View Full Version : Store-Bought Indignant Protests
ICantSpellDawg
08-06-2009, 23:53
Isn't it amazing? Every day, the Left criticizes the Right for being angry maniacs - but the second they start protesting against something, "it couldn't possibly be organic, it must be corporate sponsored. The%2
seireikhaan
08-07-2009, 02:23
Uh... Perhaps some clarification is in order here?
Megas Methuselah
08-07-2009, 02:52
A link would be helpful...
Marshal Murat
08-07-2009, 03:24
Most of these links are from HuffPost or Drudge
Reid denounces protestors (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99TKCRG0&show_article=1)
The Republican Party says it's not behind the protests, but Reid scoffed at the notion that the protesters reflect grass-roots sentiment. He held up a piece of artificial turf during a session with reporters.
"These are nothing more than destructive efforts to interrupt a debate that we should have, and are having," Reid said. "They are doing this because they don't have any better ideas. They have no interest in letting the negotiators, even though few in number, negotiate. It's really simple: they're taking their cues from talk show hosts, Internet rumor-mongerers ... and insurance rackets."
Rowdy Crowd in Arkansas (http://www.fox16.com/news/local/story/Rowdy-crowd-grills-congressmen-over-healthcare/TSiSTgUAeESfZ3a7pqZtnQ.cspx)
Democratic representatives Mike Ross and Vic Snyder both came to Little Rock Wednesday to explain what changes could be coming. And Arkansans got a chance to sound off too. It was a loud crowd at Arkansas Children's Hospital and everybody had something to say.
Tempers in South Florida (http://www.miamiherald.com/news/top-stories/v-fullstory/story/1173602.html)
Confrontation over a national healthcare overhaul reached South Florida on Wednesday, when routine office hours for the staff of a Broward-area congressman turned into a raucous protest.
The incident is like others that reflect nerves frayed by the nationwide debate. Democrats decry what they describe as a mob rule orchestrated by special interests trying to protect the status quo; Republicans call it genuine grass-roots concern over a costly government takeover.
Pelosi states that protesters are carrying swastikas. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/08/05/pelosi_town_hall_protesters_are_carrying_swastikas.html)
Tampa Healthcare debate ends in scuffle. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/06/tampa-town-hall-on-health_n_253478.html)
Police officers were called to calm down an unruly crowd outside a health care reform town hall meeting in downtown Tampa, Florida on Thursday evening, according to local news reports.
Angry protesters screamed, yelled and banged on windows as officers hurried to guard the entrances to the facility, where U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor was trying to discuss the various health care reform proposals being debated in Congress. One photojournalist said that a fistfight broke out inside the building, reports WTSP.
HuffPost Editorial (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-w-whitehead/a-little-rebellion-now-an_b_253161.html)
Here's a breaking news alert for all Americans: if you take part in protest rallies, voice your discontent through picket signs, or disrupt events with yelling or intermittent shouts, then you are likely a right-wing extremist or a member of an angry mob, and you must be silenced.
TuffStuff is simply pointing out how the Democrats (Leftys despite a majority being right-handed) are not acknowledging this as a "grass-roots" movement and shifting the responsibility to "Insurance Corporations/Republicans"
All of these disruptions are being characterized one of two ways.
Democrats - These are bought mobs (astroturf) by Republicans and Insurance Companies that are stirring up people and stifling democratic debate.
Republicans - These are grass-root movements against a socialized healthcare system that we had nothing to do with.
ICantSpellDawg
08-07-2009, 04:00
TuffStuff is simply pointing out how the Democrats (Leftys despite a majority being right-handed) are not acknowledging this as a "grass-roots" movement and shifting the responsibility to "Insurance Corporations/Republicans"
All of these disruptions are being characterized one of two ways.
Democrats - These are bought mobs (astroturf) by Republicans and Insurance Companies that are stirring up people and stifling democratic debate.
Republicans - These are grass-root movements against a socialized healthcare system that we had nothing to do with.
Thanks for the ground work.
I'm just wondering what seems more likely to you all; that we can't muster the indignation on our own for something of this magnitude or that we are merely puppets, yet again. Democrats don't actually believe that people have different opions. Any time they encounter a strong and different opinion they convince themselves that there is just some centrally controlled capitalist mothership behind it all.
Or they are lying to us and are really just trying to deflect from their own failure to create a new new deal that has majority support.
Marshal Murat
08-07-2009, 04:10
I honestly couldn't say, since I haven't really met anyone whose been involved. It sounds exactly like the frustration that one heard during the Election Campaign (Joe the Plumber), an unresponsive government that ignored the "Average Joe".
I think that it's easier for the Democrats to demonize the Republicans than to build a "Healthcare Platform" and then have to endure rhetorical assaults. The possibility that there may be some "bought actors" who are simply directing popular unrest against legislators.
ICantSpellDawg
08-07-2009, 04:35
I honestly couldn't say, since I haven't really met anyone whose been involved. It sounds exactly like the frustration that one heard during the Election Campaign (Joe the Plumber), an unresponsive government that ignored the "Average Joe".
I think that it's easier for the Democrats to demonize the Republicans than to build a "Healthcare Platform" and then have to endure rhetorical assaults. The possibility that there may be some "bought actors" who are simply directing popular unrest against legislators.
Imagine what the elderly, who have killed people for less in the great war, are thinking right now. I'm sure that some are hired - but some people at leftist rallies are Communists and Anarchists. That doesn't mean that many of the concerns aren't legitimate.
I hope that Obama continues to recklessly overplay his hand and that there is tremendous backlash. 4 years of a dandy wast of time would be a relief. Lets get back to business, not this time-of-the-month bleedout we are going through under this administration.
Banquo's Ghost
08-07-2009, 07:31
As is touched upon in the Centrist thread, yah-boo politics is all the range for all sides - and this is unfortunately true of most Western democracies. Instead of taking a stand against it, we the voters indulge ourselves as if our democracy is a substitute for televised wrestling.
After eight years of "if you don't believe in trampling human rights, you're a terrorist" we now have the Democrat's version of demonisation.
We do so love our tribalism.
It's all a vast, right-wing conspiracy...
ICantSpellDawg
08-08-2009, 05:15
It's all a vast, right-wing conspiracy...
Yes it is, but almost half of the country is in on it.
a completely inoffensive name
08-08-2009, 10:32
The Democrats are right, this isn't a grass roots movement just like the Tea Parties earlier. Like always instead of actually coming up with a better solution to the problem that fits their ideology they dive deeper into emotional calls, slander and loud means right tactics.
Don't get me wrong, I think having a public option is unnecessary and I personally believe the problem is a misunderstanding that what we have now is not a free market, but more along the lines of corporatism and so people lash out wrongly at the free market and turn to government instead.
But what do the Republicans do, admit that the people need to be given more power in the health care market and that insurance companies need some major reform so they can't deny those without money or are sick? No, they prop up a fake grassroots movement and proudly carry out their ignorance and corruption and completely ignore the fact that 70% of Americans actually want reform and insist that the status quo is just fine.
The Republicans are reaping what they sow, they have no intellect within their ranks anymore, just talking points and loudness and if they can't defend their ideals with facts or come up with solutions to major problems then they force upon the American people to either continue to set back their status among the world or engage a massive backlash from the American public or a retaliation from Democrats and Liberals and pass the public option with super speed.
If you want to stop public health care, don't infiltrate town meetings overriding the majority screaming Republican slogans and ignorant sayings, ("Keep government out of my Medicare!") and instead rally around a guy who actually agrees with the majority of Americans that reform is needed but instead wants to go in the other direction, like Peter Schiff.
