Tag: Townhalls

Did I Say They Were Cowards?

For years now I have been calling most of our elected representatives cowards……I know that may seem a bit harsh…..but I have my reasons…..and yes, I still think that they are huge cowards……no matter which side of the aisle they choose to sit……..

To begin with…they are incapable of working together to find solutions to our mounting problems……then some of the Repubs were charging people money to ask them questions in a townhall…in an attempt to try and cutback on the anger that could be captured on film…..

Captured on film?  There is more along those lines also…..I found this article on Politicususa.com

One of the ways that unpopular House Republicans have been trying to dodge the wrath of their angry constituents during the August recess is to not allow filming at their town halls. Last week, Rep. Steve Chabot of Ohio directed on duty police officers to confiscate the cameras of citizens who tried to film his responses at a recent town hall. Chabot justified this behavior as necessary for the protection of his constituents, but a Federal Court ruling on Friday makes it clear that the Republicans who engaging in this behavior are violating the First Amendment rights of their constituents.

The case brought before the court involved a man in Boston who was arrested for filming the police with his cell phone while they were making a separate arrest of a young man in public. The man who did the filming with his cell phone filed suit alleging that his First and Fourth Amendment rights had been violated. The district court ruled in favor of the person who filmed the arrest, and the state appealed.

It seems that these twits only appreciate and feel they have to follow only the parts of the Constitution that they agree with…..you know their fav…the 2nd amendment……so they are AFRAID to answer questions from their constituents and feel just find violating rights of the people….the same rights that they bitch about continuously…

Here is the judge’s ruling….

It is firmly established that the First Amendment’s aegis extends further than the text’s proscription on laws “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,” and encompasses a range of conduct related to the gathering and dissemination of information.

As the Supreme Court has observed, “the First Amendment goes beyond protection of the press and the self-expression of individuals to prohibit government from limiting the stock of information from which members of the public may draw.” First Nat’l Bank v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765, 783 (1978); see also Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557, 564 (1969) (“It is . . .well established that the Constitution protects the right to receive information and ideas.”). An important corollary to this interest in protecting the stock of public information is that “[t]here is an undoubted right to gather news ‘from any source by means within the law.’” Houchins v. KQED, Inc., 438 U.S. 1, 11 (1978) (quoting Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 681-82 (1972)).

The filming of government officials engaged in their duties in a public place, including police officers performing their responsibilities, fits comfortably within these principles. Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting “the free discussion of governmental affairs.” Mills v. Alabama, 384 U.S. 214, 218 (1966).

Moreover, as the Court has noted, “[f]reedom of expression has particular significance with respect to government because ‘[i]t is here that the state has a special incentive to repress opposition and often wields a more effective power of suppression.’” First Nat’l Bank, 435 U.S. at 777 n.11 (alteration in original) (quoting Thomas Emerson, Toward a General Theory of the First Amendment 9 (1966)).

Mark it or print it….if you have an unpleasant experience at your elected official’s townhall….just throw the ruling in their face….for you see….they are COWARDS!

Will They Take The Hint?

Whataya think?  Will the GOP take the hint from numerous polls?  The people keep dropping subtle hints, especially to the pollsters…..

The people want government to cut spending…..but not with Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid a recent poll showed…I believe it was a WSJ poll…..Defense seems to be the target for most people…end wars and adventurism around the world…..more closely control government contracts…..etc……and of course, the middle class is asking why the rich cannot pay more in taxes…..

Rep. Paul Ryan has given the country his ideas on the budget (actually they are just rehashes of the thinking of the Heritage Foundation) and there has been a lot of back and forth…….not among the people but rather from the self-serving little pills in Congress……he has been called bold and courageous and visionary…….but what do the people, I am talking about real people….average people….think of “his” Path To Prosperity?

It seems that at a recent townhall in his home state of Wisconsin….Ryan was met with an unexpected response to his saying that the wealthy need to pay less in taxes…….

Watch it http://t.co/0EkokIb

Of course this was a townhall meeting in Wisconsin and it may be a reaction to the policies of their new Repub governor….it may not be Ryan’s fault at all…..no one believes that so why would I say it?  Dunno….I guess I was just trying to be “fair and balanced”……

The GOP might want to watch this closely….it could be a harbinger of things to come…..as the people become more knowledgeable on his proposals to basically eliminate SS, Medicare and Medicaid the people will NOT allow this to continue and there is an election coming up…..let us see how many start running away from these proposals……

Will they (GOP) take the hint?

Federalist #10…….Teabaggers?

Professor’s Classroom

Subject:  American History/Current events

First of all, if anyone out there knows what the term “teabagging” means then keep it to yourself, but you will understand why I found the term “teabaggers” so amusing……

This past summer we had our protests….fondly known as the teabagger protests…..these people met and marched and protested and yada yada….but what does that have to do with the Federalist Papers?

