Tea Party Protests, and other related items.

[Shady]

How many votes of ours where cast by dead people, and others who were somehow away from the booth and voting at the same time here?

Thousands upon thousands of illegitimate votes... and all we get is a tea party, covered solely by Fox news, and lampooned by everyone else.

Is it sad that the Iranians are fighting so hard for a scrap of freedom, yet an openly major crime was committed here and there aren't enough people caring to actually question the prospect of who the people really wanted for president?

Iran is protesting exactly as we are. The difference being they are not allowed the freedom to do so and are met with strong, often violent, resistance from the government. Half a million protesters in the US does not fit the narrative of the current administration or the liberal MSM, so they don't report it.

As for ACORN, of course there should be a federal investigation into that. But with all the IGs being fired from other investigations, I think we know that's not going to happen. The hope, for now, is that in 2010 the idiots who voted these morons into power will vote them out so that some things can start being challenged. The other hope is that the Republican party can come up with someone better than McCain by 2012 to run against one of the most inept presidents this country has experienced in several decades.

[Dr. L]

Iran is protesting exactly as we are. The difference being they are not allowed the freedom to do so and are met with strong, often violent, resistance from the government. Half a million protesters in the US does not fit the narrative of the current administration or the liberal MSM, so they don't report it.

As for ACORN, of course there should be a federal investigation into that. But with all the IGs being fired from other investigations, I think we know that's not going to happen. The hope, for now, is that in 2010 the idiots who voted these morons into power will vote them out so that some things can start being challenged. The other hope is that the Republican party can come up with someone better than McCain by 2012 to run against one of the most inept presidents this country has experienced in several decades.

You make good points. Our tea parties are similar, except less forceful, and less often. I can only hope that more people attend the next one, in light of recent events. And ACORN... bleh. Just bleh.


And I've been wondering where the line is with this guy. He seriously is inviting the Iranian officials to our own White House's Independence Day Barbecue? I think that really does show precisely how much the Commander-in-Thief values our own freedoms.

[Shady]

You make good points. Our tea parties are similar, except less forceful, and less often. I can only hope that more people attend the next one, in light of recent events. And ACORN... bleh. Just bleh.

Less forceful, yes. Less often? Only slightly. They've been happening with great regularity since April 15th all over the country (which has so far been the only national protest). Most of the ones since then have been at the local level targeting local government, state reps and congressmen. From what I understand, there will be a great many people protesting outside of their local ABC affiliates tonight during the airing of Obama's "Healthcare" interview, or whatever it is. Tea Party protests are still going very strong, and in some very unlikely places, like California. I don't think a week passes by without Glenn Reynolds (http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/) giving an update about some tea party protest somewhere.

I have a feeling the national tea party of July 4th will have a far bigger turnout than that of April 15th, as well.

[Shady]

I copied these posts from the Iran on the brink of civil war (http://www.wilmarthcafe.org/forums/showthread.php?t=30) thread. I've been seeing many comments and discussions about these protests lately that I think the topic is worthy of its own thread. (I only copied these posts instead of moving them. I did not want to disrupt the flow of the other thread).

I was previously talking about the 4th of July Tea parties being planned. Subsequently, I had read that the Atlanta Tea Party Protest was canceled on short notice because of local politics.

From American Thinker Blog (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/06/july_4_atlanta_tea_party_cance.html) (numerous links within the article)

July 4 Atlanta Tea Party Cancelled
Jason Lee
With as many as 20,000 people in attendance, the Atlanta Tea Party on April 15 was one of the largest and most successful Tea Parties in the country. The Atlanta Tea Party on July 4, 2009 had been expected to be just as large. Unfortunately, plans have changed. Simon Property Group has forced the cancellation of the Atlanta Tea Party.

The Atlanta Tea Party was forced to cancel its Independence Day celebration in Gwinnett, after losing its location due to the objection of Gwinnett Place Mall (a Simon company.) The Tea Party had been scheduled to take place in the parking lot of the old Macy's building at Gwinnett Place since March.

"It is unfortunate the event had to be canceled," said Julianne Thompson, event co-organizer. She continued, "The old Macy's building is on private property, and not owned by Simon Malls, however the mall manager asked the property owner and I to come in the office on Thursday of this week [June 18], and told us Simon does not want political events on its property. They were also concerned about the fact we were using the term 'protest.' Although the event was on private property, the mall was able to assert authority on the matter due to reciprocal property easement agreements."

Event Co-Chair Debbie Dooley stated, "Our Atlanta Tea Party team tried for the next day and a half to find an alternative location large enough for the event, and with the proper layout for our vendors, children's activities, and fireworks show, but we could not find anything suitable that would have been available on July 4th.


With just a few days left until the Fourth of July Tea Parties begin, this is very unfortunate timing! One wonders why Simon Property Group waited until now to interfere.

Liberal Atlanta paper's snarky reaction. [now with snarkiness removed -Shady]

Following the money, connecting the dots:

1. Gwinnett Place Mall shut down the Atlanta Tea Party.
2. Simon Property Group owns Gwinnett Place Mall.
3. Melvin Simon (a Forbes 400 billionaire) is Co-chairman of Simon Property Group, Inc.
4. Melvin Simon has provided large political contributions to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Al Franken, John Edwards, the DNC and many other Democrats and Democrat organizations.
5. Melvin Simon was a major contributor to Barack Obama inaugural committee and has given at least $1 million to the William J. Clinton foundation.
6. Melvin's wife, Bren, personally donated almost $100,000 to various political candidates, was a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton's presidential bid, and contributed to President Obama's inaugural committee.