I tried to find a good video of Peter Schiff on health care but so far the only real interview was on the 6th with a host who kept cutting him off mid sentence to yell at him some more during the entire interview but nevertheless you still get the gist of what he is saying. Here it is anyway:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRJ1oyhTZAQ
tl;dr Republicans need to stop fake grassroots efforts, stop defending the status quo, stop yelling and stop playing us (good) vs them (evil) and instead rally around a guy who is in touch with what Americans want and has an actual solution to the problem that Republicans can propose.
a completely inoffensive name
08-08-2009, 10:33
I do not, however, condone the mob behaviour the right is exhibiting here. The Right has historically been the more civil of the two political wings of this country.
Not since the 80's.
Marshal Murat
08-08-2009, 13:40
I have to say after thinking about it, most of these protests seem to be the "real deals" for me, if only because I can empathize with those protesting. These protesters sometimes seem those who would most benefit from any healthcare reform, yet they're acting up against this bill? The Democrats say "corporate bought-mobs" who are ravaging the American Town-Hall.
I say it's people who feel under- or mis-represented by their government, people who are frustrated with a political process that hasn't replied to their needs or when the government has replied it has been inept and ineffective. Taking a list of polls from Real Clear Politics (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html), a majority of Americans disapprove of the job Congress is doing. Another RCP Poll list (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/direction_of_country-902.html#polls) identifies how a slight majority disapproves of where this country is going.
Combining a mistrust of the Legislative Branch who hasn't really helped this process at all by leaving many Americans in the dark (unless you hear something fishy) with a sense that this country is headed on the wrong track; you get opposition to almost any widespread reform of the system. While the Republicans can no doubt elucidate their opposition better with another plan, it's far easier and expends less political capital when the Democrats explode with paranoid "well-dressed protesters", "swastika carrying", "astro-turf" accusations that sound ridiculous and haven't been confirmed yet. If the Democrats can catch an astro-turfer, then the Republicans will die very quickly.
Until then, this stuff is real anger and frustration at a political system that many Americans don't trust and one that seems to be heading down the wrong course.
Edit- The Republicans also have very little incentive to come up with an "alternate plan", simply because the Democrats will destroy the Bill in birth and ridicule the attempt and deflect attention away from their bill, and not contribute to the real attempt at healthcare reform which is so difficult right now.
I do not, however, condone the mob behaviour the right is exhibiting here.
In fairness, it's not as though everyone in the nation who considers themselves "right" is involved with these town hall protests. It's more of a vocal and outraged minority.
But you make a good point; if the "right" allows itself to be painted as yelling instead of talking there could be bad consequences for the Republicans as a whole. This is all strangely reminiscent of where the "left" and the Dems went in the 1970s. Convinced of their moral and ideological superiority, the left allowed some pretty extreme people to do as they liked without much pushback from the party (Black Panthers, campus protesters, everything-protesters, etc.) and as a result the Dems were tarred for decades as the party that tolerated and encourage extremist ideologues.
A similar dynamic could play out here. Not saying it will, and not saying the two situations are exact analogies, but some of the parallels are striking.
a completely inoffensive name
08-08-2009, 23:50
If the Democrats can catch an astro-turfer, then the Republicans will die very quickly.
They did: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/grassroots-protester-actually-gop-official.php?ref=fpa
Edit- The Republicans also have very little incentive to come up with an "alternate plan", simply because the Democrats will destroy the Bill in birth and ridicule the attempt and deflect attention away from their bill, and not contribute to the real attempt at healthcare reform which is so difficult right now.
They have little incentive for their current constituents who are crazy birthers.
It would actually be great for them politically in the big picture. They introduce a comprehensive plan to fix health care, they can now claim they are no longer defending the status quo and wish to make health care affordable to 47 million Americans. The Democrats shoot it down quickly, the Republicans if they play their cards right can now accuse the Democrats of playing politics instead of actually trying to solve the current crisis. There have been much, much greater comebacks then that, all they really need is to rally around a guy with such a plan then get working with a good PR man.
ICantSpellDawg
08-09-2009, 00:51
In fairness, it's not as though everyone in the nation who considers themselves "right" is involved with these town hall protests. It's more of a vocal and outraged minority.
But you make a good point; if the "right" allows itself to be painted as yelling instead of talking there could be bad consequences for the Republicans as a whole. This is all strangely reminiscent of where the "left" and the Dems went in the 1970s. Convinced of their moral and ideological superiority, the left allowed some pretty extreme people to do as they liked without much pushback from the party (Black Panthers, campus protesters, everything-protesters, etc.) and as a result the Dems were tarred for decades as the party that tolerated and encourage extremist ideologues.
A similar dynamic could play out here. Not saying it will, and not saying the two situations are exact analogies, but some of the parallels are striking.
To be honest, though, the only things that Republicans could do to not move further down the hole in your estimation is to become Democrats, right? It a tough call. Your prescription is suicide.
Whether you call them grassroots or astroturf, Gallup polling (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-08-12-poll-12_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip) suggests that the Democrat effort to paint them as un-American nazis isn't working.
The raucous protests at congressional town hall meetings have succeeded in fueling opposition to proposed health care bills among some Americans, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds — particularly the independents who tend to be at the center of political debates.
In a survey of 1,000 adults taken Tuesday, 34% say the sometimes heated protests at sessions held by members of Congress have made them more sympathetic to the protesters' views; 21% say they are less sympathetic.
Independents by 2-1, 35%-16%, say they are more sympathetic to the protesters now.
a completely inoffensive name
08-13-2009, 01:42
Well that's good disinformation at work for ya.
Louis VI the Fat
08-13-2009, 04:13
After eight years of "if you don't believe in trampling human rights, you're a terrorist" we now have the Democrat's version of demonisation.But there really is an astroturf* anti-healthcare reform movement. See, for example, the infamous 'Americans for Prosperity'. This very well-funded group is doing to healthcare debate what it has previously done for global warming and labour: stifle debate, shout and yell, create outrage, spread alarmist misinformation.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Americans_for_Prosperity: 'Healthcare reform is the holocaust'.
The average Republican is allergic to government interference. Likewise in healthcare. A lot of the opposition is genuine, sincere, so much is true.
Healthcare reform, however, is an excruciatingly difficult subject. Few people (not me either) understand the ins-and-outs. A lot of people are protesting what they don't understand. For example, there currently is little to no free market in healthcare. What there does is, is bureaucracy, protected monopolies, paper-pushing, no choice for consumers. All of which protected by government. Which does not strike me as particularly representative of conservative values, and certainly not worthy of protecting against 'government intrusion'. It is, however, what industry and the GOP are trying to sell to American families as 'market', 'freedom' and 'in your best interest'. Meanwhile, these families can not get decent and affordable healthcare coverage like the entire rest of the free world.
*I love that word. Genius.
Major Robert Dump
08-13-2009, 04:40
My grandma survived the death panel and all she got was some stupid cookies.
Former health insurance exec speaks out (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/former-exec-insurers-fomenting-town-hall-chaos-2009-08-12.html):
A former health insurance executive says the disruptions taking place at lawmakers' town halls around the country are the result of stealth efforts by health insurance companies.
Wendell Potter, a former CIGNA vice president, detailed what he said were past covert efforts by the industry. [...] "When you hear someone complaining about traveling down a 'slippery slope to socialism,' some insurance flack, like I used to be, wrote that," Potter added.
Potter said during his 20 years in the insurance business, the industry would funnel money to large public firms who would create front groups and find friendly voices in conservative media.
In particular, he cited front groups created to fight "Patients' Bill of Rights" legislation in the 1990s, as well as a campaign to discredit the Michael Moore film "Sicko," which harshly criticized the industry. [...]
