Sunday, March 21, 2010

Delegitimizing Obamacare Protests


It seems that ugly crowd of protestors harassing members of Congress in the Capitol complex this afternoon got even uglier than we thought. As noted earlier, in addition to menacing behavior toward multiple members of Congress, one protestor called Rep. Barney Frank a "faggot", a taunt greeted by laughter from fellow protestors.

We're now getting reports that other protestors yelled "nigger" at Rep. John Lewis (D-GA).

Talking Points Memo, True Colors (Even Worse Than We Thought), 20 March 2010

Yesterday, estimates are that 30,000 to 40,000 people turned out in Washington to protest the coming vote on Obamacare. NRO has a good first hand account of the rally with numerous photos:

The rally earlier today on the West Lawn in opposition to the health-care legislation before Congress had all the fingerprints of a somewhat organic celebration of democracy. There was a pretty focused message, but mostly displayed on handwritten signs . . .

As I walked around, if it weren't for the congressmen and some right-wing organization types speaking, one might think people had gathered for an Independence Day celebration. There were smiles and babies and families and goodwill. Now and again I would run into some lone guy responding to a speaker with "then we'll dismantle the government." But that guy also got weird looks — and not just from me. I was struck by how few mass-produced signs there were. Many groups might try to take credit for the rally, but concerned Americans are responsible for it. . . .

Apparently, the worst that the NRO author saw from this mass of people - peaceably assembled to petition the Government for a redress of grievances - was repeated use of the F-word. Freedom.

But the meme of the day among the left wing MSM was not the protests - and certainly not the substance of the protesters' complaints - but allegations that the mob was angry, ugly, and motivated by racism and homophobia. As ABC's John Muir announced breathlessly on World News Tonight: “Protesters against the plan gathered on the streets of the capital where late today we learned words shouted turned very ugly, reports of racial and homophobic slurs, one protester actually spitting on a Congressman.”

Is it possible that this actually happened? Perhaps. And indeed, it is human nature that when emotions run very high, as they do at the moment, people are more inclined to say hateful things. But one, does that mean it actually happened, and two, is that the way the protests involving tens of thousands of people should have been reported? The answer to the second question is obviously not - unless the purpose was to delegitimize the opposition to Obamacare and the remaking of our country into a socialist nation.

As to the fist question. let's see any proof at all. I have zero trust in the veracity of the left wing members of Congress nor the MSM. Thus, I awaited the video on youtube of the angry mob, or an audio tape from MSM. Yet, surprisingly, none was forthcoming. One would think that with every MSM network out in force, we would have gotten some of this on Youtube or even some first hand accounts from the reporters. Nope. None. Nada. Zip. Yet these allegations were used by the left and the MSM to define the protests.

Think Progress reports on one sign at the protests: "If Brown can't stop healthcare, Browning can" - that of course being a reference to the gun manufacturer. We are a tremendously long ways away from blood on the streets at this point. But as the sign indicates, we are not so far away that it is unthinkable. As the left dreams up more ways to get around our Constitution and our democratic process, to dillute the vote, to force fundamental social changes upon our country outside of the ballot box, to criminalize political differences, and to demonize, delegitimize and silence their opposition with the help of a compliant MSM rather than engage in debate, then no, it is not unthinkable. The day the majority of the people in this country - and it should be noted that the vast majority self-identify as conservative - feel that their vote no longer is fully counted and their voice is silenced, then we will be at a tipping point - one our Constitution was designed to prevent.

3 comments:

OBloodyHell said...

> unless the purpose was to delegitimize the opposition to Obamacare and the remaking of our country into a socialist nation.

Which is EXACTLY what the purpose was....

> We are a tremendously long ways away from blood on the streets at this point. But as the sign indicates, we are not so far away that it is unthinkable.

Indeed, I see a lot more people grasping that the passage of this will be a very major step towards ending the Republic. That Those In Charge have even considered "passing" this "without voting on it", says a lot about how little shrift they grant to the entire notion of democracy and the will of the people.

There is also attention being paid to the requirements for a constitutional convention and the number of states assent required to form one. State level opposition to this bill is nominally sufficient to both form one and to pass legislation directly.

heisenbug said...

I think the Constitution wasn't designed to prevent that tipping point - the Founding Fathers, after all, were well aware of human weakness and knew that the corruption of Government was inevitable. I believe the Constitution merely delayed that point, by spelling out to a) the "rulers" the consequences to themselves of their corruption; and b) to the people how they were properly to deal with that corruption when it inevitably occurs.

Regards

Richard

OBloodyHell said...

> I think the Constitution wasn't designed to prevent that tipping point

Oh, I think it was, to the extent that any fixed document can deal with the chicaneries of the human fox trying to get into the governmental chicken house.

One of the key things it does a spectacular job of doing is to provide for an orderly succession of power in a manner and form which discourages incompetence while limiting totalitarianism. It makes it hard for either to get a deep foothold, though the people have, through a succession of failed generations of proper civic training, failed to discourage the true incompetency from steadily warping the system (the across the board fiscal problems of the USA at all governmental levels are a major part of that issue).

It is interesting to point out (so few realize it) that the US government is currently the oldest consistently functioning government of a major nation on the planet which has not gone through a major redesign since the inception of the Fed through the adoption of the Constitution.

There are older nations but the US Government is the oldest of all of them in charge of any major nation on earth.

The UK is the closest, but even it has gone from a pure monarchy to a parliamentary figurehead monarchy in that time.

Germany? Italy? Japan? Did not exist in their current form.

Spain, France, China, Russia, all have had major revolutions.

South America? 'Nuff said.

It says a lot about the design that it's held up this long. Probably not the longest in human history, I'm sure, but, given the substantial dynamism of the times, it's been an impressively stable device, thanks to both its governed people and competent design.