It's the way of the liberal, silence the opposition~!

[Shady]

Now to fast forward a little. I came across a recent article on Politico (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25646_Page2.html) discussing the various effects of taking the protest to the local level.


Town halls gone wild
Screaming constituents, protesters dragged out by the cops, congressmen fearful for their safety — welcome to the new town-hall-style meeting, the once-staid forum that is rapidly turning into a house of horrors for members of Congress.

On the eve of the August recess, members are reporting meetings that have gone terribly awry, marked by angry, sign-carrying mobs and disruptive behavior. In at least one case, a congressman has stopped holding town hall events because the situation has spiraled so far out of control.

“I had felt they would be pointless,” Rep. Tim Bishop (D-N.Y.) told POLITICO, referring to his recent decision to temporarily suspend the events in his Long Island district. “There is no point in meeting with my constituents and [to] listen to them and have them listen to you if what is basically an unruly mob prevents you from having an intelligent conversation.”

In Bishop’s case, his decision came on the heels of a June 22 event he held in Setauket, N.Y., in which protesters dominated the meeting by shouting criticisms at the congressman for his positions on energy policy, health care and the bailout of the auto industry.

Within an hour of the disruption, police were called in to escort the 59-year-old Democrat — who has held more than 100 town hall meetings since he was elected in 2002 — to his car safely.

“I have no problem with someone disagreeing with positions I hold,” Bishop said, noting that, for the time being, he was using other platforms to communicate with his constituents. “But I also believe no one is served if you can’t talk through differences.”

Bishop isn’t the only one confronted by boiling anger and rising incivility. At a health care town hall event in Syracuse, N.Y., earlier this month, police were called in to restore order, and at least one heckler was taken away by local police. Close to 100 sign-carrying protesters greeted Rep. Allen Boyd (D-Fla.) at a late June community college small-business development forum in Panama City, Fla. Last week, Danville, Va., anti-tax tea party activists claimed they were “refused an opportunity” to ask Rep. Thomas Perriello (D-Va.) a question at a town hall event and instructed by a plainclothes police officer to leave the property after they attempted to hold up protest signs.

The targets in most cases are House Democrats, who over the past few months have tackled controversial legislation including a $787 billion economic stimulus package, a landmark energy proposal and an overhaul of the nation’s health care system.

Democrats, acknowledging the increasing unruliness of the town-hall-style events, say the hot-button issues they are taking on have a lot to do with it.

“I think it’s just the fact that we are dealing with some of the most important public policy issues in a generation,” said Rep. Bruce Braley (D-Iowa), who was confronted by a protester angry about his position on health care reform at a town hall event several weeks ago.

“I think in general what is going on is we are tackling issues that have been ignored for a long time, and I think that is disruptive to a lot of people,” said Bishop, a four-term congressman. “We are trying, one by one, to deal with a set of issues that can’t be ignored, and I think that’s unsettling to a lot of people.”

Freshman Rep. Dan Maffei (D-N.Y.), whose event at a Syracuse middle school was disrupted, said that he still planned to hold additional town halls but that he was also thinking about other options.

“I think you’ve got to communicate through a variety of different ways. You should do the telephone town hall meetings. You should do the town hall meetings. You should do the smaller group meetings,” said Maffei. “It’s important to do things in a variety of ways, so you don’t have one mode of communication.”



“You’re going to have people of varying views, and in this case, you’ve got the two extremes who were the most vocal,” Maffei said of the flare-up at his July 12 event.

On Tuesday, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who handles incumbent retention duties for House Democrats in addition to chairing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, met with freshman members to discuss their plans for the monthlong August recess. While the specific issue of town hall protesters never came up, according to sources familiar with the meeting, he urged them not to back away from opponents.

“He said, ‘Go on offense. Stay on the offense. It’s really important that your constituents hear directly from you. You shouldn’t let a day go by [that] your constituents don’t hear from you,’” said one House Democratic leadership aide familiar with the meeting.

Some members profess to enjoy the give-and-take of the town halls, even if lately it’s become more take than give.

“Town halls are a favorite part of my job,” said Rep. Russ Carnahan (D-Mo.), a third-term congressman from St. Louis who noted that a “handful” of disruptions had taken place at his meetings. “It’s what I do. It’s what I will continue to do.”

“People have gotten fired up and all that, but I think that’s what makes town halls fun,” said Perriello, a freshman who is among the most vulnerable Democrats in 2010. “I think that most of the time when we get out there, it’s a good chance for people to vent and offer their thoughts. It’s been good.”

“I enjoy it, and people have a chance to speak their mind,” he said.

Both Carnahan and Perriello said they were plunging forward with plans to hold more town hall meetings.

Republicans, with an eye toward 2010, are keeping close track of the climate at Democratic events.

“We’ve seen Russ Carnahan, we’ve seen Tim Bishop, we’ve seen some other people face some very different crowds back home,” said National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Pete Sessions (R-Texas). “The days of you having a town hall meeting where maybe 15 or 20 of your friends show up — they’re over. You’ve now got real people who are showing up — and that’s going to be a factor.”

Asked later how or whether the GOP would use the confrontations against Democrats, Sessions responded: “Wait till next year.”

But Democrats are quick to point out they’re not the only ones facing hostile audiences. They single out Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.), who found himself in a confrontation earlier this month with a “birther” protester, and insist that Republicans face a backlash of their own if it appears the party is too closely aligned with tea party activists or other conservative-oriented protesters.