A health insurance trade group, America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), sent a letter to congressional leaders earlier this week stating support for "bipartisan health reform" and denying any role in fomenting disruptions at meetings.
ICantSpellDawg
08-13-2009, 19:51
Former health insurance exec speaks out (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/former-exec-insurers-fomenting-town-hall-chaos-2009-08-12.html):
A former health insurance executive says the disruptions taking place at lawmakers' town halls around the country are the result of stealth efforts by health insurance companies.
Wendell Potter, a former CIGNA vice president, detailed what he said were past covert efforts by the industry. [...] "When you hear someone complaining about traveling down a 'slippery slope to socialism,' some insurance flack, like I used to be, wrote that," Potter added.
Potter said during his 20 years in the insurance business, the industry would funnel money to large public firms who would create front groups and find friendly voices in conservative media.
In particular, he cited front groups created to fight "Patients' Bill of Rights" legislation in the 1990s, as well as a campaign to discredit the Michael Moore film "Sicko," which harshly criticized the industry. [...]
A health insurance trade group, America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), sent a letter to congressional leaders earlier this week stating support for "bipartisan health reform" and denying any role in fomenting disruptions at meetings.
Again, do you deny that some people are legitimately pissed about this? Did you blame Communists and anarchists for front protests of the War in Iraq or everything else the Bush Admin did?
The reality is that there is nothing capitalist about monopolistically obfuscating health care costs and obliterating price lowering competition. Health Insurance needs to be reformed as sure as youre born, but the way in which people are doing it is wrong. I don't want Democrats tackling this themselves - they will compound the problem. I also don't want Republicans to do it themselves because they will screw it as well. A Gesture of Good will would be to provide a bigger Republican voice in the process then we might even deserve.
Cost is primary. As long as consumers dictate pricing the system will work. If they don't (as they don't now) the problem will get worse. Democrats don't get this - Republicans have the benefit of being powerless observers and are starting to get it as a matter of survival.
The table needs to be equal. Strong, untainted GOP leadership is needed to wash away the illegitimate blocking tactics and provide balance. They need to show the american people that some Republicans are beign listened to. Lindsay Graham, Paul Ryan and numerous others are just waiting for an outstretched hand.
Again, do you deny that some people are legitimately pissed about this?
I think most of them are pissed they lost the White House to a negro. Others have been whipped up on misinformation and demagoguery from Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. Here's an important read from conervative economist Bruce Bartlett (the entire article (http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-08-12/the-gops-misplaced-rage/full/) is a must-read):
Budget experts have known for years that Medicare was on an unsustainable financial path. It is impossible to pay all the benefits that have been promised because spending has been rising faster than GDP.
In 2003, the Bush administration repeatedly lied about the cost of the drug benefit to get it passed, and Bush himself heavily pressured reluctant conservatives to vote for the program.
Because reforming Medicare is an important part of getting health costs under control generally, Bush could have used the opportunity to develop a comprehensive health-reform plan. By not doing so, he left his party with nothing to offer as an alternative to the Obama plan. Instead, Republicans have opposed Obama's initiative while proposing nothing themselves.
In my opinion, conservative activists, who seem to believe that the louder they shout the more correct their beliefs must be, are less angry about Obama’s policies than they are about having lost the White House in 2008. They are primarily Republican Party hacks trying to overturn the election results, not representatives of a true grassroots revolt against liberal policies. If that were the case they would have been out demonstrating against the Medicare drug benefit, the Sarbanes-Oxley bill, and all the pork-barrel spending that Bush refused to veto.
Until conservatives once again hold Republicans to the same standard they hold Democrats, they will have no credibility and deserve no respect. They can start building some by admitting to themselves that Bush caused many of the problems they are protesting.
I think most of them are pissed they lost the White House to a negro.Wow, that's classy. Most people upset by the healthcare reform proposal are racist- what a great generalization. You should be ashamed of yourself. :no:
If you're not making sweeping racism charges against a large group of people, I'd love to hear exactly what you meant. :dizzy2:
Lemur and Xiahou are what make the backroom worth reading once in a blue moon.
Xiahou, where were these angry mobs when GWB passed Medicare Part D? Where were they when the $700 billion TARP program was rammed through Congress? Where were they when the CBO predicted a $1.2 trillion deficit before BHO enacted a single policy?
Where were they when Federal spending as a percentage of GDP rose from 18.4 to 20.9? Where was all of this indignation?
Honestly, I think there's a class of people who see the country's racial complexion changing, and it freaks them out. 'Cause on the issues they simply don't have grounds to be as angry as their screaming makes them out to be.
So yeah, there's a racial dimension. I wouldn't call them racists, though. But none of these people took to the streets or screamed at their representatives when far more liberty-robbing events than health care reform took place.
Let's hear your theory: Why the anger now and not previously? Is this just another case of It's okay to do it if you're a Republican?
-edit-
P.S.: Anyone who disagrees with me is going to get turned into Soylent Green when they come in front of my Death Panel.
I complained about Medicare part D- and I know I wasn't alone. Even more people were livid over TARP. People's anger over government excess has been snowballing for a long time. And, unlike you, I'm not going to try to attribute all of people's outrage to one or two specific things. Some don't like the plan on it's merits, some are upset that it'll further spike our deficit, some are nuts (there's always a few) and many are upset by a combination of reasons. Protests and anger over government spending have been growing for years. The deficit this year is quadruple what it was last year. If people were uneasy before, how do you think they'd feel now?
But no, it's so much easier for you to say that A)Most of them don't like negroes or B) Those that don't hate blacks are just stupid and being duped into opposition. I'm sure that lumping everyone who is opposed to it into a nice little stereotype makes it so much easier for you to dismiss them. Pathetic.
Which am I, Lemur? I don't like the healthcare reform plans. Is it because I don't like a negro being in the Whitehouse or because I'm too dumb to know what's good for me? It's gotta be one or the other, you said so.
Well, there is a strong nativist theme with the protesters, sorry. It was even stronger with the Birthers.
We've had federal overspending, overreaching and information grabbing on an epic scale for eight years. But suddenly a negro is president and it's time to bring the guns and scream in our representatives' faces.
Yup, must be a coincidence.
(P.S.: When protester after protester screams about how they're losing "their" America, what do you suppose they're talking about? Physician reimbursement schedules? Rural clinic access provisions?)
-edit-
In response to your edit: Xiahou, I seriously doubt you're attending town hall meetings in PA, screaming at the top of your lungs and declaring that the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants. So as the courts would say, you have no standing.
If you're trying to say that I'm saying anyone who's dissatisfied with the five current healthcare reform bills is a racist or misled, well, epic reading comprehension fail. We are discussing people who try to shout down their representatives at town meetings, not policy wonks or Backroom contributors.
Crazed Rabbit
08-14-2009, 00:06
You ever heard of the 'straw that breaks the camel's back' Lemur?
As for suggesting a majority of these protestors are protesting because Obama is black - that's beyond preposterous.
CR
We've had federal overspending, overreaching and information grabbing on an epic scale for eight years.If it was on an epic scale before, what is it now when it has quadrupled, hmmm?
