Sometimes, our readers do a better job of defending us than we do ourselves.
When a critic contended that those protesting the President’s plans to overhaul our health care system were mere stooges of the insurance companies (and not grassroots protesters), North Dallas Thirty took issue with him (far more succinctly and much more to the point than I):
. . . he believes that the only way people would oppose Obama is if they were paid to do so. He simply cannot even entertain the possibility that people could disagree with Obama.
While I might quibble with a term NDXXX used in the part (of his comment) I did not quote, he’s really onto something here.
All too many on the left (and even a good number on the right) are simply astounded at the intensity of the spontaneous protests against a bigger and more intrusive national government. We Americans may have not seen anything like this since the ’70s, the 1770s, that is.
It’s simply amazing that some of our readers as well as those who work in the liberal media and write for left-wing blogs refuse to accept that their fellow Americans could have principled objections to and genuine concerns about Obama’s big-government policies, particularly given the failure of so many statist schemes to improve the economy as well as the delivery of a great variety of services, including health care.
Even Obama’s campaign rhetoric suggested some sympathy for those favoring smaller government. If he could understand those concerns in his campaign, why can’t his supporters understand then now that he’s in office?
FROM THE COMMENTS: ThatGayConservative writes:
These folks have paid rent-a-mobs so they assume everybody else does it too. Still waiting for somebody to provide evidence of the insurance companies paying folks to oppose Chairman Obama. Should be just as easy as finding ads on CraigsList, right?
These folks have paid rent-a-mobs so they ASSume everybody else does it too. Still waiting for somebody to provide evidence of the insurance companies paying folks to oppose Chairman Obama. Should be just as easy as finding ads on CraigsList, right?
“He simply cannot even entertain the possibility that people could disagree with Obama”
Ahem. Trust me on this GPW, we are fully aware of the fact that 47% of the American people did not vote for Obama. Maybe you can make a case that the left is obssessed with and paranoid about the right, but you cannot for a moment sustain an argument that we are not aware of the fact that nearly half the country is on the other side.
If anything, it is rightwingers, with your constant talk of “real Americans” who seem incapable of understanding that a majority of real americans actually voted for Obama.
And btw, continue to support him today. Last I checked, his approval ratings are a tick higher than the percentage who voted for him.
“We Americans may have not seen anything like this since the ’70s, the 1770s, that is.”
Wow. What a huge misunderstanding of American history. Here is a hint. The left got more people out to one single demonstration against the Iraq war, than the sum total of every tea party held so far, combined.
I think you are confusing volume of noise produced with breadth and depth of support. Even a million people turning out in oppostion to a policy is an tiny fraction of the population – and y’all have never come close to even getting 1/10 of that kind of a turnout.
Hey. I’ve been to a few demonstrations in my time. You guys have nothing going so far. Its a reeeeeealy big country.
Tano, just because your guy got 53% of the vote doesn’t mean people buy his agenda hook, line and sinker. Recall, Obama won promising a line-by-line review of the federal budget and a “net spending cut.”
Um, Tano, trying to figure out where you’re finding us saying you’re paranoid about us. All I’m saying is you guys don’t take our concerns seriously. In this post, I never said that Republicans represent a majority–or that Obama failed to win a mandate. So, please, please, address the point of the post.
And if 53% of the America people, by doing of casting their ballots for Barack Obama, favor his health care plan, how come the more he talks about the proposal, the more it sinks in the polls?
So, please answer my question, why must so many on the left deny the legitimacy of the concerns of that 47% of Americans. You couldn’t even say as much in your commentary. If the lefties who describe us as astroturf are so convinced of the popularity of their policies (adn those of the president), why must they write us off as corporate instead of addressing our substantive criticisms on the merits?
Once again, please, respond to the points of the post (and my commentary–after all it’s my blog to which you attach your ramblings) rather than engage in repeated rants against “right-wingers.”
#2
Who’s “we”?
If anything, it is rightwingers, with your constant talk of “real Americans” who seem incapable of understanding that a majority of real americans actually voted for Obama.
They didn’t vote for the shit he’s peddling now. That’s why folks are bailing out as he spends trillions on new deck chairs.
BTW, does anybody really believe him when he says he will veto a defense budget laden with pork?