“It’s a risk that they align themselves with such a small minority in the party,” said Brian Smoot, who served as political director at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in the past election cycle. “They risk alienating moderates.”

While I regret seeing reports of unruliness at town hall meetings and any other protest locations, protesters are not the only individuals who sometimes allow emotion to get the best of them.

umawimGQpY0

The point is, I'm glad to see that the protests are staying on message instead of being a passing phase. I hope the trend continues.

[Grunthos]

As do I... and I don't think people forcefully but non-violently expressing dissatisfaction with their government REPRESENTATIVES should be considered "unruliness." If the rules are being used to prevent expression of legitimate dissent, then it is the rules, and not the dissent, which is out of order.

These people are not engaging in lawlessness or civil disobedience; they are communicating with their paid employees.

If you want politicians to see the light, it has famously been said, you must make sure they feel the heat.

[Shady]

I heard about this on talk radio on the way home from work today.

Barack Obama told a crowd of supporters in Philadelphia back in 2008, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” He added, “That’s the Chicago way.”

Last night in St. Louis, Missouri, a local conservative found out firsthand about the “Chicago way.” Kenneth Gladney, a black conservative from the city, was handing out “Don’t Tread On Me” flags after a Russ Carnahan town hall meeting on health care in Mehlville. This didn’t go over well with the Obama supporters and union thugs who attended the meeting. They punched him in the face, kicked him in the head, and stomped on him on the pavement. So much for hope and change.

This is my first-person account of what I saw at the the town hall meeting in Mehlville.

I was running late for the Carnahan meeting last night. The doors opened at 6:00 PM and it was around 6:20 when I arrived at Bernard Middle School in St. Louis county. The parking lot was already full. The streets next to the school were also filled up. I ended up walking about three blocks to reach the school. By the time I arrived, the line outside of the school was about 200 yards long. The line wrapped around the front of the building and halfway down the school’s driveway. I was told they had already stopped letting people inside the building. The people up front were told that they could not let anyone else in because of a fire code.

I continued up to the front of the school and a friend I ran into told me to try the media entrance on the side of the building. My friend thought it was a media entrance. It wasn’t. It was marked “handicapped,” but as I approached the side entrance, it was obvious that these were not handicapped individuals who the Carnahan staffers were letting in.

Several people entered through these doors. I pulled out my camera and filmed the action. Right before I made it to the door the staffers let a man walk right in. Two SEIU members in purple shirts walked up to the door and did not even hesitate to enter the school. It was like they knew right where to go. But by this time the crowd of tea party protesters locked outside started to notice what was going on. They began yelling, and one man stepped in front of the SEIU members and asked that he be let in, too. Enough people were screaming now that the union members backed off and moved over to the side. The Carnahan staffers decided to stop letting people in this entrance.

There must have been 1,000 tea party protesters standing outside in the 90 degree heat and they were agitated. There were now a few SEIU members outside, and they started to taunt the crowd. Not a very smart move, but they didn’t seem to care. A former marine with his young son on his shoulders told the crowd not to react to the taunting. The crowd outside started to sing “God Bless America.” This really seemed to ease the tension that was beginning to build outside the school.

Inside the school the chaos continued. The Carnahan people had roped off the gymnasium into two sides. One side was marked reserved. This was for the union supporters who arrived late for the event. The other side quickly filled up with tea party protesters. A couple of tea party taxpayers sat in the reserved section but moved after the union members arrived. They said they didn’t feel safe. There were several planned speakers who took turns talking before Rep. Carnahan took the stage.

As he spoke the crowd of union supporters continually interrupted him with their applause. A few of the tea party protesters left during this staged show by Carnahan and his cronies. After Carnahan was through speaking he said he was going to take a few questions. His staffers then pulled out a few questions and read them to him from their index cards. They said they had collected the cards beforehand, but the tea party taxpayers did not even know they were only taking questions that were written down. It was a total dog and pony show.

After the event, things got really out of control. The SEIU members were looking for trouble. They roamed the parking lot like a pack of thugs. Conservative Kenneth Gladney, who is black, was passing out “Don’t Tread on Me” flags and tea party buttons to the taxpayers at the school. Unfortunately for Kenneth, the SEIU members were not happy that a black man was passing out tea party buttons. Kenneth’s lawyer described what happened next:

The SEIU member used a racial slur against Kenneth, then punched him in the face. Kenneth fell to the ground. Another SEIU member yelled racial epithets at Kenneth as he kicked him in the head and back. Kenneth was also brutally attacked by one other male SEIU member and an unidentified woman. The three men were clearly SEIU members, as they were wearing T-shirts with the SEIU logo.

The three SEIU members were arrested at the scene. Kenneth was hurt badly and taken to the emergency room, where he was treated for his numerous injuries. We all hope that he recovers quickly from this vicious attack.

Tomorrow, Saturday, the St. Louis Tea Party Coalition is holding a rally at the local SEIU headquarters. We are going to demand justice for Kenneth Gladney, who was brutally beaten on Thursday night. The St. Louis Coalition will request that the NAACP and the ACLU come out in support of Kenneth Gladney’s rights which were trampled by the union hooligans.

What happened on Thursday night may be the Chicago way of holding a town hall meeting. But it won’t fly in St. Louis.

A few links can be found embedded in the article here (http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seiu-thugs-teach-protestors-the-chicago-way-of-politics/).

[Shady]

dqpfU_AC7Ls&eurl

[Grunthos]

First time I can recall elected officials openly calling for union thugs to violate the free speech rights of free citizens.

