“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” Messina said, according to an official who attended the meeting.
So now they're giving advice from "The Untouchables"? The Chicago Way, and all that.
This is the advice coming from someone in the 0bama administration. "Punch back twice as hard". They are openly advocating an escalation in violence as part of the administration's policies. Seriously. We're already seen it happen in St. Louis where SEIU union thugs put a conservative-leaning anti-0bamaCare protester in the hospital after a "town hall" style meeting.
Think about that for a second. If that doesn't chill your marrow, I don't want to know you. After all the bullshit protests; after all the "BUSH=HITLER" crap we've endured the past 8 years, these vile sonsabitches are DOING exactly what they insinuated conservatives were doing during the Bush years. Actively silencing dissent through open, naked force.
And this isn't the first time - note in PA where New Black Panther Party members showed up at the polls with weapons and openly menaced the voting public. Oh, and the charges were dismissed, too. Nothing to see here, just Chicago politics business as usual.
I'm reluctant to take sides in the whole "prags vs. 3%er" debate. But these assholes are sure as hell trying to push me into the 3%er camp. Because I sure as hell won't stand idly by if union thugs try the intimidation bullshit. If they're trying to openly provoke civil war, they're sure as hell going about it the right way.
I won't be baited into the "bring it on" speech, not yet. But there is a limit to my patience.
That is all.
17 comments:
Jay, This is a blatant distortion of what was said and to whom and under what circumstances.
Messina, the Whitehouse Chief of Staff, the official you quote, wasn't talking to "Democratic Activists. He was talking to US Senators and was obviously referring to campaign tactics, not physical violence.
The actual quote, in context:
"They showed video clips
of the confrontational town halls that have dominated the media coverage, and told senators to do more prep work than usual for their public meetings by making sure their own supporters turn out, senators and aides said.
And they screened TV ads and reviewed the various campaigns by critics of the Democratic plan.
“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” Messina said, according to an official who attended the meeting."
To describe this as "telling Democratic activists to resort to violence" is totally removed from reality. Read the article again. I fthis was a Union leader talking to his members who were on their way to a town hall meeting, I'd agree with your assesment. But that's not what happened.
If conservatives are hanging senators in effigy outside of their offices, I'm not sure that either side (conservative vs. liberal) can claim it's taking the high road. Both sides have extremists with no appreciation for respectful debate.
He was talking to Democratic Senators, Bill. This was a strategy session on how to deal with the political ramifications of 0bama's very unpopular Socialist policies.
They're advocating going nuclear on the average Joe and Jane based on nothing more than their refusal to blindly swallow The One's crap.
And the actions of the Democratic faithful - Union thugs and race warlords - are bearing out the "ratchet up the violence" rhetoric.
They're advocating going nuclear on the average Joe and Jane based on nothing more than their refusal to blindly swallow The One's crap.
Absolutely. And really, whether actual violence is being advocated (and I went to the first local Tea Party, so I have a very hard time believing the laidback folks there have suddenly turned violent as some Dems are claiming) is damn near immaterial at this point. It's the thought police. Blind adherence to a political notion is one thing. Blind adherence to a political leader is quite another. I didn't spend six years as a German student without learning to recognize the danger signs. (And no, I'm not bringing Nazis into the argument--this bears a resemblance to a slightly earlier time in Germany's history.)
This is hate speech Jay!
;-)
Jay, just remember that when a liberal says "blatant distortion" they mean "accurate description". ;)
The problem that the Democrats have now is that unlike in the past, their thuggishness can't be covered up by the Rapidly Dying Media.
There are too many people out there with cameras and blogs and they aren't just on the liberal side of the equation.
Oh and dastardly Fox News is ginning up the crowds too. As opposed to calm and impartial ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, CNN, and MSNBC. Who are telling us the truth, which just happens to coincide with what the Democrats are telling us. Coincidence, I'm sure.
Jay, they're not talking about "going nuclear" on Joe and Jane Citizen, they're talking about pushing back against powerful lobbying interests who are ginning up Fear Uncertainty and Doubt among people on the right, with campaigns of outright lies.
The people organizing these things have been exposed as people with direct financial interests in the status quo, and paid lobbying organizations with direct ties to healthcare financial interests, not grass-roots activists with a particular political point of view.
I've seen the talking points issued by these guys and most of them aren't even about healthcare. They're just a general litany of dissatisfaction on subjects ranging from immigration to fears of government mandated euthanasia, which is as ridiculous a claim as any that's ever been made in this country.