(P.S.: When protester after protester screams about how they're losing "their" America, what do you suppose they're talking about? Physician reimbursement schedules?)It speaks volumes to you mindset if the first thing you attribute that to is racism. Do you think that people could have other visions of "their" America besides just a white one? Why is it Obama supporters, like yourself, who are always the ones to drag race into everything he does. Do you think some people were harder on Clinton for things that Bush Sr did as well? I've already explained how average people could have a growing sense of outrage over government excess, so let's set them aside and look at the worst sort of partisan hacks. Are there people out there who would give a Republican a pass for something and bash a Democrat for the same thing? Of course there are, I've heard them do it. But I have no idea how you get off attributing "most" people's anger to racism. We've really moved forward in electing a black president haven't we? Before, you'd have to defend a policy on its merit. Now, you can just call opponents racist. Good thing for the post-racial presidency. :dizzy2:
In response to your edit: Xiahou, I seriously doubt you're attending town hall meetings in PA, screaming at the top of your lungs and declaring that the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants. So as the courts would say, you have no standing.The excerpt you quoted said people "Again, do you deny that some people are legitimately pissed about this?"
There was no mention of screaming protesters at rallies in the selection you quoted nor in your response. Many people who are "pissed" protest respectfully, many of us, like myself, don't even go. But we're still upset or "pissed" about what our government is trying to force on us. You glibly dismissed us all as racists(most) or suckers(the rest).
If you're trying to say that I'm saying anyone who's dissatisfied with the five current healthcare reform bills is a racist or misled, well, epic reading comprehension fail. We are discussing people who try to shout down their representatives at town meetings, not policy wonks or Backroom contributors.More like epic posting fail. I read what you typed. Nothing more or less. If you mean something other than what you type, maybe you should type that instead. :yes:
Edit: Even had you said that the protesters are either racists or stupid, that alone would be patently offensive, but at least you would have left me out of your insults.
You ever heard of the 'straw that breaks the camel's back' Lemur?
Yeah, and it's funny how the straw happens to be a Democratic administration. I seem to remember people getting freaked out and ready for revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_movement) under Clinton as well. Bit of a pattern there ...
As for suggesting a majority of these protestors are protesting because Obama is black - that's beyond preposterous.
Right, 'cause nativism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativism_%28politics%29) has never been a force in American politics. Absurd! Ridiculous!
-edit-
Cross-posted with you there, Xiahou.
Since the subject of the thread is protests, and since we have been exclusively discussing the raucous town halls, I thought it was obvious that I was talking about the protesters. I also mentioned the word "protesters" in every response to your high dudgeon responses. However, if you want to warm yourself on a hot coal of outrage and injured pride, be my guest. I was talking about the protesters who have been in the news and on the YouTubes. You clearly are ready to take offense on behalf of all mankind.
And yeah, I do think there is a racial component to their outrage. If that honks you off, then you shall be very, very honked off.
Hosakawa Tito
08-14-2009, 00:21
Some of our politicians had better back off the jokes on lynching and doing violence to their ideological opponents before some nutjob in the crowd decides that's the "green light" and acts on it.
Since the subject of the thread is protests, and since we have been exclusively discussing the raucous town halls, I thought it was obvious that I was talking about the protesters. I also mentioned the word "protesters" in every response to your high dudgeon responses. However, if you want to warm yourself on a hot coal of outrage and injured pride, be my guest. I was talking about the protesters who have been in the news and on the YouTubes. You clearly are ready to take offense on behalf of all mankind.I see, when you said that people who are pissed about healthcare reform are mostly just pissed because they don't like a negro in the White House. And when you said "most" you really meant that there's just a racial component. It's my fault for reading what you typed and taking offense instead of knowing that you really meant to say "I think there's a racist component to some of the protests". That's big of you Lemur, really.....
Some of our politicians had better back off the jokes on lynching and doing violence to their ideological opponents before some nutjob in the crowd decides that's the "green light" and acts on it.Yeah, somehow I don't think it's likely we'll be seeing an angry mob lynching Pelosi or any other member of congress at the behest of a politician. :no:
It appears your difficulties are not limited to posting broken links.
Yes, I think most of the protesters are deeply disturbed that an "other" class person has taken the White House. I doubt that Obama's specific race is the problem; he could just as easily be Latino or Polynesian to provoke the same gut-level distress. So yeah, there's a racial dimension that looks like nativism (this land is my land, this land ain't your land), not racism.
None of this is inconsistent, and despite your attempt to show me as backtracking, I am not.
What do you think the protesters mean when they scream about losing "our" America? Seriously, what do you imagine they really mean? 'Cause their vehemence and outrage seems way out of proportion with the level of change being proposed.
Yeah, somehow I don't think it's likely we'll be seeing an angry mob lynching Pelosi or any other member of congress at the behest of a politician.
I would love to see how you would react if an angry liberal screamed in the face of a Republican representative and then dropped a loaded gun (http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/printDS/304149) on the ground.
“Yelling and screaming is counterproductive,” [Arizona congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D)] told the Sierra Vista Herald at a Congress on Your Corner event last week. There, one visitor dropped a gun at the meet n’ greet held in a Douglas Safeway, her staff says. That has aides, who called police to the event, concerned for her safety.
“We have never felt the need before to notify law enforcement when we hold these events,” said spokesman C.J. Karamargin.
This sort of thing should give you an idea of how enraged (and hilarious) these protesters can be:
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v489/Lemurmania/teapartybraveheart.jpg
Louis VI the Fat
08-14-2009, 01:37
http://patientsunitednow.com/?q=events. <- industry sponsored astroturf movement:
'Bring your family and friends out on the Patients United Now Tour and make sure your voice is heard against policies that will lead to a Washington takeover of your family’s health care, and support real health care choices for every American.'
If the healthcare industry sponsors expensive movements against this bill - what's more: are going at the proposals with all guns blazing - then apparantly the proposals managed to hit the bulls eye in trying to cut down on some very profitable industry practices. :yes:
Louis VI the Fat
08-14-2009, 01:41
What do you think the protesters mean when they scream about losing "our" America? Seriously, what do you imagine they really mean? 'Cause their vehemence and outrage seems way out of proportion with the level of change being proposed.Yes, there is a racial dimension. This much is true.
There is also a partisan dimension to the outrage. It never ceases to amaze the foreigner to what extent American political partisanship is aggressive, alarmist, omgtheendoftheworld-ish. The other side 'must be' terrorists, communists, racists, 'or how else to explain their perfidious scheme to destroy America and all it stands for'.
The second thing that strikes the foreign visitor, is that one could walk into any nice middle-class suburb. Anywhere in America. One house has a little porch, a basketball hoop over the garage door, the most ornate Christmas lightshow in the street. The house next door looks different, yet so very the same. It has the street's finest Halloween decorations, kids play soccer on the lawn, the garage door is open, showing the father's tools and fishing gear on the walls. Both house the same sort of family, with the same education, their kids go to the same highschool, each attends church on Sunday.
Yet, one is Republican, the other Democrat. The first thinks the Clintons will turn America into a dictatorship, that they wil stop at nothing to gain power. The second thinks that Bush is the anti-Christ, possible a manchurian candidate. Which is what the first thinks about Obama.
In other countries with extreme political polarization, at least political affiliation is tied to class, or race, or religion, or region. You can tell a person's affiliation from a mile away. To a large extent, this is not the case in America.
The good news about that is that this stabilises America, keeps it together. The 'other side' does not have a distinct 'face'. The bad news is that it shows the utter lack of moderation, of soberness of mind, of contemplative reflection, in American political debate.
America must necessarily be a moderate, middle-class country for it to function. This is what America is at heart, what is at the core of its succes. Yet, this very aspect is undermined by political partisanship. That is a centripedal force. It forces people into groups, with distinct cultures, with culture wars. Moderation, recognising your neighbour as 'one of your own', is lost.
Quite apart from their impact on healthcare reform - and nicely tying in all of the above and page two of this thread -it is this very polarizing effect of astroturf movements and other political hackery that undermines America. When politics is reduced to shouting and yelling and alarmist misinformation, @@@@@@* is what you end up with.