In this country, at least.

This is going to be a Donnybrook.

[Dr. L]

How typical... yet, at least people in this country are getting angrier about all this. I was watching the news, and they were showing clips in city halls all over where people were yelling at politicians and representatives about the Obamacare thing amongst others. Some old guy was getting right in a representatives face about it, I was very pleased.

It was music to my ears. I want to see more... luckily for my district, we're represented by John Boehner, and he hasn't given us any problems yet.


And Pish posh from Obama. This is more like a duck hunt, and he brings a rifle.

[S Carver Orne]

Actually it seems more like a duck hunt, and Obama shows up wearing a "#1 Prez" t-shirt and doesn't do much of anything at all, except complain that the former administration didn't hunt ducks the way he thinks they should have.

[Dr. L]

Actually it seems more like a duck hunt, and Obama shows up wearing a "#1 Prez" t-shirt and doesn't do much of anything at all, except complain that the former administration didn't hunt ducks the way he thinks they should have.

I was just referring to when during the campaign, Obama said something about duck hunting with a rifle (Trying to get hunters to like him), which caused eyebrows to raise because, as John McCain pointed out, Duck hunting is normally done with a shotgun.

[Shady]

WARNING!!! SCARY MOB PICTURES!!!!

hahahahaha.


Meet the Mob
2009 August 6
by DanaLoesch

You’ve heard a lot about this crazy, scary, vicious mob on some shadowy GOP payroll. By the way the DNC, Rachel Maddow, and President Obama talk, you’d think it was a motley crue of Hell’s Angels.

Let me introduce you to the mob:

http://thedanashow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/iamthemob1.jpg

http://thedanashow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/iamthemob2.jpg

http://thedanashow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/iamthemob3.jpg

http://thedanashow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/iamthemob6.jpg

http://thedanashow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/iamthemob7.jpg

http://thedanashow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/iamthemob8.jpg

http://thedanashow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/iamthemob9.jpg

http://thedanashow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/iamthemob12.jpg

http://thedanashow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/iamthemob10.jpg

http://thedanashow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/iamthemob131.jpg

http://thedanashow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/iamthemob11.jpg

I am the mob. My kids are the mob. My grandma is the mob. My family members did not shed blood for this country so that their elected officials could silence them into shame if they dared to speak out and voice their concerns.

Are you the mob?

linky (http://thedanashow.wordpress.com/2009/08/06/meet-the-mob/)

[Grunthos]

Sigworthy, from Frank J.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/GrunthosToo/proud-member-of-the-angry-mob.jpg

[S Carver Orne]

We need an angry, torch bearing mob. It worked against similar personas, such as Frankenstein and the (Jewish) Golem.

[Tonus]

We need an angry, torch bearing mob.
Check with the SEIU.

[Tonus]

Glenn Reynolds weighs in: (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Sunday_Reflections/Remember-when-protest-was-patriotic-52767517.html)


Glenn Harlan Reynolds: Remember when protest was patriotic?

By: Glenn Harlan Reynolds
Sunday Reflections Contributor
August 8, 2009


"Protest is patriotic!" "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism!" These battle-cries were heard often, in a simpler America of long ago -- that is, before last November. Back then, protests -- even if they were organized by the usual leftist apparatchik-groups like ANSWER or ACORN -- were seen - at least in the media - as proof of popular discontent.

When handfuls of Code Pink ladies disrupted congressional hearings or speeches by Bush administration officials, it was taken as evidence that the administration's policies were unpopular, and that the thinking parts of the populace were rising up in true democratic fashion.

Even disruptive tactics aimed at blocking President Bush's Social Security reform program were merely seen as evidence of boisterous high spirits and robust, wide-open debate. On May 23, 2005, the Savannah Morning News reported (http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-130823725.html):

“By now, Jack Kingston is used to shouted questions, interruptions and boos. Republican congressmen expect such responses these days when they meet with constituents about President Bush's proposal to overhaul Social Security.

“Tinkering with the system is always controversial. To make Bush's plan even more so -- political foes are sending people to Social Security forums armed with hostile questions.

By now, Kingston, a Savannah lawmaker and part of the GOP House leadership, has held 10 such sessions and plans at least seven more.”

On March 16, USA Today reported (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-03-16-gop-townhalls_x.htm) that Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum "was among dozens of members of Congress who ran gantlets of demonstrators and shouted over hecklers at Social Security events last month. Many who showed up to protest were alerted by e-mails and bused in by anti-Bush organizations such as MoveOn.org and USAction, a liberal advocacy group. They came with prepared questions and instructions on how to confront lawmakers."

This was just good, boisterous politics: "Robust, wide-open debate." But when it happens to Democrats, it's something different: A threat to democracy, a sign of incipient fascism, and an opportunity to set up a (possibly illegal) White House "snitch line" where people are encouraged to report "fishy" statements to the authorities.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls the "Tea Party" protesters Nazis, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman --forgetting the events above -- claims that left-leaning groups never engaged in disruptive tactics against Social Security reform, and various other administration-supporting pundits are trying to spin the whole thing as a deadly move toward "mob rule" and – somewhat contradictorily -- as a phony "astroturf" movement.

Remember: When lefties do it, it's called "community organizing." When conservatives and libertarians do it, it's "astroturf." But some people are noticing the truth. As Mickey Kaus notes (http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2009/08/06/keep-off-the-astroturf.aspx), "If an 'astroturfing' campaign gets real people to show up at events stating their real views, isn't it ... community organizing?" Why yes, yes it is.

