When Bush visited Portland, Ore., for a fundraiser, protesters stalked his motorcade, assailed his limousine and stoned a car containing his advisers. Chanting "Bush is a terrorist!", the demonstrators bullied passers-by, including gay softball players and a wheelchair-bound grandfather with multiple sclerosis.Contrast with how the media has followed the Democratic talking points by playing up any individual who may have been holding up an ugly sign outside of an appearance by any Democratic politician during the health care debate.
One protester even brandished a sign that seemed to advocate Bush's assassination. The man held a large photo of Bush that had been doctored to show a gun barrel pressed against his temple.
"BUSH: WANTED, DEAD OR ALIVE," read the placard, which had an X over the word "ALIVE."
Another poster showed Bush's face with the words: "F--- YOU, MOTHERF---ER!"
A third sign urged motorists to "HONK IF YOU HATE BUSH." A fourth declared: "CHRISTIAN FASCISM," with a swastika in place of the letter S in each word.
Although reporters from numerous national news organizations were traveling with Bush and witnessed the protest, none reported that protesters were shrieking at Republican donors epithets like "Slut!" "Whore!" and "Fascists!"
Either ugly protests are always news or they aren't. As always, the media displays its bias in what it chooses to cover. And what it doesn't.
12 comments:
Betsy, I distinctly recall the Portland, Oregon protest being covered by CNN and FOX back when it occurred, and I live in the Midwest so it wasn't just a regional news story. However, I've now seen the Portland protest cited on at least four different blog/news sites. A more effective argument would be if each site pointed to a different example. I don't think the point of the criticism of the townhall behavior (at least by me) is that its never been done before, but I would argue its entered a new level. Folks standing on the sidelines, outside meeting locations, etc is pretty common. And just as common is a portion of these folks (left and right) will include the second cousin from your mother's side that the family tends to want to pretend does not exist. What I take issue with is folks portraying this as just 'real' americans standing up for what's right, and just as likely the "true" majority, etc. Its crap. I respect the folks I've been hearing interviewed on NPR, again left and right, who are coming to listen and if the opportunity presents itself, be heard. Not to ensure the other side doesn't have an opportunity to speak, is drowned out, etc. Not to spew utter nonsense, such as "death panels", and refuse to permit the person they are supposedly asking a question of to answer. That is more tactic than discussion or debate. Its team sport, win by any means within the rules (and basically short of hitting, shooting, burning, etc the rules are pretty liberal). Or to put it another way, is the approach observed in many (not all, very important to note) of citizens in these townhalls in any way similar to the sort of debate taught in school? I'm asking you as a teacher, though I don't recall if this is an area you are responsible for.
So the Portland protesters with the signs? Nutjobs and or idiots. And the townhallers who hold effigies of hanged politicians or refuse to let other opinions be heard? Nutjobs and or idiots. This is not the advanced citizenship expected/required of someone who professes to believe America is the greatest country and system of government on Earth.
Honestly, we need to start calling both sides out for this and stop the "well they did it too!" nonsense. Feels just like kids. And just like kids, each time one points out the other did it as well, usually you will observe that "doing it too" includes just a bit of escalation. Where does it end? If we are ever going to 'fix' this country, we have to learn to talk with each other. Or we can continue the continual back and forth of seemingly ever increasing extremes.
I'd rather the "Fourth Estate" didn't show that lunatic left wing garbage but just as they refuse to admit that it was common place for eight years, it disgusts me that they refuse to be objective in their coverage of this administration today.
Yesterday's planted "random" question from the 13 year old daughter of an Obama campaign supporter was pathetic and should have been reported widely. Using a kid is pretty low but it also demonstrates this President is not ready to face his critics on the issue of health care "reform". There are valid reasons for this but they receive scant attention in the MSM.
stubedobedu,
I'm all for civil discourse at these events. The Congressmen that get up there and take static are to be commended for making the effort but on the other side of the coin, when a child is used as a plant for the President to smack a softball question, I'd say they've shown that there can be a measure of "passive" disruption of honest discourse.