Federalist #10:

Madison begins perhaps the most famous of the Federalist papers by stating that one of the strongest arguments in favor of the Constitution is the fact that it establishes a government capable of controlling the violence and damage caused by factions. Madison defines that factions are groups of people who gather together to protect and promote their special economic interests and political opinions. Although these factions are at odds with each other, they frequently work against the public interests, and infringe upon the rights of others.

Read it again….James Madison did a pretty good job of describing the “teabaggers”.

First this faction known as “teabaggers” went after Obama because of non-existent taxes…then they went after Obama over health reform….now they are after Repubs that they feel do not stand with the GOP on other issues….they are attacking people like Lindsey Graham as a RINO…only a matter of time before they hit on the two Senators from Maine….

Okay, I guess that Federal #10 by Madison was basically about those factions within the government….but if Madison were alive today he would put these “teabaggers” in the same category….Fed 10 was a call for bi-partisanship, Madison saw the dangers of being partisan…..

Teabaggers, of course there are many others, but for the sake of this post, it is they, are part of the factions that Madison was referring to in #10…..these people are forcing the country into two seperate camps and in doing so are forcing partisanship…….

If Madison was writing this today….he would be referring to all those that are fighting against the will of the people…that was my scholarly reaction…..now for the real deal….the founders, including Madison, their thoughts were never what was best for the people, but rather what was best for the government and the country…..the people were a necessary evil that had to be dealt with…..

But the teabaggers and others are using the Constitution to defend what they are attempting to do…….(that is for another post)…….

The U.S.S. Constitution

Professor’s Classroom

Subject:  Economics/US Constitution

Recently a townhall protester was heard to say and was captured on film saying it.  He was holding up a book on the US Constitution.

Right here. I got a book here called the U.S.S. Constitution. I’m sure everybody’s seen this before. And you know what? I’ve this book three times now, and I’ve referenced it dozens of times and I can’t find one little paragraph in here that says the government has the right to take over our health care.

The Constitution gives Congress the power “‘to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,’ and sports fans that is a direct quote from the Constitution, the document not the ship.

I guess a case can be made that the health of the people is not necessarily in the general welfare, but then somewhere we could.  If we want to go by the letter of the Constitution then I suggest that when debating torture that the amendment 8 of the Constitution be read and understood.


2009 Anal-Ocity

The health care debate has given us some of the greatest anal statements ever made and the hits just keep coming.

This one is from one M. Steele the chairman of the RNC:  (thanx to thinkprogress.com for content)

at Howard University, Steele encountered his own “genuinely concerned” citizen — 23-year-old college grad/activist Amanda Duzak. Duzak stood up and interrupted Steele, arguing that “everyone in this country should have access to good health care” and cited the case of her own mother who died of cancer six months ago because she couldn’t afford her prescription chemotherapy medications. The audience applauded her. Steele responded by chastising Duzak and accusing her of pulling antics to get on TV.

“So people go out to town halls, they go to the community, and they’re like this. (SHAKES ARMS) It makes for great TV. You’ll probably make it tonight. Enjoy it.”

Sorry to say…there is your answer…..and it is echoed by all Repubs…they do not care what happen to a loved one….only that health reform is killed.

Sounds like the typical conservative response….,that is to give NO valid response.  Why would a leader blow off a questioner like this?  Did this help the GOP’s efforts to kill health reform?

How To Handle The Health Protesters?

This is a paper by the Inkwell Institute:

The townhalls have been going on for about a month now and surely everyone has heard the BS coming from both sides of the political spectrum and yes there is a way to handle the protests, the shouts, the accusations……..

Please gentlemen and ladies do not use the Rep. Barney Frank technique of insulting and antagonizing your questioner that leads to more anger and more accusations and even more anger…..

In the last couple of weeks and months there has been much debate on the Dem health care bill.  Some of it is legitimate and some of it is pure fantasy.  But beyond that the people protesting the bill have come armed with posters and shouting.  The Dems are not handling the protesting very well….they are impotent in selling the bill as a good bill.

We have talked it over at the Institute during our monthly Agitatus Round Table and we have agreed that the Dems need a bit of assistance on the matter.

The question is how do we handle the townhall protests?

The townhall format is an old established way for the reps to meet and answer questions of their people.  These days they, the Dems, have let the townhalls become nothing more than shouting matches of accusations and misinformation.  No one in attendence has learn anything useful from most of the meetings.

We offer the following technique to dampen the protests.

If protesters start heckling and shouting…the rep should get on the mic and say that they may have their day if the rep is allowed to continue when they are finished.

After the protesters are through the rep should:

1–ask are you anger with the bill or the ideas?  ask for a show of hands and have someone recording the count

2–ask, have you read the bill–show hands and a count

3–ask where they got their information that they are basing their objection.

4–ask if they believe that bill is socialized medicine–show hands and count

5–ask who here has Medicare–show of hands and count

6–ask are you happy with your Medicare?  show of hands and count

Once the count has been taken and the questions asked, reps should then begin explaining the bill, always have a copy of the bill with so that sections can be read out loud or copies made for anyone who wants to have them.

