the causality must run from the left to the right in the quantity theory of money: MV=PY. However, this exogenous money approach, as will be discussed later in contrast with endogenous money, suffers serious flaws. Nonetheless, the essence is that the central bank does control money supply.

    A disastrous implication from the exogenous money approach is money scarcity. Since the quantity of money supplied affects inflation rate, it is assumed that money must be scarce enough to ensure price stability. In other words, money scarcity is simply truism at any stable price level. If we accept money scarcity, then it is only logical to believe in the loanable funds theory that fiscal spending only crowds out private investment by bidding up interest rate for a fixed pool of savings. Therefore, the best fiscal policy is to limit the spending of the government to allow private businesses to invest more at a lower cost of financing. Hence, the doctrine of sound finance is legitimized.

    What is important for the paper is that the above analysis shows how intrinsically connected are the ideas of barter, money neutrality, “real” economic analysis, “exogenous money,” inflation, money scarcity, and “loanable funds theory.” These theoretical tools then allow the orthodox economists to conduct “correct” monetary and fiscal policies. To recapitulate, monetary policy determines price levels while fiscal policy negatively affects private investment. Hence, the solution is to target a stable money supply and to run balanced government budget as long as possible. It is therefore that the myth of barter is crucial in the orthodox theorizing. With no evidence that suggests the existence of barter, one sees why the orthodox economists are eager to fabricate a fantasyland of barter for us. The myth of barter is told not only because it is consistent with orthodox theorizing but also that by telling it, the orthodox theoretical and policy implications can make more intuitive sense and thus become the unquestionable truth. To see so, one only needs to consider how dominant Monetarism remained even after the complete failure of its empirical experiment. The Volcker Fed completely failed to hit money supply target for several consecutive years beginning in 1979, and as a result the “New Monetary Consensus” emerged as the recognition that the central bank cannot target money supply. Yet, the idea that the central bank somehow controls the money supply and thus messes up inflation rate is still widely accepted.

    If, however, the myth of barter is debunked, then the orthodox theoretical and policy implications suffer serious criticism. For the abandonment of the myth of barter necessarily calls the orthodox notions of money neutrality, “real” economic analysis, “exogenous money,” money scarcity, and the “loanable funds theory” into question. Furthermore, if barter never existed in the first place, then what is the reason to model today’s economy as barter when it is evident that modern production has to be financed by money and will not take place unless profit is foreseeable? In other words, mainstream economists ought not to view the purpose of production as satisfying exchanges. Moreover, removing the myth of barter also brings the problem of unemployment into the picture. As barter describes production behaviors as largely voluntary (one produces more if s/he wants to exchange for more of other’s produce, and vice versa), involuntary unemployment simply does not exist in the imagined barter economy. Abandoning the myth of barter thus gives at least the theoretical possibility for involuntary unemployment to occur, which is missing in the neoclassical theorizing. Finally, the policy prescriptions that follow the mythical foundation of orthodox theorizing are also subject to a re-examination.

    After all, the orthodox theory of the nature, role, and origin of money was engineered to be consistent with the orthodox/neoclassical theorizing of a barter economy. Since neoclassical theorizing is asocial and ahistorical, its theory of money similarly lacks any social or historical context. The paper now shifts to the heterodox theory of the nature, origin, and role of money. By doing so, the paper prepares the background knowledge to debunk the orthodox theory of money and paves the way for rethinking the alternative guiding principles behind both monetary and fiscal policies.

  15. and in other news Says:

    Jesus, Obiwan. Are you also obi-won or whassup wit dat? Is he just mocking you or vice versa? Coupla weiners.

    Please leave me the foch out of your teabagger rants. Unsurprising that the conservative fundamentalists want to go back to the Dark Ages.

    I do NOT want to truck and barter my onions for your milk.
    I DO want to provide professional consulting services, make a profit and accumulate money so I can go to Paris again….the banks of the Seine not the taxiways of Orly… on vacation this time instead of on assignment.

  16. rebar Says:


    Those are some pretty impressive copy/paste skills you have. Isn’t the internet great!