GPW,
I do not think that opponents of Obamacare are insincere or are paid stooges. My sense, from what I have seen, is that the protesters are very sincere. And very scared. And very deluded as to the reality of the issue.
I think the rightwing propagandists have done a very effective job scaring the living sh*t out of people who seem to rely on them for all their information.
So are your concerns legitimate? In a totally theoretical sense – sure. If someone tells you that Obamacare is a socialist communist fascist kenyan plot to exterminate all the elderly, and probably the conservatives next, and if you are so gullible as to believe them, then of course you should be concerned.
But are you concerns legitimate in the sense of having some reference to the real world/ Not that I can see.
‘how come the more he talks about the proposal, the more it sinks in the polls?”
Because utterly unprincipled and outrageous demagoguery can often trump reasoned discourse, at least in the short run.
If you want the Dems to take your concerns seriously, why not take responsibility for articulating serious concerns. I suspect that y’all have entertained yourselves for so long with over-the-top ranting, on the radio, books etc. that you may have forgotten that that was just entertainment, and not how to conduct a serious national debate.
Oh, and as to why others on the left make the insincerity charge – I dont know. I have my own take on things, others have theirs.
#5: Tano, of all the asinine bullshit that seeps from your every zombified pore, this is among the most intolerable. We’ve certainly heard this argument before because you are incapable of expressing a point that has not been uploaded to that tiny little microprocessor in the back of your neck by the DNC. Specifically, that the protesters are HINDERING Obama and his minions from getting the truth out and allowing them to combat the lies and evil right-wing propaganda being spread about the plan. You condescendingly lecture about “demagoguery” trumping “reasoned discourse” and advise the protesters to “take responsibility” for articulating their “serious concerns.”
Tano, you are a useless, pathetic little marionette and NO ONE is buying it. You and the scumbags causing you to clownishly flop about as they pull your strings had every intention of passing this assault on individual freedom in a few weeks with no questions asked. But when people started asking questions, the liberals did what they always do–tried to shove them aside, expressing shock and indignation at the very idea of being questioned by the ignorant masses. Well, they had finally had enough of it and they rightfully stood up and reminded their representatives who works for whom. Any disruption, chaos, or madness is the fault of your party alone. The chaos NEVER kept your party from getting out the truth–your party’s vile attempts to conceal the truth led to the chaos. Not the other way around. So please take your advice about how the protesters can best get their legitimate concerns addressed and CRAM IT.
Wake up, Tano. YOU are with the bad guys. YOU are aligned with the oppressors, not the liberators. That is why The People are reacting this way. You can keep parroting the left’s talking points about astroturfers and nazis, but somewhere deep down, you know the truth. You’re on the wrong side.
Specifically, that the protesters are HINDERING Obama and his minions from getting the truth out and allowing them to combat the lies and evil right-wing propaganda being spread about the plan.
And let’s not forget the Snitch List. WTF kind of “leader” asks people to report others who are “lying” and has to create (yet another) piss & moan site to address said “lies”? A crime boss maybe?
That’s one thing I miss about Bush. He wasn’t as thin-skinned as this elitist snob. If he gave a crap about all the poo the liberals were slinging like wild monkeys, he didn’t show it.
I want to address one point – the 53% that voted for Obama is not 53% of the whole population. Since you do not have compulsory voting, you rely on the voter turnout. Therefore that 53% only represents those who did in fact turn out to vote. This would mean that the percentage of the whole of the eligible voters is somewhat less than 53%.
It is a fudge to keep up with this notion that “53% of Americans voted for Obama” because if you did the sums correctly you will find that combined with the non-turn out more did not vote for Obama than those who did vote.
#5
“And very deluded as to the reality of the issue.
I think the rightwing propagandists have done a very effective job scaring the living sh*t out of people who seem to rely on them for all their information.”
Yeah, okay. Tell me something, Tonto. When it rains, do you find yourself gasping and choking on water from having your nose so high in the air?
P.S. Didn’t we hang or shoot a good majority of the people who had attitudes like this after WW2. I think they were called Nazis, or something like that. They thought they were the only ones who were smart enough, and pure enough, to understand the world, too.
Actually Sean, I am content to leave your hysterical rant out there unchallanged. I think it proves my point beyond a shadow of a doubt.
