Bruce Benidt
Jon Austin
tcarideo
Ellen Mrja
Mike Keliher
Joe Loveland
All photos from Rep. Bachmann's anti-health reform rally yesterday. Source: Huffington Post
Filed under: Communications, Free speech, Government, Messaging, Politics | Tagged: health care reform, Michelle Bachmann, picture is worth a thousand words
I am soo proud of Michele Bachmann!
I just made a contribution to Maureen Reed
http://maureenreedforcongress.com/
Yeah, wingnuts on both sides give me the creeps, and God knows there are enough of them from the righty birthers and those who believe Obama identifies with Muslim terrorists to the lefty nuts who called Bush everything from a Nazi to a traitor and blamed him for everything from global warming (oops climate change or whatever they are calling it these days) to blaming him for blowing up the Twin Towers.
I’m quite tired of it all, but it is a free country with free speech and each is entitled to his or her opinion, no matter how nutty or offensive it might be.
This is free and very disturbing free speech, and absolutely nothing to be proud of.
I’m ashamed and embarrassed at this display of mindless hyperventilation.
We look like fools on the world stage.
I agree. No one ever said we should be proud of it. I’m just as ashamed and embarrassed as I was when it was on the other side.
This isn’t the first time we’ve looked like fools on the world’s stage, and it won’t be the last. What the world thinks of us is important, but then compared to what goes on in some quarters of Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Latin America, North Korea and other places, I’m not losing sleep over it.
Besides, I’ve seen footage. This isn’t representative of the majority of people there. However, one can always find some wackos at every event and photograph their nutty signs. The more provocative they are, they more they will draw attention.
Mike:
I agree with you that (to chose just one) the 9/11 conspiracy thinkers were also complete wackos, and just as bad as these folks. And there is something about a wacko that loves attention!
What bothers me is that a “major media network” would be willing to present and promote this crap as somehow legitimate!.
Sure, Shepard Smith has been good about calling this crap what it is, and there are people like Lou Dobbs on other networks who are not any better, but still….
And what are we to think of the leadership of the House Republicans addressing this stuff, and not, at least, differentiating between legitmate complaints and concerns (opposition to the health care bill) and illegitimate ones (death panels, socialism, naziism, genocide, etc.).
You would think that if these protestors want to be seen as legitimate, they should try to control some of those who are the most extreme. Instead, it seems as if the organizers are trying to make those most extreme voices legitimate.
Are the wacky conspiracy signs at this rally representative of a small part of the Republican party, or a larger slice?
In a recent poll by Public Policy Polling, Americans were asked “Do you think that Barack Obama legitimately won the Presidential election last year, or do you think that ACORN stole it for him?” A majority (52%) of Republicans said that they thought ACORN stole the election for Obama, instead of winning handily by six percentage points.
Blows me away. Maybe the nuttiness is not isolated.
Well, it certainly depends on the makeup of the people who were polled and identified themselves as Republicans. No one I know (and I know a few) among Republicans think that ACORN stole it for him. Perhaps all the recent publicity surrounding ACORN influenced their answer. This poll done months ago might have yielded substantially different responses. I don’t trust one poll in the grand scheme of things.
Personally, I think this is an example of grasping at straws. A lot of republicans (and I have no idea how they chose their sample, etc.) clearly do not think that Barack Obama is legitimate–and I mean that in a very broad sense of legitimacy. Some (maybe not a large number) do not think that he is legitimate because of his race, some because his father was not American, some clearly do not think that he is American, some because they think he is a socialist (remember, I am talking about a broad sense of legitimacy here), some because they think something funny happened in the election, etc. My guess is if you reworded the question to ask if a bunch of Smurfs stole the election for Obama, or that it was the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, that a significant number would agree with it just because they think Obama is not legitimate, for some reason or another. They can’t imagine that Obama won in the first place, they think that there is something fishy about the election, they think that there is something fishy about ACORN, and the question led them to associate the 2 fishy things.