*I would name some other countries here, but don't want to sound disparaging to possible members.
What do you think the protesters mean when they scream about losing "our" America? Seriously, what do you imagine they really mean? 'Cause their vehemence and outrage seems way out of proportion with the level of change being proposed.
You can't think of anything else? Seriously? What did Democrats mean when they said they wanted to "take back America"? What minority group did they think had seized control of America? Dirty bunch of nativists!
Yes, I think most of the protesters are deeply disturbed that an "other" class person has taken the White House. I doubt that Obama's specific race is the problem; he could just as easily be Latino or Polynesian to provoke the same gut-level distress. So yeah, there's a racial dimension that looks like nativism (this land is my land, this land ain't your land), not racism.Ok, so you did mean to make an offensive generalization. I'm glad we're finally clear on that much. By the way, most Obama supporters are misogynists. Most of them were deeply disturbed that a woman- Hillary or Palin might have gotten into the White House. :yes:
You can't think of anything else? Seriously? What did Democrats mean when they said they wanted to "take back America"?
If democrats had been screaming it at the top of their lungs and preventing any dialogue by shouting down town meetings, I'd want to know. As it is, you're equating the empty slogans of election time with the red-faced mantra of the town hall protesters. Both "Ready to lead on day one" and "White power!" are slogans, but they're hardly equitable or convertible.
When a politician says, "It's time to take back America," we all know it's time to take a nap. When a screaming protester froths that he's "losing my America!" while jamming himself into the face of an elected Congresscritter, something else is at play. I've yet to hear you even begin to answer what that might be.
And I'm sure the birther/teabagger who painted a swastika (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-08-11-congressman-swastika_N.htm) on a black congressman's sign was, um, making a philosophical point about national socialism. Nothing racial there, nope.
Good points as per usual, Louis.
-edit-
Also, unless you plan to bring a gun to a town hall meeting and scream in the face of a representative or senator, I don't see why you insist on lumping yourself in with these loons, Xiahou. I mean, if you absolutely must take offense, nothing's going to stop you, but in the process you're equating yourself with the worst sorts of crazies. Doesn't reflect well on you. This thread is about the protesters. You did read the title and the rest of the thread, correct?
If democrats had been screaming it at the top of their lungs and preventing any dialogue by shouting down town meetings, I'd want to know. As it is, you're equating the empty slogans of election time with the red-faced mantra of the town hall protesters. Both "Ready to lead on day one" and "White power!" are slogans, but they're hardly equitable or convertible.
When a politician says, "It's time to take back America," we all know it's time to take a nap. When a screaming protester froths that he's "losing my America!" while jamming himself into the face of an elected Congresscritter, something else is at play. I've yet to hear you even begin to answer what that might be.So you seriously believe that Democrat groups have never shut down events before? No union thugs have ever tried to make a scene at a function? Anti-war protesters have never tried to shout down others instead of debating?
I kept asking you to engage in a little critical thinking and just try to think of what else they could mean by "we're losing our America". See, when I hear people yell that to Arlen Specter, I think they're probably worried about the growth of government and worried how a government run healthcare program might change their lives. Apparently, when you see them yelling that to a white "congresscritter" it's because they don't want a negro in the White House. That you immediately assume that and cannot even think of another possible alternative doesn't reflect well on you, Lemur.
Also, unless you plan to bring a gun to a town hall meeting and scream in the face of a representative or senator, I don't see why you insist on lumping yourself in with these loons, Xiahou. I mean, if you absolutely must take offense, nothing's going to stop you, but in the process you're equating yourself with the worst sorts of crazies. Doesn't reflect well on you. This thread is about the protesters. You did read the title and the rest of the thread, correct?We've already been through this. TSM, asked you if you would believe that some people could be legitimately upset over the proposed reform, you replied that most of them don't like a negro in the White House. TSM did not say "some protesters", he said "some people". Then when someone takes what you wrote at face value, you pretend to be the aggrieved party. You've since explained yourself- I get what you mean. I'm not a protester, and it wasn't aimed at me. It's still a generalization and it's still offensive to any non-"nativist" protester, which I have no doubt includes most of them. You have no statistics or data to support your attack- just your own bigoted views of them.
Louis VI the Fat
08-14-2009, 03:13
Good points as per usual, Louis.Why, thank you. :blush:
For good measure, I added in a subtle side-remark:
'The other side 'must be' terrorists, communists, racists, 'or how else to explain their etcetera'
Even if there is nativity, or racism, - and yes, both are visibly there - I think a lot of the behaviour of the more outraged protesters can be explained by extremities of partisanship and by lack of sober moderation in political discourse. Clinton wasn't Black*, yet his presidency managed to create eight years of outrage. In a different manner, so did the presidencies of Bush and Reagan.
*No, he was not 'The first Black president', even if he liked to portray himself as such.
ICantSpellDawg
08-14-2009, 05:05
Great arguements, guys. None of them are in any way absurd.
I'm no friend of insurance companies. The way that they manipulate Health care costsand premiums has become a burden on all of our backs, but the hackneyed plan we have on our front door setting up shop in our living room is not our friend. I support Republicans for health care reform and I would like to see someone gouge the INS companies as the monopolies they are
But I do believe that private insurance can work in our favor if we find the right balance. The right balance has nothing to do with nationalized health care.
So you seriously believe that Democrat groups have never shut down events before?
If you weren't able to reach for a tu quoque (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque) argument, would you have anything to say on this subject?
I think they're probably worried about the growth of government and worried how a government run healthcare program might change their lives.
Yes, and it got more urgent and vitriolic all of a sudden, right when the "conservatives" lost their golden boy, and a dusky Moor swept into power. Fascinating, yes? Louis is right, a lot of this is raw partisanship, but the anger and distress of many of the protesters seems more profound than partisan demonization can explain. Many of these protesters believe that they are literally losing their nation, that it will be gone in some sense, changed beyond recognition into a dystopian something. If that isn't an overreaction to a health care bill that doesn't even exist yet ...
You have no statistics or data to support your attack- just your own bigoted views of them.
And you have none to defend them. Cheers.
I understand what the protesters are saying, I just think their level of anger, vitriol and naked fear does not correlate with the issues they are protesting. And their timing, if coincidental, is a statistical miracle.
Watch this protester (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwgzYkTDsmQ), and tell me there's no racial subtext. The Other has come to take away your stuff and destroy America. "I want my country back," she screams, and seems to mean it. Amazing that she appears to have slept through Medicare D, warrantless wiretapping, the dismissal of habeas corpus, TARP, etc.
The trends have not changed radically, but something has changed, and the loonbats are out in force. Feel free to explain the sudden explosion of nativist populist anger.
Sheogorath
08-14-2009, 09:38
I, personally, find it incredibly amusing that the very same people who BLASTED protesters against the Iraq/Afghanistan invasions (And the Patriot Act, and Guantanamo...) as 'unpatriotic' for opposing the president have now come around and started hurling names at the administration.
And now apparently Glenn Beck, that righteous beacon of democracy and freedom, has started comparing the Obama administration to Nazi Germany.
I won't say the democratic party is innocent on the subject of hypocrisy, but really, this just seems to be taking it to a whole new level.
KukriKhan
08-14-2009, 14:19
America must necessarily be a moderate, middle-class country for it to function. This is what America is at heart, what is at the core of its succes. Yet, this very aspect is undermined by political partisanship. That is a centripedal force. It forces people into groups, with distinct cultures, with culture wars. Moderation, recognising your neighbour as 'one of your own', is lost.
