‘Geezer’ won’t let thugs ruin his walks—and won’t let truth ruin his liberalism

Reader Michael E. sends this article from today’s Philadelphia Daily News, commenting, “Four thugs beat an 84 year old man in Philly. No apparent motive, at least to the liberal mind.”

Reader Mark A. also sent the article, saying: “Amazingly, the article provides a description of the attackers as well as evidence that robbery (i.e. poverty) wasn’t the motive. The real ‘stunner’ to Shea is that they left without trying to take his wallet, keys or cellphone.”

‘Geezer’ won’t let thugs ruin his walks
BY STEPHANIE FARR

AN 84-YEAR-OLD ex-university official savagely attacked by four young punks during a walk in Wissahickon Valley Park earlier this week theorizes that the beating he endured was a cruel game of “get the old geezer.” [LA replies: See my response to the victim’s “geezer” theory below.]

Jim Shea, a former vice president of university relations for Temple, from 1968 to 1983, walks up to five miles on Forbidden Drive, in Fairmount Park, three times a week, but that type of stamina wasn’t enough to stave off the lowlifes who not only beat him bloody, but dealt a blow to one of the things he holds most dear—his pride.

Shea was near the Valley Green Inn, on Forbidden Drive, in the Wissahickon Valley Park, about 1:15 p.m. Monday when he was hit from behind.

“I felt a real something to the head, a real blow to the head from behind,” he said. “It knocked me to the ground; that was the biggie.”

Shea said the four assailants continued to beat him for minutes while he was on the ground. He said they were black, appeared to be between 16 and 20, and three of them were wearing La Salle sweatshirts.

Police and Shea said that at least one of the attackers used a rock to hit him, causing deep cuts above his eyes. They all kicked and punched him while he was on the ground, conscious the entire time.

“There was only one I really saw well because he came back to kick me,” Shea said. “The others spent a great deal of the time laughing.” [LA replies: Of course this is standard behavior by black “youths” engaging in “surge attacks” on white people. ]

The real “stunner” to Shea is that they left without trying to take his wallet, keys or cellphone.

“I think it was just to get the old geezer,” Shea said. “They were some bad kids with rancid souls.” [LA replies: But of course the recent black group attackers of whites show this behavior toward whites of any age. Shea is a former university official and presumably keeps up with the news. Even if the racial aspect of the other beatings he’s read about is blocked out from his mind, surely he’s read of how the surge attackers routinely laugh at their victims as they hurt and torment them. But he can’t admit that, because then he’d be implicitly admitting the racial dimension of the attack. That is, he presumably knows from previous news stories, especially in Philadelphia, that youth mobs of unspecified race attack victims of unspecified race and laugh at their victims. But now he, not a generic person, but white person, has been attacked, not by a generic mob, but by a black mob (he described them as black) that laughed as they beat him. If he doesn’t attribute their behavior to his age, then the only other reason for their behavior is that he was white, which he cannot admit.]

He tried to walk back to the Valley Green Inn alone, dripping with blood, but a bicyclist came to his aid.

Shea spent four hours at Chestnut Hill Hospital, getting stitches in his face—from his eyelid to his cheek—and treatment for two large scrapes on his leg and elbow. Shea also said two bones in his nose were broken.

The attackers have not yet been caught, police said yesterday. Despite that, Shea said he plans to be back out walking on Forbidden Drive next week.

“I hope to make myself do it,” he said. “It’s been a wonderful thing for me at my age.”

farrs@phillynews.com 215-854-4225

- end of initial entry -

LA writes:

I think “surge attacks,” which I used above, or, alternatively, “surge beatings” or “flash attacks,” is better than “flash mobs.” The term “flash mobs” conveys the idea that suddenly a group of black criminals band together and raid a store or attack a white person, but it doesn’t necessarily convey the idea of physical violence. By contrast, the terms “surge attacks,” “surge beatings,” and “flash beatings” clearly convey both the sudden gathering of individuals into a menacing group (often facilitated by social media), and the physical violence the group commits.

James P. writes:

What made the four punks beat the old geezer?

Evolutionary psychology.

What makes the geezer deny the motive for the attacks and return each day for a possible future beating?

Evolutionary psychology.

LA replies:

Ha ha ha ha.

Perfect. Better than any of my examples.

OneSTDV writes:

At the very least Jim Shea described his attackers in morally accurate terms: “They were some bad kids with rancid souls.” A stark contrast with the characterization championed by Matt Lauer in his interview with beating victim Carter Strange:

It seems to me the defense so far is saying, “Look, these kids who are between the ages of 13 and 19 are basically good kids who did a very bad thing and made very bad judgments.” Do you feel that way?

LA replies:

Agreed. Jim Shea is closer to the truth than the egregious Matt Lauer.

Elena G. writes:

Given the fact that all we have of the victim’s reaction are snippets chosen by a journalist, it’s possible that his reaction was more complete or realistic (as in, in accord with reality) than it appeared to be in the article. This could easily be media bias.

LA replies:

You are right. This is always true. The choice is either to comment on news stories such as this, knowing that our knowledge derived from the stories is incomplete and may be incorrect, or not to comment on them at all.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 20, 2011 08:06 PM | Send