As someone who's been following the Tea Party campaign since the beginning, it seems to me to be the most genuine outbreak of grassroots popular involvement in my lifetime. People have been turning out, in the tens of thousands at times, because they feel that Obama pulled a bait-and-switch and is moving the country much farther to the left than he promised during the campaign.

More significantly, most of these people are turning out to protest for the first time in their lives, and they're planning for future political involvement in years to come. Perhaps that's what's got the critics worried.

It's true, of course, that conservative and libertarian organizations -- ranging from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's American Solutions to FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity -- are getting involved and providing advice and support, just as numerous lefty groups have always done with left-leaning movements.

But, as I noted in an April 15 column (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123975867505519363.html) in The Wall Street Journal, those groups were playing catch-up to a movement that was already rolling on its own.

The truth is that for my adult lifetime, "protest" has been a kind of Kabuki engaged in by organized groups on the Left with help from the press -- as in the recent bus tour of AIG executives that was organized and paid for by an ACORN affiliate and in which the protesters were heavily outnumbered (http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2009/03/media-outnumber-mob-protesters-on-aig.html) by the media, who nonetheless generally treated it as an "authentic" expression of populist discontent.

Things like that tour led President Obama to warn bankers (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/20871.html) that he was the only thing standing between them and the pitchforks, one of a number of thuggish statements he's made along these lines.

Funny how fast the worm -- or maybe it's the pitchfork -- has turned. Now that we're seeing genuine expressions of populist discontent, not put together by establishment packagers on behalf of an Officially Sanctioned Aggrieved Group, we're suddenly hearing complaints of "mob rule" and demands for civility.

Civility is fine, but those who demand it should show it. The Obama administration -- and its corps of willing supporters in the press and the punditry -- has set the tone, and they are now in a poor position to complain.

Whether they like it or not -- and the evidence increasingly tends toward "not" -- President Obama and his handlers need to accept that this is a free country, one where expressions of popular discontent take place outside the electoral process, and always have. (Remember
Martin Luther King?)

What historians like Gordon Wood and Pauline Maier call "out-of-doors political activity" is an old American tradition, and in the past things have been far more "boisterous" than they are today.

Rather than demonizing today's protesters, perhaps they might want to reflect on how flimflams and thuggishness have managed to squander Obama's political capital in a few short months, and ponder what they might do to regain the trust of the millions of Americans who are no longer inclined to give the Obama administration the benefit of the doubt.
I only wish this got more 'airplay.' Dai notes the chorus of praise heaped on Rachel Maddow for "exposing" the ties that right-leaning groups have to some of the protesters. I wonder if they remember when organizing protests and providing guidelines for "how to confront lawmakers" was a good thing? Or perhaps they never really acknowledged it, and simply acted as if the protests were spontaneous and unplanned?

I think there's a sad irony in the fact that the media is now the target of the same cynicism and suspicion and distrust that used to be reserved for political figures, particularly after the Nixon administration was unmasked by... the media. We've come full circle, I guess.

Edit to add:

http://media.sfexaminer.com/images/090809beelertoon_c.jpg

[Grunthos]

The media made it's bed, and should now rest in it. In peace.

[Ythogtha]

I like the teabaggers, they're funny.

[Dr. L]

I like the teabaggers, they're funny.

Ours back in April was pretty epic.

cWqCRnkf3_0


This one guy's sign was awesome, the epitome of wit:

oUGUWSwBKH0

[Tonus]

HMM: Was the young girl who asked the President a question (about the "mean signs" held by protesters) a plant? (http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=911911)

Read it all, keeping in mind that the girl's mother made the following statement when interviewed afterwards: "This was my first time meeting Barack Obama."

I guess she should've scrubbed her facebook page before making that statement...


Edit: Piling on. (http://michellemalkin.com/2009/08/12/the-illustrated-guide-to-obamacare-human-props/)

Edit: Adding to the pile. (http://theblogprof.blogspot.com/2009/08/busted-obama-as-hitler-poster-was.html) The irony of this article is that there was little complaint from the left as Bush/Hitler (and Bush/Satan) posters and artwork were being circulated during his term in office. So why would the DNC go with "Obama/Hitler" as a plant to try and discredit anti-Obamacare protesters?

Edit: Holy shit CHUCK NORRIS JUST ROUNDHOUSE KICKED OBAMACARE!!!! (http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2009/08/11/dirty_secret_no_1_in_obamacare) Is nothing sacred?!?!?! o.O

Edit: An excellent point by John Stossel, (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/08/12/big_business_goes_big_for_health-care_reform_97859.html) who points out that both big pharmaceuticals and big insurance companies are supporting Obamacare:

But despite these differences, the biggest companies in these two industries are on board with "reform."


It illustrates economist Steven Horwitz's First Law of Political Economy (http://tinyurl.com/cw9nbt): "No one hates capitalism more than capitalists". In this case, big business wants to shape -- and profit from -- what inevitably will be an interventionist health-care reform. Can you think of the last time a major business supported a truly free market in anything?


In light of all this, it's funny to watch Democrats and their activist allies panic over the protests at congressional town meetings around the country. Tools of the corporate interests! they cry. But anyone opposing "socialized medicine" at the meeting can't be a mouthpiece for big business because, as we've seen, big business supports government control. Conservative groups may be encouraging people to vent their anger at congressmen who pass burdensome legislation without even bothering to read it, but that's no reason to insult the protestors as pawns. What's wrong with organizations helping like-minded people to voice their opinions? Why do Democrats, such as Speaker Nancy Pelosi, dismiss (http://tinyurl.com/nne8l4) citizen participation as "AstroTurf" -- not real grassroots -- only when citizens oppose the kind of big government they favor?