We are. What you see is the noisy, raucous, ridiculous way we have devised to achieve that moderate, middle-class country - among a bunch of revolutionaries (without major bloodshed).
You can trust Barney Frank to put the nutjobs in their place :laugh4:
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/barney-frank-confronts-woman-obama-hitler
'On what planet do you spend most of your time?'
ICantSpellDawg
08-19-2009, 23:52
I, personally, find it incredibly amusing that the very same people who BLASTED protesters against the Iraq/Afghanistan invasions (And the Patriot Act, and Guantanamo...) as 'unpatriotic' for opposing the president have now come around and started hurling names at the administration.
And now apparently Glenn Beck, that righteous beacon of democracy and freedom, has started comparing the Obama administration to Nazi Germany.
I won't say the democratic party is innocent on the subject of hypocrisy, but really, this just seems to be taking it to a whole new level.
I find it amusing that this is the only angle you find amusing. You don't see any irony that the same people who yelled and screamed about the last administration and how they were dismissed are the ones dismissing people today?
LittleGrizzly
08-20-2009, 00:42
Anyone who says its unpatroitic to protest is a moron whichever side of the fence the instruction comes from...
I would venture those who make the effort to protest are more patriotic than other Americans no matter what they're protesting. Just remember this next time its comes to a left wing protest its not unpatriotic or unamerican. It may be unhelpful for the health bill or the war in Iraq but its thier right...
HopAlongBunny
08-20-2009, 13:17
Anyone who has ever spent any time working for a political organization would laugh; this has every incentive needed for organized mobilization. Money, influence, power; there is an enormous stake in this.
The question I think is interesting is: Why so much attn to this one?
Was there dissent over the bailouts? Yes.
Was there dissent over T.A.R.P.? Yes.
Was there dissent/outrage over the wiretaps? Yes.
All lost in the fog; but this issue gets the lights and shiny cameras...and never ending repetition.
Is every protester a Republican/Insurance industry patsy? Certainly not...some definitely are.
I am always curious about where the "gaze" of media comes to rest.
You can trust Barney Frank to put the nutjobs in their place :laugh4:
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/barney-frank-confronts-woman-obama-hitler
'On what planet do you spend most of your time?'What do you expect from people who support (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2009/08/town_hall_talk_frank_grills_op.html?hpid=sec-politics) LaRouche?
Don Corleone
08-24-2009, 17:54
So, I just got back from China and am dealing with jetlag and the end of a kidneystone of a course (2 more till I get my masters!) and thus don't have the time to read through the past few pages of this debate.
From the looks of what I can see in one particular page here, it looks like the arguments basically boil down to:
-If you disagree with the Health Care plans put forward by Congress you're a racist and a nativist
vs.
-If anything put out by Congress actually passes, it will be the end of American civilization.
Basically, the usual level of thoughtfulness and carefully reasoned arguments we can expect back here?
Seriously.... folks.
Lemur, there's all kinds of reasons besides Obama's skin color to not like the myriad of bills percolating in the eternal swamp, aka D.C. You really degrade your arguments when every single one comes back to "Agree with the White House or you're a racist/nativist" (Sorry, never saw the finer point you were trying to draw between the two).
Others: Please, other than "Nothing the Democrats are suggesting", can we have some sort of proposal put forward? Other than tort reform, what on Earth would all of you recommend to do about a system that is consuming GDP at an ever increasing rate, yet not offering comensurate results?
Basically, if nothing changes, I'm quitting my job and becoming an insurance executive. Or a doctor. Legalized theft, gotta love it. :cool:
Lemur, there's all kinds of reasons besides Obama's skin color to not like the myriad of bills percolating in the eternal swamp, aka D.C. You really degrade your arguments when every single one comes back to "Agree with the White House or you're a racist/nativist"
Um, as I have said multiple times, I was attempting to explain the outrage, anger and fear expressed by the more over-the-top town hall screamers. And yeah, I think there's a racial component to that hysteria. I would never argue that to disagree with President 44 is to be a racist, but thanks for the reductio ad absurdum anyway.
Don Corleone
08-24-2009, 19:01
Okay, perhaps I didn't articulate myself as well as I would have liked.
Has it ever occurred to you that the people that are freaking out at these town hall meetings are terrified, not bigots? Congress has stepped in and talked about rationing, outlawing private insurance (or subsidizing the public option until private goes out of business) and meanwhile, there's talk of abortion funding, requirements for private hospitals to peform abortions and the other litany of woes. I'm not arguing that all of these characterizations are accurate. I'm arguing that the belief that they are, rather than the ever present racism you seem to suspect in anyone that disagrees with the administration might be to blame.
The guy who pushed his kid in the wheelchair up to the front of Specter's meeting comes to mind.
Has it ever occurred to you that the people that are freaking out at these town hall meetings are terrified, not bigots?
Yes, clearly they are terrified. But what, exactly, are they terrified of? They seem to be willing to believe anything. Tell them that Obama plans to personally rape their gandmama, and they'll buy it. They're out of their minds with fear.
I'm arguing that the belief that they are, rather than the ever present racism you seem to suspect in anyone that disagrees with the administration might be to blame.
So for me to argue that there's a strong racial component to the white-eyed terror of the town hall screamers is to say that "anyone who disagrees with the administration" is a racist? Don, we could get a lot further in this convo if you would stop reducing my argument to absurdities.
Don Corleone
08-24-2009, 19:45
The line you seem to seize upon is "Our America". You have pre-decided that particular phrase is specifically tuned to a racist/nativist message.
First, I argue that it doesn't in this context. "Their America" that they refer to is the America of an ownership society of personal responsibility, where they're convinced that they're going to play the ant in the modern respin of Aesop's fable... they bust their ass to squirrel away for their family and the government is going to come and take that away from them and distribute it those who bought new flat panel televisions instead of paying insurance premiums.
Second, I have heard the phrase "Our America" a lot in the past 8 years... it usually came from the anti-war crowd. The term "Our America" generally is indicative of a "not in my name" argument, not racism or nativism.
Finally, if you're looking for boogeymen, you should stop playing the race card and start playing the homophobia card and the sexism card, because the two scariest people in Washington are Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi. And since they're always right also, having that all-important D next to their name, anybody that disagrees with them by definition must be a homophobe and a sexist, right? It's not Barney Frank's arrogance and shocking statements about telling people how he'll spend their money, it's his gay identity, right? And it's not Nancy Pelosi's hypocicy, flying private jets for all her staff around the country while moaning about Greenhouse gasses, it's her gender, right? :dizzy2::dizzy2:
I can make the identity politic arguments for the Dems better than they can these days, simply because I've heard them all so many times. If you want to talk about dropping the reductio ad absurdum arguments, stop reducing everybody that disagrees with you to a gun toting, whiskey-drinking, Jesus-loving, homophobic, racist klansman.
So for me to argue that there's a strong racial component to the white-eyed terror of the town hall screamers is to say that "anyone who disagrees with the administration" is a racist? Don, we could get a lot further in this convo if you would stop reducing my argument to absurdities.Yes, your argument was already absurd enough. No need to reduce it further. :juggle2:
Don Corleone
08-24-2009, 19:49
For the record, before you drop the "vast-right-wing conspiracy" label on me, I'm actually pro-reform, so long as its the right reform. I don't want a half-assed rushed measure that grows government and fails to control costs. Obama claims this was the single most important piece of legislature of his presidency.... yet he demanded it be debated, discussed, paneled, vetted, presented and voted upon in.... two months? :dizzy2: WTF?
Xiahou, if you're ready to make a rational argument, or contribute anything to this discussion, feel free to do so.