I encourage anyone who's unhappy to go to these town halls and express themselves in a civil manner. I don't think that's the issue. The issue is that these guys have basically been nothing other than totally disruptive to any kind of discussion at all. The tapes of these things has been all over the place. It's not a discourse or debate, it's screaming and chanting so as to totally disrupt the event.
When the left-wing nutjobs shut down conservative speakers with brownshirt tactics at college campuses it's deplorable. When the right does it it's just as deplorable.
Trying to paint what's going on as a spontaneous, large-scale social movement is a misunderstanding of what's going on.
I'm sorry these folks are unhappy their guy lost the election, but that's politics. Obama is doing exactly what he promised to do on this issue. If anything, he's toned down some of his promises on healthcare.
The teabaggers are no different than the lunatics going on about Bush/Hitler and "Selected not Elected" in 2001. They're just on the opposite side of the same coin.
My call for calming the Hell down and getting down to the serious business of working to modify one party's policies is no different today than it was in 2001 when I was calling the leftists idiots.
Show yup with some serious input on how to improve the situation. Showing up and saying "this sucks" doesn't do anything productive. It just divides the country even more. Lead, follow or get out of the way.
Anyone who believes these protests are being professionally organized is drinking too much of the blue koolaid. Sure, it's nice and convenient to dismiss us as a bunch just working to protect some big company's profits; and that's what some people want you to think.
However, that's just not the case. This is the real grassroots movement, regular, hard-working people like Jay and myself who reaching the point where enough is enough. These events aren't organized for the most part; they are simply posted to blogs, facebook groups, and email lists.
We are not "activists", nor are we sore losers or mad that our guy lost (most everyone I know wasn't too happy with the other choice either). People (of any affiliation) who choose to dismiss this movement as astroturf really do so at their own peril. There is change coming, but I don't think it's what the Obamabots are expecting.
It's funny, I don't remember getting my check (from those evil right wing billionaire financiers) for being part of this "fake hysteria" over healthcare....
"NO" is a perfectly acceptable answer to the socialism they're trying to push on us.
Get off you high horse, you pompous ass.
"The people organizing these things have been exposed as people with direct financial interests in the status quo, and paid lobbying organizations with direct ties to healthcare financial interests, not grass-roots activists with a particular political point of view."
I'm sorry. I'm going to need some proof of this exposure.
You see, I know people who have gone to these events, and none of them have had any "backing".
It's not like the Democratic "protests" where they round up a bunch of bums and pay them off with cigarettes; or bus in a bunch of activists; or offer college fucking credit to liberal arts majors to take the day off and protest.
It's projection, plain and simple. The Democrats do it by the goddamned truckload; they naturally assume that the Republicans do it to.
And the thought that this might be Joe and Jane Q. Public doing it of their own dissatisfaction either never enters into their heads or scares the living shit out of them.
Let's face it: The GOP can't organize a goddamned bottle drive, let alone a coordinated effort to shut down a Democratic event.
Jay, you know the other weak point of that argument?
When were all of these protests held?
After work.
Weekends.
I've never messed with public protests, until I heard about a bunch of like minded folks getting together for a teaparty. Turned out to be a very cool thing.
Besides, isn't dissent patriotic? Or is that only when you disagree about the "right" problems?
Jay, I posted specific links and detailed descriptions you asked for on my blog. The response was too long and had too many links to put into a text editor in the comments section.
Best,
Bill
"The people organizing these things have been exposed as people with direct financial interests in the status quo[...]"
You mean they're...[gasp!] taxpayers???!!
Ol' Bill must have cashed a big check from Soros this week.
emdfl
I want to make sure I understand what you are saying, Jay. Is it this: "If somebody hits me, I'm supposed to do nothing."
That's it? if somebody takes a swing at me, I'm supposed to just take it?
No, what I'm saying is that it shouldn't be part of the administration's official line to escalate the rhetoric.
Especially in light of the fact that the only actual, you know, punching is being done by left-leaning thugs.
I don't know, Jay. I attended a couple local town halls and the comments from people to the Sarah Palin side of the spectrum were decidedly nasty and tending toward advocating using violence against politicians they disagreed with. There were a couple comments that certain politicians should be shot and that was, by far, one of the milder ones.
I didn't hear anything like that coming from the other side, the worst being a comment about "doing whatever I can to make sure you're not re-elected", which was directed towards a Republican. Hardly a violent threat.
Post a Comment