[Grunthos]

Thoroughly disgusting. The fact that the press can't bring themsleves to investigate "their guy" just makes me want to hurl.

[Dr. L]

John Stossel makes an excellent point, as usual.


There are bigwigs who benefit from Socialism, because of the elimination of competition allows them to just sit back and work however slow or inept they so please. As a prospective businessman, I recognize Capitalism as a tough challenge for me, because of all the potential competition that results from it. Capitalism is good for the people. It's tough on businesses, because they're forced to succeed, or they're out. Essentially, they must also treat their own workers ethically, because in a Free market the people are still free to protest bad working conditions at their leisure. The bosses are rewarded by customers with profit, the employees are rewarded by the bosses for their good work, and the consumers are rewarded by the employees with good products.


In Socialism, why even bother? You're making money no matter what you do. The ideal setting for a corrupt businessman, making it near impossible for other people to enter the market. See, the reason I support the free market, is simply out of my own personal ethics. I do not want to go unchallenged, but I don't want to go out of business either. Other businesses in my field will force me to be ethical and shell out the best products I can manage, as I still have to convince my buyers and business partners that I am still worth partnering with.

Hell, my business ideas alone are for an environmental cause, and I can make a profit from it. Want to save the world? Make it profitable. Want to save the whales? Make it profitable. A good image is half the game, and if I engage in charities on top of all this, not only will it show the success of the Free Market, but it will boost my personal image to the people themselves. May even help a prospective... political image.

We have a lot to gain from a free market. Look at New Zealand, their system works magnificently, and what is it? Free Market. Only with capitalism can we as people succeed in this country, as Socialism throws tar in our path. People will be charitable, if given the freedom to do so. It is not up to the government to force good will upon us, because it always backfires.What the government can giveth, it can also taketh away.

[Tonus]

Here is a pretty blatant incident of astroturfing by... guess who? (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/08/13/video-obamacare-fans-take-astroturfing-to-a-new-level/)

[Tonus]

Remember, slandering the President as a nazi is wrong. (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=612)

[Tonus]

From Q and O:

Lefties are up in arms with Whole Foods CEO John Mackey (http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=8322658&page=1) after he came out in a WSJ editorial against Obama’s health care reform. You see, Mackey’s company self-insures and provides its own health care coverage. And it works. Mackey tops it off by saying we should be moving toward “less government control and more individual empowerment”. Liberals are enraged and boycotting, believing Mackey is biting the hand that fed him. I guess the entrepreneurial capitalist won out over the sniveling collectivist. He knows what got him where he is and it wasn’t government. Me? I’ve never shopped at Whole Foods, but I’m going to now.
There are some interesting angles to this story:

* Mackey takes no salary (well, his salary is $1) which is a nice symbolic gesture, though relatively meaningless except as good PR.

* In 2007 he took heavy criticism when it was discovered that he posted critical comments towards a competitor in order to undermine their business prior to attempting to purchase them. Interestingly, it appears that this action didn't lead to threats of boycott from the left.

* Read the points he made in his editorial, and read the details of the Whole Foods health care plan. It's an interesting contrast to the man who played dirty to undermine a competitor. It's also a very good insurance coverage for his employees. If I worked for Whole Foods I'd be terrified of Obamacare.

* John Stossel has a short anecdote (http://blogs.abcnews.com/johnstossel/2009/08/liberal-customers-to-whole-foods-ceo-shut-up.html) that makes you question Mackey's sanity just a bit.

This is one of those stories that can work for either side. Mackey's editorial is reasonable and sensible, which means that the firestorm of criticism could work against the left. Mackey's history makes him a pretty easy target for criticism, especially his dealings with Wild Oats Market. It's hard to portray him as a "good guy" CEO when you consider his past.

But Whole Foods' health care package may be the one detail that leads the press to bury this story. If the RNC is smart they'll take that part of the story and run with it. From both the "here is health insurance that works" and the "would you take this away from honest, wholesome, hard-working American families?" angles, there is plenty of grist for the mill.

[Tonus]

Who wants heath care reform?

Not these guys! (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/august_2009/54_say_passing_no_healthcare_reform_better_than_pa ssing_congressional_plan)


Thirty-five percent (35%) of American voters say passage of the bill currently working its way through Congress would be better than not passing any health care reform legislation this year. However, a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that most voters (54%) say no health care reform passed by Congress this year would be the better option.

This does not mean that most voters are opposed to health care reform. But it does highlight the level of concern about the specific proposals that Congressional Democrats have approved in a series of Committees. To this point, there has been no Republican support for the legislative effort although the Senate Finance Committee is still attempting to seek a bi-partisan solution.

Not surprisingly, there is a huge partisan divide on this issue. Sixty percent (60%) of Democrats say passing the legislation in Congress would be the best course of action. However, 80% of Republicans take the opposite view. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 23% would like the Congressional reform to pass while 66% would rather the legislators take no action.

Voters who earn less than $20,000 a year are evenly divided but a majority of all other voters would prefer no action. Middle income voters, those who earn from $40,000 to $75,000 a year, are most strongly in favor of taking no action.

It's interesting to note that two critical demographics (independents and middle income) do not want health care reform as it is being proposed. And I don't think that town hall protests are to blame, as the protests are a symptom, not the cause. The claim that the Republican party has managed to galvanize an effective resistance to the bill seems far-fetched. This is the same party that we keep being told is badly out of touch and can't get its act together, but suddenly they're this dynamo that works magic in the field!