The reps can fight the misinformation and they can win the argument if they treat the people with respect even if the people cannot do the same.  The rep must realize that people, most notably the elderly, are afraid and confused….every opportunity should be made to reassure them that there is nothing hidden or deceitful in the bill.

The Dems can win this argument but they must have a unified plan not a bunch of willy nilly comments on television or radio.  They must talk with one voice with one answer to the questions that are plaguing the people in their districts.

Is It Implied Violence?

***This was a post that I originally wrote for Progressive Independence (go to blogroll to visit).

By now most Americans have seen all the images of the common man branishing his gun at the townhalls across the country.  Some bill them as “average” Americans dis hearted by the government take over.

I have heard several pundits state that this people are exercising their 2nd Amendment right by appearing in the protests while packing.  That is all well and good but what does packing a gun have to do with health care?  I guess it is just a constitutional thing, huh?

Back to the “average” Americans with guns….most of these mach little pricks have been exp[osed as members or supporters of right wing militias.  And in case you do not know, most of them see the government as something evil and needs to be confronted whenever possible.

Carrying a gun at a public townhall meeting with a public figure is “implied violence”, no matter which side of the political spectrum you stand on…it is Implied Violence!  The cowards in the city governments that are allowing this are playing with fire.  They allow this so they cannot be sued for some constitutioonal busting law suit.  They are AFRAID!

What would be the outcome if a person from an anarchist group showed up with a gun?  Would they be treated with kid gloves like the macho morons on the right?  If the anarchist is a threat why is the right wing militia member not a threat?

If violence is not implied why pack heat?  The carrying of a weapon is in NO way part of the conversation on health care.

How long will this continue?  How long will the Secret Service look the other way?  How long will ALL law enforcement people look the other way?  How long will it be before someone packing over-reacts?  Will it take the injury to a president before these dipsticks are taken out of the public?

Sad to say, that it looks like the death of a president will be the only thing that will wake up a sleeping country to the implied violence of guns at public meetings.

2009 Anal-Ocity

HA HA HA HA….sorry sometimes people in Congress say the damnedest things….and this time I cannot blame the GOP for a complete anal statement….this time it is Dem that has his head shoved up his ass….

Democrat Rep. Rick Boucher of Virginia told a town hall meeting:

“I have a problem with this government option plan,” Boucher said. “I’m troubled that the government option plan could become very popular and if it became sufficiently popular it could begin to crowd out the other” private insurance companies.

I am sorry but that is another really anal statement. Sorry, but funny is funny….and that is funny.  Can you see the humor?  This dipstick supports co-ops and these will not be a powerful deterrent to powerful insurance.  So how much cash does this dipstick get from the health industry?


2009 Anal-ocity

I know some of my readers think I have a hard on for Repubs….well that is not so….an anal statement is just that no matter who says it….granted there have been a wealth of Repubs in 2009 that have made some of the lamest statements I have heard….but they are not alone….thios toime the anal statement came from a Dem, one Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA).

He Frank was asked by a woman at a townhall of why he continues to support the Nazi policies of Obama, he replied:

“a tribute to the First Amendment that this kind of vile, contemptible nonsense is so freely propagated.’’

And for good measure, he added, “Ma’am, trying to have a conversation with you would be like trying to argue with a dining room table. I have no interest in doing it.’’

That is not the way to handle a person asking a lame question…he should have shown more respect and replied to her with intelligence…but instead he wanted to be glib and condescending ….for this reason his was an anal statement that was unwarranted.

Why Target Seniors?

Death panels…..pulling the plug……socialized health…..long lines….remove doctor…..withhold services…..Obama is a Nazi…….Why are all these made up downside being aired and who believes them?  BTW…none of this is true…but it is out there and it is believed by some.

That is an easy one to answer…they are aimed at seniors.  Why the elderly?

That group is most resistant to change.  The last election showed that only about 8% of seniors voted for Obama and his promise of change.  But that is not the only reason that the elderly are the most outraged by the proposed new health care bill.

Look at any of the townhalls, the most passionate speakers are elderly.  And their questions and speeches are the talking points of the GOP and other conservatives.  The very people that already have a government run health system….so why the outrage?

But why, if all I say is correct, are the seniors buying into the manure spread about the proposed health care system?

Here are some of the tactics that are being used:

1–seniors are easily scared into a position.

2–Seniors do not like change…as I previously said.

3–because that they are easily freighten then they can be more easily be manipulated.

4–seniors are not too tech savvy and they do very little fact checking.

5–they trust their Rep because he would not lie to them.

6–the “rational Ignorance effect” (learn about RIE–visit my page here on the subject)

7–seniors have an opinion already shaped and will not change that view no matter what is said or by whom.

8–the elderly receives their news from one network and usually one that reinforces their world view.

All in all…if you want to defeat an issue in Washington then start with the seniors….they can be manipulate and confused to follow the leader of the opposition.

This post will no doubt piss off any seniors who read this….for that I apologize…but if they would take a good look at the world around them they would see just how bad they are manipulated.