When the President of the United States is complicit in the deceitful use of a child, when the Speaker of the House calls people that disagree with her "unAmerican", and when other members of Congress simply will not speak with their constituents on this issue, it is no wonder that people lose confidence in their elected officials. It is a vicious circle.
I pointed out the irresponsible rhetoric we heard from liberals for the entire Bush Administration. I even placed a video by Evan Coyne Maloney done after the 2004 Election to show how liberals were calling for blood. Liberals treated it as aberrations, while believing the nutjob that took a firearm to Obama's campaign speech in Portsmouth, NH was another member in the "Deather" crowd.
I even had one liberal claim to be dumbfounded at the notion liberals acted like that towards President Bush...I told her to keep taking the pills.
"Honestly", stubedobedu, anecdotal evidence from your memory is refutation? And "we need to start calling both sides out for this"? Perhaps you can show how you "called out" those who did this back in 2002, or did your concern start recently, when the hypocrisy of the Left and MSM began to be so obvious even ordinary non-partisans took notice?
Honestly.
stu,
No one is justifying bad behavior of some of the current protesters by saying "well, they started it!"
The issue Betsy's pointing out is the choice of the major news outlets to mostly ignore the nutjobs of the left and instead highlight those on the right.
A side issue is the relative level of inappropriateness displayed by left vs. right. From what I can tell, the viciousness and frequency was much, much greater on the left.
Get it?
"No one is justifying bad behavior of some of the current protesters by saying "well, they started it!""
Maybe you need to read the post two above yours, because that is *exactly* what Dr. J. Robert Asten is doing ...
Refutation? No, merely one documented record of an incident does not qualify as evidence this is basically the same as what occurred before. In fact, frankly its impossible to compare the two. If you recall, contrary views were prohibited at the actual President Bushes gatherings(and outside was usually a fair distance from the event), where as these are annual public forums that congressmen use to interact with us peons (yes, I don't think highly of most of them either). However, using them to shout down discussion... is not discussion. And the idea that the media is basically a tool of the left because they are not comparing this and the Portland demonstrations as basically the same is silly. What does the media care about? Anything that gets us to watch so that they can charge as much as possible for their commericial air time. The blogs on the left were having a cow yesterday due to an encounter between someone who brought a poster of Rosa Parks and a guy who ripped it up. The video apparently mostly shows the lady being kicked out and the left feels this was a deliberate attempt by the media to do exactly what Betsy's post suggests they are not.
This criticism is not limited to the recent town hall behavior. I am a big believer of folks expressing their opinions, discussing ideas and debating positions. When actual active listening is engaged, it is a great way to learn and change minds (IMO). Hateful statements meant to demean (sp?) opponents, threaten them, or suppress another's views are "unAmerican" and I don't not care what side your on. My friends on the 'left' get this ear full as well. I did however deeply resent the general attitude back in 02 and 03 that any contrary opinion towards our response to 9/11, the President, his policies, or Congress was 'unAmerican' or bad for the war really p*** me off. Did that justify hostile and over the top criticisms and hostile language towards President Bush, nope. I was a big supporter of the original mission in Afghanistan and my co-workers who tilt very red wanted to talk to me about it quite a bit. The moment I started complaining about the change of mission and my concerns of how it might fail (not the war, the deliverables from it), woefully inaccurate cost estimate, etc, I was essentially excommunicated. Not becuase I had a different opinion. Heck we argue/discuss frequently. It was because deep down I must not really love this country or care about what happened on 9/11. Nothing I said, at least for several months, mattered. That was very, very disturbing.
equitus, I agree with the relative eqivalence of the protest elements. However the townhall meetings are forums for discussion and happen at least annually, these are not 'special events for health care', though I believe there are more occurring due to the importance of the issue. To turn this from "go to these forums and be heard" (and instead basically shout down anything and everything) and simply call them protests is, sorry, wrong.