The line you seem to seize upon is "Our America". You have pre-decided that particular phrase is specifically tuned to a racist/nativist message.
I "pre-decided"? What does that even mean?
"Their America" that they refer to is the America of an ownership society of personal responsibility, where they're convinced that they're going to play the ant in the modern respin of Aesop's fable... they bust their ass to squirrel away for their family and the government is going to come and take that away from them and distribute it those who bought new flat panel televisions instead of paying insurance premiums.
Don, this is your personal nightmare scenario, and I've seen you frame it many, many times. On this occasion you forgot to mention that the welfare/medicare cheats will also have Xbox 360s and smoke pot. There are some other details I'm forgetting.
Look, I'm not misunderstanding what the town hall screamers are saying, and I fully understand their arguments. (Although why they continue to tolerate Socialist fire and police departments is beyond me -- and in fact, I have argued with a RL right-wing friend who insists that those should be privatized as well, and that the military would be better run by corporations. Thankfully these views have yet to gain traction in the mainstream.)
What I am responding to is the level of anger and fear displayed by the screamers. Frankly, it's irrational. There are plenty of things to mislike about President 44, and there are many good arguments to be made against the five healthcare bills floating around. But the white-eyed terror and fury of the town hall disruptors is beyond rational process.
The term "Our America" generally is indicative of a "not in my name" argument, not racism or nativism.
Watch the birther (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwgzYkTDsmQ) screaming her head off about "my America." Take in her distress, her panic, her anger. Then try to argue that this is about economic policy. Clearly it is not.
If you want to talk about dropping the reductio ad absurdum arguments, stop reducing everybody that disagrees with you to a gun toting, whiskey-drinking, Jesus-loving, homophobic, racist klansman.
This just isn't worthy of you, Don. You're grandstanding instead of talking. Where have I mentioned Jesus? Where have I mentioned guns? Where did the whiskey come from, besides your anal orifice? At least the klan makes some sort of sense, since you're accusing me of being a chicken little racism-screamer, but even that level of argumentation is more appropriate to Glenn Beck than a thoughtful guy like you.
I'm ready to argue in good faith if you are.
Xiahou, if you're ready to make a rational argument, or contribute anything to this discussion, feel free to do so.You'd have to do so first old bean. I was pretty well finished letting you make a fool out of yourself after you responded to my assertion that your claims have no supporting evidence by asking me to prove a negative. :dizzy2:
Your claim that most protesters don't like a negro in the White House is completely unsupportable and offensive. I don't expect any of this to phase you though, so keep on digging your hole.
I just think it's pretty hilarious that you attempt to dismiss protesters shouting down their white members of Congress over their support of a bill as being racists nativists. And then you actually have the stones to accuse others of putting forward irrational and absurd arguments....
Well then, Xiahou, since you're convinced that you've already won, how about you do a victory lap, and let me and Doc C have a grown-up conversation?
Don Corleone
08-24-2009, 20:31
I "pre-decided"? What does that even mean? I couldn't come up with an adequate term, so I invented one. You seem to have the omniscience required, or at least believe you do, to assign motive to the rantings of the fringe elements you're citing. You heard that phrase "Our America" and you have personally decided that is proof-positive that the phrase is the smoking gun of latent racism in the crowds opposed to the leading health-care reform proposals put out for discussion right now.
Don, this is your personal nightmare scenario, and I've seen you frame it many, many times. On this occasion you forgot to mention that the welfare/medicare cheats will also have Xbox 360s and smoke pot. There are some other details I'm forgetting.
You forgot the free pizza, but yes, you seem to have the gist of it. It is a considerable, and based on the way life in these 50 is shaping up, reasoned (IMHO) concern for me and millions of other hard-working, tax-paying Americans. Laugh all you want, I've seen nothing in a Democratic or Republican led government that disputes this notion. The only thing that seems to stop the societal slouch towards the veal-calf public is gridlock, which is why I've started voting D-R-D-R-... on every ballot .
The government is buying votes and placation. What really torques me is they always buy them with my dollars, taken from my children. And no, I'm not being hypocritical. I was every bit as upset when the stinking turd that was Medicaid Part D got laid on the carpet.
Look, I'm not misunderstanding what the town hall screamers are saying, and I fully understand their arguments. (Although why they continue to tolerate Socialist fire and police departments is beyond me -- and in fact, I have argued with a RL right-wing friend who insists that those should be privatized as well, and that the military would be better run by corporations. Thankfully these views have yet to gain traction in the mainstream.)
What I am responding to is the level of anger and fear displayed by the screamers. Frankly, it's irrational. There are plenty of things to mislike about President 44, and there are many good arguments to be made against the five healthcare bills floating around. But the white-eyed terror and fury of the town hall disruptors is beyond rational process. What could possibly be more terrifying than the belief, rational or not, that the government was going to rob you and hand your money for your health care over to the unwashed masses, leaving you with squat all to provide for yourself and your family? And you can't understand an emotional response? It has to be our old pal, Mr. Ray Cism?
Watch the birther (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwgzYkTDsmQ) screaming her head off about "my America." Take in her distress, her panic, her anger. Then try to argue that this is about economic policy. Clearly it is not. In the sense that she's mad because she thinks free-market politics will be weakened, of course not. But in the sense of she personally believes she's fighting for the welfare of her family? I don't doubt it.
This just isn't worthy of you, Don. You're grandstanding instead of talking. Where have I mentioned Jesus? Where have I mentioned guns? Where did the whiskey come from, besides your anal orifice? At least the klan makes some sort of sense, since you're accusing me of being a chicken little racism-screamer, but even that level of argumentation is more appropriate to Glenn Beck than a thoughtful guy like you.
I'm ready to argue in good faith if you are.
And yet, you completely refuse to address my point that Frank & Pelosi are more feared and despised than Obama. Perhaps because it doesn't fit into your nifty, pre-wrapped racism argument?
I laid out a caricature I've seen quite a lot from the Daily Kos crowd.... the "Bubba" tar & feather job anybody that disagrees with them gets hit with. David Frum, emminent scholar and noted author? Nope, just a racist & a bigot. George Will? Homophobe. Peggy Noonan? Jesus freak.
Seriously, if you want me to quit playing identity politics, lead the way.
Seamus Fermanagh
08-24-2009, 20:50
Gentlemen:
If you insist on discussing the racial aspect of these protests, please keep the choice of words simple rather than witty. Numerous Americans of largely African descent take offense to "Negro," "Colored," or "dusky-hued," among other terms. The generally accepted terms that are considered most "neutral" in character are 'black' or 'african-american.' Please stick to those so as to not accidentally offend.
Thanks.
Seamus, thanks for the guidance.
You heard that phrase "Our America" and you have personally decided that is proof-positive that the phrase is the smoking gun of latent racism in the crowds opposed to the leading health-care reform proposals put out for discussion right now.
Well, for one i would never say that I have "proof positive"; I'm voicing my opinion, as are we all. You can "prove" things in mathematics. Just about everywhere else it's opinion, evidence and reason, but rarely (if ever) proof.
To be perfectly honest, I'm not convinced that race is primary to the protesters, but I think it's likely. Louis made a good argument that this is just over-the-top partisanship as usual, and there's good evidence to support that perspective, given the eruptions of the past. I do believe, however, that the anger and fear of the town hall screamers is something new and interesting, and that the usual motives ascribed to rightwing loonbats don't quite explain what has been going on.
The government is buying votes and placation. What really torques me is they always buy them with my dollars, taken from my children.