And further, isn’t it downright hilarious, in a thread defined by a post lamenting the supposed inability of the left to acknowledge the sincerity of its opponent’s views, that so many people writing here seem to have an absolute inability to acknowledge that someone (like me) could sincerely believe the things I do.
I am not claiming to be smarter than any of you here, but I think it fair to say that my comments show that I have thought through these issues as much as most of you have, and, for whatever reason, I seem able to articulate those views without the need to melt down and spew barrages of childish insults, like Sean above, just for an example.
So, are you guys in any sense any better than your opponents when it comes to extending to your opponents the minimal level of respect entailed in accepting their sincerity? Not really. And so that kinda undercuts your entire argument.
No Tano,
You have shown an inability to accept there are viewpoints other than your own, slinking away when challenged to back up anything you say with documentation.
A fool may beleive that the moon is made of green cheese, or that Obama has never said he’s for single payer, but neither of these things is true, no matter how many time the fool says it.
Have you guys seen the latest Gallup survey? Not only do conservative outnumber liberals two to one (40% to 21%), we also outnumber them in all fifty states.
Allow me to interpret this: We’re the mainstream. Tardo, torpidprime, and crosseyednutlicker are the fringe extremists.
The AARP has lost 60,000 members since July 1st due to the organization’s waffling on Obamacare. Naturally, elitist losers like Tano will claim that senior citizens are “deluded” about the issue and blame the “right-wing propaganda” about “death panels,” but the real reason is preserved forever on high-definition video and is well-known to people who acknowledge truth and reject liberal double-speak. For years, Bush was excoriated for trying to throw senior citizens into the street for the proposal of privatizing a tiny percentage of social security in order to maximize growth and save the program. Now, Obama expects to publicly propose $300 billion in cuts to Medicare and then two weeks later, attend AARP’s town hall meeting, look directly into the eyes of AARP’s members and say, “no one is talking about cuts to Medicare.” And of course, even after shamelessly lying to AARP’s membership, Obama lies AGAIN by claiming that his plan is being endorsed by AARP. No one is being fooled because at this point, senior citizens know that they have no more reason to trust Obama on these issues than a town hall protester wearing a swastika.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/17/eveningnews/main5247916.shtml
I think doing nothing but call people “deluded” and “misinformed” is a losing strategy. Instead of attacking people, the Obamacrats might find it more constructive to re-write the bill to address their concerns.
#8: “And let’s not forget the Snitch List.”
After blaming “third-party groups for official White House e-mails that have been sent to people who never signed up for them over the weekend, Obama’s media director is now on the official White House blog attempting to “clear up” the confusion regarding the Administration’s e-mail practices. Naturally, he points the finger at “defenders of the status quo” (= conservatives) for “fear-mongering” and “sinister conspiracy theories” even while acknowledging the problems with the Administration’s online practices. And the snitching program is still a go–it’s just being “consolidated” with Obama’s “reality check” propaganda site. Here’s a quote from:
“An ironic development is that the launch of an online program meant to provide facts about health insurance reform has itself become the target of fear-mongering and online rumors that are the tactics of choice for the defenders of the status quo,” he wrote. “Despite reports by some bloggers and others in the media that have invoked a variety of sinister conspiracy theories, more people signed up for updates last week than during the entire month of July.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/18/white-house-blames-e-mail-controversy-sinister-conspiracy-theories/
So, to review, they don’t have any idea who sent the unsolicited e-mails, they are continuing to keep tabs on citizens who disagree with the Administration’s policies, and any concerns about the practices are the result of right-wing fear-mongering and fabricated conspiracy theories.
Glad they cleared that up.
“A fool may beleive that the moon is made of green cheese, or that Obama has never said he’s for single payer,”
I actually wrote, what is common knowledge in most places, that Obama certainly did say he was for single payer – IF we could start from scratch and build an entirely new system. BUT, he continued, in the very next sentence, since we can’t start from scratch, I do not support a single payer system – in the real world.
Anyone with an ounce of interest in understanding reality has figured this out long ago. But those with an absolute derangement about the guy still try to pretend that this is some proof of great deception or something…
Ah Sean. You can’t help yourself, can you? The more you post the more you show how correct the left is to point to deluded propagandists.
The “snitch list”!! Ha. Yeah dude, how do you think we will figure out who to send to the reeducation camps?