Maybe that's not it. Maybe it's several things. Like the fact that this is supposed to be Obama's signature legislation, but so far the administration has taken little part in formulating it. Or the fact that they tried to ram the legislation through two weeks ago, even though we STILL don't have a final version. Or the fact that the 1,000+ page monstrosity is a clear example of what's wrong with Washington, a point driven home when a congressman admitted that he hadn't read the bill because it was too huge and convoluted. It's a horrifying mess, and neither the administration nor the bill's sponsors have done much to help clear things up, preferring instead to sling mud and treat their constituents like crap.

[Grunthos]

Apparently, the "public option" is about to go down in defeat.

Awwww...

[Tonus]

An interesting view as to why Obama is not doing as well as anticipated. Basically, he doesn't have the mandate (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2009/08/obama_misreads_his_mandate_1.html) that he assumed he has.


Obama Misread His Mandate


After a rough week for health care reform, Democratic leaders appear to be pulling back on their demand for a public option. It remains to be seen whether liberal Democrats, especially in the House where they are more numerous, will go along with this. But this is still a step in the right direction to get something passed this year.

The public option was an overreach. The White House's erroneous belief that it could get it through the legislature - or at least that it could let four out of five congressional committees push it - was a misinterpretation of last year's election results. It has already made a similar mistake with cap-and-trade, backing a House bill that appears to have no chance of success in the Senate.

Bismarck once commented that politics is the art of the possible. So far, the White House has not exhibited a good understanding of exactly what is possible in this political climate. It has been acting as though the President's election was a major change in the ideological orientation of the country.

A lot of liberals certainly saw it as such. All the strained comparisons of Obama to Franklin Roosevelt were a tipoff that many were talking themselves into the idea that the 2008 election created an opportunity for a substantial, leftward shift in policy. Yet the election of 2008 was not like the 1932 contest. It wasn't like 1952, 1956, 1964, 1972, 1980, 1984, or even 1988, either. Obama's election was narrower than all of these. FDR won 42 of 48 states. Eisenhower won 39, then 41. Johnson won 44 of 50. Nixon won 49. Reagan won 44, then 49. George H.W. Bush won 40. Obama won 28, three fewer than George W. Bush in his narrow 2004 reelection.

This makes a crucial difference when it comes to implementing policy. Our system of government depends not only on how many votes you win, but how broadly distributed those votes are. This prevents one section or faction from railroading another. It is evident in the Electoral College and the House, but above all in the Senate, where 44 senators come from states that voted against Obama last year. That's a consequence of the fact that Obama's election - while historic in many respects, and the largest we have seen in 20 years - was still not as broad-based as many would like to believe. Bully for Obama and the Democrats that they have 60 Senators, but the fact remains that thirteen of them come from McCain states, indicating that the liberals don't get the full run of the show.

For whatever reason, the Obama administration has acted as if those hagiographical comparisons to FDR were apt. It let its liberal allies from the coasts drive the agenda and write the key bills, and it's played straw man semantic games to marginalize the opposition. For all the President's moaning in The Audacity of Hope about how the Bush administration was railroading the minority into accepting far right proposals - he was prepared to let his Northeastern and Pacific Western liberal allies do exactly the same thing: write bills that excite the left, infuriate the right, and scare the center; insist on speedy passage through the Congress; and use budget reconciliation to ram it through in case the expected super majority did not emerge.

This might have flown during FDR's 100 Days. But this is not 1933 and Barack Obama is no Franklin Roosevelt.

Now that his legislative agenda is stalling, we're seeing the predictable critiques about the outdated United States Senate, which is the real source of the bottleneck: the Connecticut Compromise was meant to protect the interests of small states, but not states that are this small. Rhode Island, yes. Wyoming, no! These arguments will be conveniently tabled whenever the Democrats return to minority status, so I won't bother to address their merits. The bigger question is: what did they think was going to happen? It's one thing to bemoan the fundamental unfairness of the Senate; it's another thing to overlook it when you're formulating your legislative program. The map is what it is (http://www.npr.org/news/specials/election2008/2008-election-map.html#/president?view=race08): that big swath of red that runs through the middle of the country then swings right through the South should have been a tipoff that the stage was not set for coastal governance.

The President should have realized what was possible and what wasn't, and he should have used his substantial influence to push the House toward the kind of centrist compromise the Senate will ultimately require. That's called building a consensus - something he promised he'd do but has not yet made a serious effort at.
I had not considered this point, all I knew was that Obama had won a convincing electoral victory. And that such a victory implied a mandate, or at least gave him plenty of political maneuvering room. But the election was, IMO, about removing dead wood-- Republican congressmen who were seen as too closely aligned with an unpopular president. It wasn't about a policy shift, in spite of the assumptions of the left.

So when they try to ram home policies and proposals written by the fringe of the party, they run afoul of a large part of the country that isn't interested in such a radical shift, especially with the economy struggling as badly as it is. As I have said repeatedly, when they start in with the name calling, they are calling out legitimately concerned voters. Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank may be safe in their districts, but a fair number of votes in both the House and especially the Senate are going to be cast by congressmen who cannot toe the party line. They're the ones who have to face angry constituents who want no part of radical fringe politics, and they don't appreciate being demonized by their representative's colleagues.

[Grunthos]

Don't bet too strongly on Nancy's immunity; she's taking considerable flak from her home constituency... for being too conservative!