On the other hand, I do think that the Republican Party is really going to suffer from this long term. The more it is identified with these wackos, the more it will lose in places like the 23rd district of NY. (the winning candidates in NJ and VA were much more moderate). Republicans can win with a more moderate voice, but they will lose with a more extreme voice. I wonder if they get that message or not.
As I understand it, the Republican Party didn’t lose New York’s 23rd because the voting public identifies the party with whackos. The 23rd was lost because a moderate/centrist/impure candidate was forced out — perhaps to appease some whackos, but there’s a difference.
I don’t think what you said in any way invalidates my point–moderates win, wackos lose.
But you are right–The Republican Party lost after it’s candidate (selected by the local chairs of the Republican parties in the 3 counties in the district) withdrew. That candidate withdrew after a number of prominent National Republican politicians (Pawlenty, Palin, etc.) endorsed not the Republican candidate, but the Conservative Party Candidate (the wacko in the race). Those endorsements, it seems to me, tend to identify the Republican Party with wackos (despite the endorsement of the Republican moderate by our old pal Newt).
I don’t think this is a party deal on either side. I think this is an independent voter deal and if enough independent voters are pissed at one party or the other, that is the party that will gets its backside thumped. That’s why I think governering from the far right or left is the kiss of death for any political party. However, governing from the center or the opposite of one’s party is also the kiss of death. The trick is to find the right of center or just left of center. Clinton did it well, and in the end, so did Reagan. He got enough bipartisan support, as did Clinton. Bush was polarizing and only won two terms because of such a weak candidate in Kerry. So far, Obama, is turning out to be quite polarizing, as well. Only time will tell.
It is curious that Pres. Obama is a polarizing figure. I have always felt that he wasn’t nearly as “liberal” as many “major media outlets” make him out to be. I one should govern from the center in order to be effective, then our President should be very effective, yet he seems to get hackles up from most repubs in leadership, and even some of our more liberal democratic lawmakers. Could it be that the politics of division that were practiced and polished under Mr. Rove have become unovercomable? See Congressman Wilson.
By the way, Really? on the rally signs? What are they really so afraid of?
I think they’re afraid of a government that provides health coverage and then, in the name of controlling costs so as to not have unhealthy people live at the expense of their neighbors, effectively outlaws smoking or drinking or Twinkies or playing tackle football or undergoing experimental treatment or…
Far-fetched? Probably. Crazy? Absolutely not.
Point taken. There is a good chance now, though, if you get sick through no fault of your own, you could lose your insurance, your benefits and your house. I’m not suggesting that one is better or worse to lose, but there’s always something to lose.
Won’t you come over for one of my special Ginger martini’s?
Oh heck, I’d still be driving a Corvair if Ralph and the gov. didn’t intervene. Monza Spider. Supercharged. The front lifted off at about 105. Thrilling ride. Tackle football? We love it in all its forms don’t we? Very easy to overlook its incredibly violent, destructive nature while we’re being wildly entertained. While you’re at it check out a former player named Dave Meggyesy who wrote a staggering indictment of the pro game over twenty years ago. The “opiate of the masses.” Largely ignored of course. But I’ve digressed. Now Twinkies, that’s something else.
Crazy? Yes! probably too many twinkies in one sitting.
Mrs. Fay:
Obama campaigned on governing from the center. How he actually has governed………well. I’ll leave that up to the masses to decide, but I’ve got my own opinion. Check this out.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/15/obama-now-more-polarizing_n_322159.html
Also keep in mind that his approval rating is barely over 50. He had a ton of good will going in and a huge approval rating and it seems to have dropped in stunning fashion.
Saw this the other day and don’t know what to make of it. Some liberals are critical about the president’s behavior regarding this incident for the same reason many conservatives are. Hanson is right………….this is a worrying sign.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NGI4YjE0YzU5MjU4YWE0NWI3ZjFmYzQ0M2E5ZGFmMjI=
Sorry for the poor sentence structure. I should have said “This is a sign of concern.”