My sense, from what I have seen, is that the protesters are very sincere. And very scared. And very deluded as to the reality of the issue.
Actually, no.
For example, you lied and said that the uninsured go to emergency rooms at a higher rate than anyone else, when the facts instead indicate that those on government health insurance do.
For example, you lied and said that preventative care always lowers costs, when the facts indicate that in the vast majority of cases, preventative care raises, rather than lowers, costs.
For example, you lied and said that the health care plan your Obama was proposing would bend the cost curve downward, when in fact the CBO proved definitively that it would do the opposite and actually RAISE it.
For example, you lied and said that no one was even talking about or considering single-payer, when in fact a single-payer bill has been guaranteed a vote in the House.
For example, you lied and said that the AARP had approved Obama’s health plan, which they did not, and that surgeons were routinely removing tonsils and other body parts unnecessarily, when in fact they were not.
In short, Tano, you repeat nothing but Obama talking points and run like hell when confronted with real, live, referenceable facts.
Senior citizens are not stupid. They recognize two things — one, that they have had money taken from every single paycheck they have ever received for the past forty years in exchange for the promise that they would receive health care services, and two, that Obama is now saying he’s going to cut those services so he can take the money they’ve already paid and give it to other people instead.
What I think several of them also realize is that the more of them that die, the more that Obama is benefited, because they were the age group that consistently voted against him. They also realize that he considers them racist, that his advisors consider them “low productivity”, and that gay liberals like yourself openly talk about how you can’t wait for them to die off so you can implement your “progressive agenda”.
#20: “Ah Sean. You can’t help yourself, can you? The more you post the more you show how correct the left is to point to deluded propagandists. The “snitch list”!! Ha. Yeah dude, how do you think we will figure out who to send to the reeducation camps?”
Wow, Tano. You’ve really outdone yourself with this one. Just so I’m clear: my reference to Obama’s continuing program to collect information about “deluded propagandists” makes me a “deluded propagandist.” Is that pretty much it?
Or is it just your objection to me calling it a “snitch list?” If so, would you be willing to help me come up with a better name for it? Here’s the deal–I’ll call it by the same name that you honestly would have given to the program described below.
George W. Bush, facing mounting domestic opposition to the War in Iraq, begins encountering demonstrations at every public event he attends and he notices that the anti-war protesters are all carrying signs and banners with statements like, “9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB,” “NO WAR FOR OIL,” “BUSH HAS MURDERED MILLIONS OF IRAQI CIVILIANS,” “BUSH LIED, KIDS DIED,” “NO WMDS,” and the like. Bush publicly announces that in order to clear up all of the misinformation and lies being spread about the war and the reasons the US went to war, he is setting up a website and e-mail address devoted specifically to receiving information from citizens about “fishy” and erroneous statements and slogans being spread about the War in Iraq. The website has the following statement: “There is a lot of disinformation about the War in Iraq out there. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help.”
What would YOU call the program described above, Tano? Give it a shot. “The White House Wartime Public Outreach Plan For The Children”? “The White House War On Terror Education Initiative”? How about “Dear Georgie”? Just give me the first TRUTHFUL answer you’ve ever typed on this blog and tell me what you would have called the program I described, and that’s what I’ll call Obama’s program. Deal?
Tano: Come on! You appear to be an intelligent person. The reason the anxiety is INCREASING instead of dissipating is because Obama and his representatives aren’t answering the questions, if they do… they really don’t, they’ve been innaccurate, one day it’s one thing, the next day it’s something different, then it’s back again. Remember, Obama wanted a 1200 page bill passed and signed before the break. We already went through that with the stimulus that no one even read. Common sense dictates there will be a decrease in services; it’s just math. Common sense dictates that NOTHING is “free” and will cost each and every one of us more money and a majority will have the privelage of paying more money for even less service. There are too many baby boomers out there that are concerned that when it’s their time to get care after paying all their lives that it won’t be available (whether it is accurate or not.) I think you might be sincere in your beliefs but here’s the government in action: my best friend finished boot camp, was attending his first training after boot camp at Fort Dix. He received a letter from the draft board addressed to “Private J. D.” (won’t use his name) address: “Fort Dix” advising him that he had failed to report to register for the draft!