  17. OBIWAN Says:


    Common rebar is made of unfinished tempered steel, making it susceptible to rusting. Normally the concrete cover is able to provide a pH value higher than 12 avoiding the corrosion reaction. Too little concrete cover can compromise this guard through carbonation from the surface, and salt penetration. Too much concrete cover can cause bigger crack widths which also compromises the local guard. As rust takes up greater volume than the steel from which it was formed, it causes severe internal pressure on the surrounding concrete, leading to cracking, spalling, and ultimately, structural failure. This phenomenon is known as oxide jacking. This is a particular problem where the concrete is exposed to salt water, as in bridges where salt is applied to roadways in winter, or in marine applications. Uncoated, corrosion-resistant low carbon/chromium (microcomposite), epoxy-coated, galvanized or stainless steel rebars may be employed in these situations at greater initial expense, but significantly lower expense over the service life of the project. Care should be taken during the transport, fabrication, handling, installation, and concrete placement process when working with epoxy-coated rebar, because damage will reduce the long-term corrosion resistance of these bars. Users must take appropriate steps to inspect bars after placement and repair any defects found in the epoxy coating.[4] Even damaged bars have shown better performance than uncoated reinforcing bars, though issues from debonding of the epoxy coating from the bars and corrosion under the epoxy film have been reported.[5] These bars are used in over 70,000 bridge decks in the USA. Epoxy Interest Group. “Epoxy Interest Group of CRSI”. Epoxy Interest Group of CRSI. Retrieved 24 August 2012.

    Fiber-reinforced polymer rebar is also being used in high-corrosion environments. It is available in many forms, from spirals for reinforcing columns, to the common rod, to meshes and many other forms. Most commercially available rebars are made from unidirectional glass fibre reinforced thermoset resins.

    Reinforcing steel can also be displaced by impacts such as earthquakes, resulting in structural failure. The prime example of this is the collapse of the Cypress Street Viaduct in Oakland, California as a result of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, causing 42 fatalities. The shaking of the earthquake caused rebars to burst from the concrete and buckle. Updated building designs, including more circumferential rebars, can address this type of failure.
    Rebar is available in different grades and specifications that vary in yield strength, ultimate tensile strength, chemical composition, and percentage of elongation.

    The grade designation is equal to the minimum yield strength of the bar in ksi (1000 psi) for example grade 60 rebar has a minimum yield strength of 60 ksi. Rebar is typically manufactured in grades 40, 60, and 75.

    Common ASTM specification are:American Concrete Institute: “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11) and Commentary,” ISBN 978-0-87031-744-6
    ASTM A82: Specification for Plain Steel Wire for Concrete Reinforcement
    ASTM A184/A184M: Specification for Fabricated Deformed Steel Bar Mats for Concrete Reinforcement
    ASTM A185: Specification for Welded Plain Steel Wire Fabric for Concrete Reinforcement
    ASTM A496: Specification for Deformed Steel Wire for Concrete Reinforcement
    ASTM A497: Specification for Welded Deformed Steel Wire Fabric for Concrete Reinforcement
    ASTM A615/A615M: Deformed and plain carbon-steel bars for concrete reinforcement
    ASTM A616/A616M: Specification for Rail-Steel Deformed and Plain Bars for Concrete Reinforcement
    ASTM A617/A617M: Specification for Axle-Steel Deformed and Plain Bars for Concrete Reinforcement
    ASTM A706/A706M: Low-alloy steel deformed and plain bars for concrete reinforcement
    ASTM A767/A767M: Specification for Zinc-Coated(Galvanized) Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement
    ASTM A775/A775M: Specification for Epoxy-Coated Reinforcing Steel Bars
    ASTM A934/A934M: Specification for Epoxy-Coated Prefabricated Steel Reinforcing Bars
    ASTM A955: Deformed and plain stainless-steel bars for concrete reinforcement
    ASTM A996: Rail-steel and axle-steel deformed bars for concrete reinforcement
    ASTM A1035: Standard Specification for Deformed and Plain, Low-carbon, Chromium, Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement

    ASTM marking designations are:
    ‘S’ billet A615
    ‘I’ rail A616 (superseded by A996 “ASTM A616 / A616M – 96a Standard Specification for Rail Steel Deformed and Plain Bars for Concrete Reinforcement (Withdrawn 1999)”. Retrieved 2012-08-24.)
    ‘IR’ Rail Meeting Supplementary Requirements S1 A616 (superseded by A996 “ASTM A616 / A616M – 96a Standard Specification for Rail Steel Deformed and Plain Bars for Concrete Reinforcement (Withdrawn 1999)”. Retrieved 2012-08-24.)
    ‘A’ Axle A617(superseded by A996 “ASTM A617 / A617M – 96a Standard Specification for Axle Steel Deformed and Plain Bars for Concrete Reinforcement (Withdrawn 1999)”. Retrieved 2012-08-24.)
    ‘W’ Low-alloy — A706

    Historically in Europe, rebar is composed of mild steel material with a yield strength of approximately 250 MPa (36 ksi). Modern rebar is composed of high-yield steel, with a yield strength more typically 500 MPa (72.5 ksi). Rebar can be supplied with various grades of ductility. The more ductile steel is capable of absorbing considerably more energy when deformed – a behavior that resists earthquake forces and is used in design.
    Rebar cages are fabricated either on or off the project site commonly with the help of hydraulic benders and shears. However, for small or custom work a tool known as a Hickey, or hand rebar bender, is sufficient. The rebars are placed by steel fixers “rodbusters” or concrete reinforcing ironworkers, with bar supports and concrete or plastic rebar spacers separating the rebar from the concrete formwork to establish concrete cover and ensure that proper embedment is achieved. The rebars in the cages are connected either by spot welding, tying steel wire, sometimes using an electric rebar tier,[8] or with mechanical connections. For tying epoxy coated or galvanised rebars, epoxy coated or galvanized wire is normally used.
    Also known as “mechanical couplers” or “mechanical splices”, mechanical connections are used to connect reinforcing bars together. Mechanical couplers are an effective means to reduce rebar congestion in highly reinforced areas for cast-in-place concrete construction. These couplers are also used in precast concrete construction at the joints between members.

    The structural performance criteria for mechanical connections varies considerably between different countries, codes, and industries. As a minimum requirement, codes typically specify that the rebar to splice connection meets or exceeds 125% of the specified yield strength of the rebar. More stringent criteria also requires the development of the specified ultimate strength of the rebar. As an example, ACI 318 specifies either Type 1 (125% Fy) or Type 2 (125% Fy and 100% Fu) performance criteria.[9]

    Rebars with safety caps installed before being covered in concrete.
    For concrete structures designed with ductility in mind, it is recommended that the mechanical connections are also capable of failing in a ductile manner, typically known in the reinforcing steel industry as achieving “bar-break”. As an example, Caltrans specifies a required mode of failure (i.e., “necking of the bar”).[10]

  18. and in other news Says:

    He’s ALL yours, rebar.
    Will say one thing for him… a classic West supporter.
    And the latest shining example that neither editor Burke nor anyone else at PBPost gives two shyts how dysfunctional their comments sections are.
    They have handed them over whole to the liars, barbarians, fundamentalists, bigots, and gun nuts along with the paper’s reputation.
    Which is why Obiwan and Obi-won/ The Aviator[who isn’t one]/ TheMasterAviator [who CERTAINLY isn’t one]/ Watch_Dog/ UziDoesIt/ ObiOne// PadreKatz/ BS-Patrol/ Kenobe/ GodGunsNGuts/ReasonsNurse/ recondo/ rec0nd0/ WhyFoxSuxCox/ Follow_The_Money/ RichardHWood/ ***RichardCPeck***/ GeorgiePorgiePedophile/ WhyFoxIsSoScrewed/ hey-middle-america/ TrafficAvengerIndividual/ TrafficAvengerPervert [both mocking that rare “voice of reason” around here = TrafficAvenger]/ et al (possibly also uses SkrateUp) flourish here.

  19. Another Day in Paradise Says:

    Mr. West, who is now a civilian, having walked away from the Army, should know that it is inappropriate for him to be saluting the colors. He should have his hand over where his heart would be if he had one.

Florida political tweeters
Video: Politics stories