Well, eventually the dollars will be taken from our children, but right now they're being taken from us. I'm not going to dispute your perspective here; it's perfectly valid, although I don't entirely agree. We could spin off onto the question of whether or not a graduated income tax is legitimate, but that's a whole 'nother conversation.
What could possibly be more terrifying than the belief, rational or not, that the government was going to rob you and hand your money for your health care over to the unwashed masses, leaving you with squat all to provide for yourself and your family? And you can't understand an emotional response?
In fairness, I don't understand getting freaked out and angry about most issues. I knew in my bones that going into Iraq was a epically bad idea, but I never protested or marched or signed petitions. Maybe I'm too relaxed to relate.
As I said earlier when I was going over these same points with Xiahou (who has declared "mission accomplished" and run off to a victory parade), what I don't understand is the willingness to believe the absolute worst on the part of the protesters. Where is that coming from? Example:
But in the sense of she personally believes she's fighting for the welfare of her family? I don't doubt it.
So why does she believe she's defending the welfare of her family? Based on the logic and rhetoric of the more extreme rightwing protesters, we have been trending toward socialism since 1913 (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005921.html) (at the absolute latest). We have socialized medicine for the elderly, a socialized military, a socialized police system, socialized jails, socialized payments for the elderly, socialized prescription medicine, etc., etc., etc. Why the eruption of anger now? Xiahou makes the argument that it's deficits, but that's completely facile. We've had massive deficits since the inauguration of Saint Reagan. Why the explosion of angst now? Why are we losing America now?
And yet, you completely refuse to address my point that Frank & Pelosi are more feared and despised than Obama. Perhaps because it doesn't fit into your nifty, pre-wrapped racism argument?
Don, I'm not simplifying or mocking your arguments, and I'm doing my level best not to put words in your mouth. Let's have a conversation, okay? If I want blind partisan fury, I know where to go for it, and I'd rather it wasn't from you.
Frank and Pelosi are better targets than President 44, yes indeedy, and their polling is abysmal. So naturally they're a focus of rage. But you don't hear the protesters screaming about Nancy, do you? And you don't see Frank being singled out. On the signs, in the shouts, it's all-Obama all the time. So this seems to undercut the argument you're making.
I laid out a caricature I've seen quite a lot from the Daily Kos crowd....
And laid it at my door, claiming that it's my baby. Unworthy, Don.
Seriously, if you want me to quit playing identity politics, lead the way.
So by suggesting that there's a strong element of racial fear, fear of the Other, at play with the protesters, I deserve no reasoned debate or honest responses? I've pulled a Godwin? How am I supposed to discuss this, then? I do believe xenophobic fear is at play with the protesters. I do think there's a nativist element at work. Is there any way for me to express this that won't cast me into a pit of unworthiness in your eyes, or am I invalidated by merely holding these opinions?
Don Corleone
08-24-2009, 21:45
Well, in reading your latest Lemur, I think we're going to have to agree we're looking at a turquoise egg. I'm saying it's blue and you're saying it's green. I don't think we can make much progress here, other than I'd like to point out two last facts, then, unlike Bill O'Rieley, I really will let you have the last word:
1) You're engaging in selective memory if you think the people at these town halls are less ramped up then people were in the 90's. Don't you remember G. Gordon Liddy telling his listeners to always go for the headshot, cause ATF agents always wear flak jackets?
2) No, you're not freaked out enough to go protest. Neither am I. But I think we can both agree that there are people for whom such moral outrage and unrest comes quite naturally. Wouldn't it stand to reason that these individuals would precisely be the ones to get all ramped up, racially motivated or not? The very fact that you're marching around a town hall meeting, taking your chances with secret service agents and finding your way onto the No-Fly list means you're pretty passionate.... WITHOUT a racial bias.
There. I've said all I can on the matter. If you're still convinced.... "Nope, it's gotta be racism", I can't sway you. I think Louis has the right of it though. Yes, the protesters are getting carried away. So is an overreaching government. If we're not careful, we're going to lose our souls in all of this outrage-politic business, both sides.
It doesn't bother me that you've considered the matter and concluded that the protesters must be racially-nativsticly motivated, had that actually happened. What bothers me is the tone to your arguments that there can be no other explanation. It smacks of a "you're either with us, or the evildoers" type of argument, one I would hope you would credit me with never having made during your time in the wilderness.
Xiahou makes the argument that it's deficits, but that's completely facile. We've had massive deficits since the inauguration of Saint Reagan. Why the explosion of angst now? Why are we losing America now?As I've pointed out, and you ignored, the current years deficit is projection to be roughly quadruple the previous record set by Bush. If people groused about Bush's spending -indeed, a large part of the GOPs fall from power was due to overspending- what do you think a proportional reaction to quadrupling that is? Hmmm?
The White House recently raised their 10yr deficit projection from $7 trillion to $9 trillion. Obama has promised to halve the deficit by the end of his first term. Do you realize, that even if he succeeds, the deficit will still be higher than it's highest under Bush? You've tried to call people who are upset about the scale of the deficits hypocrites. If you're going to do that, maybe you should look in the mirror. You railed against Bush's spending- where's your outrage now?
I'm aware that the traditional Obama talking point on deficits is to blame Bush for the current deficit. So, before anyone does that, please consider what I've said above- Obama has said that by the end of his term deficits will still be higher than they were at any time during the previous administration. How long can they get by on blaming the last guy?
What's really unsettling is when you look at the projections. Indeed, they forecast the deficit lowering by the end of Obama's first term. But what happens after that? It takes off like a rocket again! At no point will it even tie the highest deficit of the Bush years which I think we can all agree was bad enough.
Edit: It's important to note that this is not considering any of the proposed health care reforms- all of which would drive the projections significantly upward.https://img232.imageshack.us/img232/1710/31051470.png
How is alarm over this facile?
So by suggesting that there's a strong element of racial fear, fear of the Other, at play with the protesters, I deserve no reasoned debate or honest responses?I seriously can't imagine what "debate" you're looking for with your statement. How does one make an honest response to something you've stated is solely your opinion? How did making sweeping generalizations about the protesters forward the debate? You're just trying to use your unsubstantiated opinion to discredit them. You are not helping the debate. You registered your opinion, just drop it and move on.
Don, you make excellent points; between you and Louis, I guess you've got history on your side, and good examples to back it up.
Xiahou, you're your usual self. I said that the argument that the outrage was caused by deficits was facile, not that such outrage would be facile in and of itself. In other words, I said that to say that clowns cause road rage was untrue, not that road rage is a myth. Strange how your reading comprehension drops so precipitously when you're parsing an argument with which you disagree.
How does one make an honest response to something you've stated is solely your opinion?
Oh, I dunno, Louis and Don C managed quite handily, but maybe they're special.
Oh, I dunno, Louis and Don C managed quite handily, but maybe they're special.That's funny, because your statement "So by suggesting that there's a strong element of racial fear, fear of the Other, at play with the protesters, I deserve no reasoned debate or honest responses?" was directed at Don. :shrug:
I think he's already said, wisely, that he has washed his hands of you in this thread. If I'm smart, I'll do the same. I mean, I seem to remember being able to carry on rational discussions with you, but looking over your responses in this thread I'm hard pressed to find one not laced with childish insults. Have the last word, I'm out.
Edit:If someone else can see the points Lemur's making that I'm apparently missing, please point them out. Maybe if they can be made without the seething rage, I'll be able to pick them out. But I have to admit, right now, I'm not seeing any. It's not that I'm unwilling to discuss the OT, I just have no more interest in discussing it with him. :shrug:
I asked Don to argue in good faith because I know he's capable of it, and I know he's a good guy. If you find vindication in that, you are quite easily sated.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.