As to viciousness, well I think that is subjective. Personally, if folks hang other individuals in effigy, bring guns, and or carry signs that remind us the tree of liberty needs a little trimming now and again, that is 'worse' than a lot of hateful angry, and frankly immature, language. I've attended a number of protests over the years. Sometimes to participate and sometimes simply to get my senses full of the spectacle. Nothing has ever compared in the grandeur of bizarre than a right to life/right to choose protest. The folks on the ends of that spectrum really, really need serious medication.
Maybe we can create a club for all of these "special" people. Take their signs, their effigies, the PETA types with their paint filled water balloons, etc and place them in this club and lock the door until the rest of us are done talking?
Jaw Bone,
So you're saying that Dr. J. Robert Asten "started it"? Great.
stubedobedu,
Democrat leadership seriously misjudged the resistance that their "plan" would garner and they've really aggravated the situation with insulting dismissals of the constituents and their concerns. Combine that treatment with recent needlessly rushed bills like TARP and Cap & Trade and you create the perfect storm.
Congressmen admit they have not read this monstrosity of a bill. They tried to get this passed BEFORE they went on their much undeserved recess for the simple point of avoiding debate.
People don't trust their representatives and they don't trust this so-called "plan". There really won't be an opportunity to have reasoned debates if this Congress cannot perform their duties better than we have seen so far.
Chiding angry voters may be satisfying in some circles but it just perpetuates the anger and it isn't likely to go away
tfhr,
Folks can be angry, protest, and offer alternatives. I support this completely. Being angry and determined that I will take you down by preventing you from speaking, spew outrageous misrepresentations ("death panels") and create the impression that I will take you out if you proceed... nope, that is not simple resistance, its intimidation.
By the by, President Obama fully anticipated this would be a major topic, with very different positions and opinions, etc. He said as much repeatedly in speeches. Whether Representative Pelosi knows her ass from her elbow is a serious concern (IMO).
TARP? Jury will be out on that one for a couple more years. That is the stuff of ubergeek economists to look at the full data and assess whether it was truly necessary, did it work, etc. Personally, I think much of the meltdown could have been avoided if they had interceded with Lehmans' instead of letting the market handle it with the spectacularly disasterous results. Cap & Trade also will take time to fully appreciate whether it was good or bad. However, to suggest it was rushed is to ignore the fact it was essentially buried as a topic for many years. It wasn't like this was a new bill, the congressional Republicans simply didn't want to touch it. Much like Tort Reform. That isn't a new topic and I strongly suspect if the latest attempt to address health care fails and the topic is dropped, so too will Tort Reform. It will come back up the moment there is serious discussion on health care. It makes great kerosine.
stubedobedu,
"TARP? Jury will be out on that one for a couple more years".
The TARP rush job and the accompanying promises don't pass the common sense test and don't appear to have been lived up to in the early intended impact on unemployment. President Obama and TARP supporters rushed to have the bill signed knowing that more than 80% of the funds would not be released for YEARS. They claimed the bill would keep unemployment down below 8% but we've already seen it rise to 9.5%. We don't have to be "ubergeek economists" to see how the lion's share of that so-called "stimulus" bill was nothing more than pork or to understand that the added debt WILL be take years to be fully realized and lifetimes to repay.
The entire effort that went into steam-rolling TARP through and measures it has or will implement are judged by many Americans as unnecessary at best, too expensive by nearly all, and flat out disingenuous by many. That same frame of mind has lingered or intensified and is a factor in why Cap & Trade has been delayed and why the anger we see at the town halls has been unleashed.
Obama promised transparency and he has failed abysmally at delivering that all important quality to the debate and process surrounding TARP, C&T, and health care "reform".
As for your tort reform prediction, I believe you are correct. You need only count the number of lawyers serving in Congress to understand why.
Post a Comment