And it looks like Barbara Boxer may be facing a stiff fight to retain her cushy job, too... as the word is that Carly Fiorina's got her eyes on Boxer's overstuffed seat.

[Tonus]

Heh. Turns out that the racist Obama-as-Joker image was created by a young Palestinian man who doesn't think that there's anything wrong with socialism.

LINK (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/08/obama-joker-artist.html)


Obama Joker artist unmasked: A fellow Chicagoan (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/08/obama-joker-artist.html)


When cryptic posters portraying President Obama as the Joker from "Batman" began popping up around Los Angeles and other cities, the question many asked was, Who is behind the image?

Was it an ultra-conservative grassroots group or a disgruntled street artist going against the grain?

Nope, it turns out, just a 20-year-old college student from Chicago.
Bored during his winter school break, Firas Alkhateeb, a senior history major at the University of Illinois, crafted the picture of Obama with the recognizable clown makeup using Adobe's Photoshop software.

Alkhateeb says he wasn't actively trying to cover his tracks, but he did want to lay low. He initially had concerns about ...

... connecting his name with anything critical of the president -- especially living in Chicago, where people are "very, very liberal," he said.

"After Obama was elected, you had all of these people who basically saw him as the second coming of Christ," Alkhateeb said. "From my perspective, there wasn't much substance to him."

"I abstained from voting in November," he wrote in an e-mail. "Living in Illinois, my vote means close to nothing as there was no chance Obama would not win the state." If he had to choose a politician to support, Alkhateeb said, it would be Ohio Democratic Rep. Dennis Kucinich.

"I think he's definitely doing better than Bush was," Alkhateeb said of Obama. Alkhateeb's views on foreign relations align with the Democrats, he said, while he prefers Republican ideals on domestic issues.

Alkhateeb's assessment of Obama: "In terms of domestic policy, I don't think he's really doing much good for the country right now," he said. "We don't have to 'hero worship' the guy."

He's honored by Shepard Fairey (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/08/obama-joker-shepard-fairey.html)'s assessment of his Joker picture, but disagrees with some of Fairey's comments criticizing the message of the Socialism poster.

"He made a picture of Bush as a vampire," Alkhateeb said about Fairey. "That's kind of speaking with two faces."

Regardless, Alkhateeb does agree with the Obama "Hope" artist about "socialism (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/08/obama-joker-shepard-fairey.html)" being the wrong caption for the Joker image. "It really doesn't make any sense to me at all," he said. "To accuse him of being a socialist is really ... immature. First of all, who said being a socialist is evil?"
I suppose the criticism will switch to whoever co-opted the image and slapped the "SOCIALISM" tag on it. But the steam is gone from the charge that the image is the brainchild of a racist ultra-right white guy. And he seems to have muslim ties, which has to really burn the radical lefties!

[Grunthos]

Not to mention that anyone who could honestly support Dennis Kucinich belongs in a rubber room...

[Tonus]

Here's an example of The New Math- Jesse Jackson Jr decided to expound on the President's clumsy comparison of Obamacare to the post office. According to Jackson, the existence of the USPS is what keeps Fedex and UPS from charging a fortune to mail a letter.

It's a good thing that there is no monopoly on mail delivery, then, isn't it? :rolleyes:

[Tonus]

These are the people who deliver the news to us. (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2009/08/18/msnbc-no-mention-black-gun-owner-among-racist-protesters)

MSNBC: ObamaCare Protesters ‘Racist,’ Including Black Gun-Owner

On Tuesday, MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer fretted over health care reform protesters legally carrying guns: "A man at a pro-health care reform rally...wore a semiautomatic assault rifle on his shoulder and a pistol on his hip....there are questions about whether this has racial overtones....white people showing up with guns." Brewer failed to mention the man she described was black.

Read the rest and watch the video, where the man is shown carrying an automatic rifle at a rally... but MSNBC makes sure you never see his skin.

Why is it that FOX NEWS gets tarred as the dishonest and biased news station? I guess it's because of the Memogate mess. Or maybe the Tailhook embarrassment? Perhaps the Eason Jordan flap? Or when they agreed to tone down news coverage in Iraq in order to be allowed to keep an office there? What's that? That wasn't FOX?

Also... it's too bad that people are so hard on President Obama. I mean, they never wished death on George Bush (http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=621), did they?

[Grunthos]

You can tell that the MSNBC video was zoomed in digitally; in other words, they cropped their footage AFTER shooting it wider... hmmm, wonder why that might be?

[Tonus]

I think this is a good place to link to this opinion piece in the WSJ. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574370301468452872.html?m od=rss_opinion_main) The rhetoric distracts from the primary point just slightly, but it pursues a theme that I agree with, that the administration made the wrong assumptions about what the electorate wanted when it voted it in. I think you'll appreciate the points made, particularly about Reagan.

[Tonus]

Here's a video and testimonial (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/01/video-hcan-instructing-people-how-to-disrupt-meetings/) that I doubt Dai will link over at UGOP.

Be sure to watch this video, too. (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/08/31/video-the-chicago-way/) A pro-Obamacare protester tries to disrupt a town hall by shouting down other people, then he swings an elbow at the face of a man who approaches him. The recipient of this violent act then goes on to keep other people from intervening, thus keeping things civil. And when a cop comes over to find out what's going on, it's the protester pointing fingers.

All of which serves as a reminder to those who use anecdotes as a method of promoting an agenda or point of view; there's always an anecdote or incident that works against you, as well.