You can look at someone who throws a brick through the windows of a Congrewsswoman's office as deranged, imbecilic, and infantile. The same goes for anyone who makes death threats against their Representatives. Or publishes a website that lists the home address of a lawmaker's brother.
John Boehner (R-Ohio) declared "violence and threats are unacceptable. That's not the American way." Tell that to Sam Adams as he and his cohorts are brewing a cauldron of tar and gathering feathers to forcibly adhere to a tax collector.
I'm not trying to equate (and thereby lionize) today's Tea Party cadres to the Sons of Liberty, but there's an interesting dynamic of rage that's similarly at work in both the 2010s and 1770s.
While most of America - Left, Center, and Right - condemns the irrational acts and threats of violence that have been launched toward certain Democrats, their very existence should alarm everyone that wields power in Washington. America is generally a passive country when it comes to politics. We don't have attacks on polling stations, never have riots or violent protests after elections, and half the nation doesn't vote.
People don't regularly throw bricks into buildings that house offices of those they disagree with. Someone has to have a psychological snap of sorts, allowing them to cross lines and boundaries they'd never normally approach. There's a rage there, and that should not be dismissed, it should be carefully analyzed.
It's difficult, because when one observes some jerk heaving masonry through windows, it's hard to take their cause seriously. Quite the opposite, the "protester" is obviously a fool, and anything they have to say is either ignored, or prejudicially labelled incorrect.
The Democrats are dismissing this rising torrent of political temper tantrums. "Go for it," Barack arrogantly provoked when discussing the possibilities of Republicans running for office under an anti-Healthcare Reform banner.
The Democrats seem to think that having so many loudmouthed, incoherent, silly SOBs against them signifies that they are right, and their opponents are wrong. Even if that were true, it's a dismissive way of ignoring the underlying rage that allows a person to act barbarous.
Why are these people upset? Because they feel unrepresented by their representatives. Disenfranchised. They feel as though Government is attempting to run their lives, that some distant politician is trying to intervene in the fundamental elements of their daily activities.
It's the same kind of rage felt by Bostonians in 1773. And guess what, Barack's Government is dismissing that rage the same way George III's did.
Now, unlike the Lobsterbacks, you're not going to have soldiers quartering in private houses, or blockades of harbors, or any of the other provocations that turned drunken civil unrest in Boston into the Revolutionary War.
It's easy to mock irrationality, and illogic. It's easy to make fun of Carl Everett for dismissing the existence of dinosaurs because they're not mentioned in the Bible. But if you never try to understand how someone could possess such ludicrous beliefs, you'll never be able to defeat them, only outnumber them.
So laugh it up, Jon...
Because while Sarah Palin provides hilarious material, and Glenn Beck's chalkboard should wind up in the Smithsonian as part the TV Comedy wing, next to Archie's chair (for several reasons), there is something not so funny fueling this rage, justified or unjustified. The rage exists. It's very real. It's growing stronger.
Bating the rage will not defeat it. Firefighters don't fight real fires with fire. They use foam and water. Why? Because they understand that foam suffocates fire, depriving it of the oxygen that it needs to survive. The protagonists in zombie movies last 90 minutes because they're able to infer that decapitation kills the zombies (and immortals).
George III's Government didn't understand the angst in colonial Boston. They dismissed it as rabble, irrational and irrelevant. And in a way, it was somewhat irrational. The American colonies were taxed considerably less than every other citizen in the British Empire.
But throughout the history of our planet, political outrage has always been expressed in irrational and unconventional ways. And this can be dangerous. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. For every piece of Leftist legislation that scurries through Congress while 48% of the country dissents, there will quite a backlash.
The Liberals best be careful, for all our sakes. Because irrational people, fueled by rage, can coalesce into powerful mobs. They're capable of unspeakably crazy things, like toss toss leaves in harbors, hurl bricks, and vote Sarah Palin into the White House.
Such an irrational and self-destructive act might be impossible to understand. But you must strive to at least understand the rage that incites such behavior. And maybe look at your rational self in the mirror and say "We need to slow down."
So belittle, bemoan, make your little jokes. But don't someday claim that nobody warned you.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
The cartoon omits the part about 48% of the country hating the bill and only 45% supporting it.
We all know Liberals think they're smart. Everyone thinks they're smart. But Liberals specifically believe not only are they smart, they're smarter than you. So much so, that for your own best interest, THEY should run YOUR lives.
After all, Liberals read the New York Times. You read USA Today, or rather, you look at the color pictures and "analyze" the charts. And that's if you read any newspaper at all. You probably just sit in front of Fox News and think whatever Glenn Beck tells you to think. And that, of course, isn't how Liberals relate to the Times. They just happen to agree with the Times, because they and the Times are both so utterly intelligent.
The thing about us Conservatives is that we really all talk with one voice. What Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin say pretty much speaks for us all. When two or three assholes at a Tea Party rally shout racial slurs, they're representing all of us. If one Conservative is racist and/or ignorant, it logically follows that ALL Conservatives are racist and/or ignorant.
And that's sort of why we need Healthcare Reform, even though about half of us didn't want it. Because the 48% of the United States that doesn't want reform, is wrong. We're stupid. This young woman pretty much speaks for me. She's against Healthcare Reform, I'm against Healthcare Reform, it's probably for the same reasons, right?
The 48% of us just don't get it, do we? We don't want something that's so obviously grand and desirable like Healthcare Reform. How could we be so stupid? Reform means "to improve." Healthcare is a good thing, so what's wrong with improving something good? Only an idiot wouldn't want to make a good thing even better.
Those of us that don't want our insurance premiums OR taxes to go up, we simply fail to understand that the legislation will somehow lower premiums and taxes. And we're just paranoid for fearing that Government estimates of costs are always grotesquely underestimated.
Those of us that want to maintain the quality of our own Healthcare, we're either too selfish to spend our money to pay for someone else's lung cancer treatments OR we just don't understand how forcing insurance companies to accept people with preexisting conditions will lower the cost of insurance. We also don't get the crazy notion that a house insurance company should insure houses that are already on fire.
I'll not discuss the merits, shortcomings, faults, and horrors of Barack's Healthcare plan. It's passed, it's going to happen. Honestly, I'm not too sad. Because if the Republicans can find a decent candidate in 2012, well they'll have endless ammunition to fire. There's just something about us Americans, we don't like it when Government tells us what we should want. We tend to do something about it.
I voted for Scott Brown, so did 1,168,106 of my fellow Massicans. He won an election, in the most Liberal enclave of the country, based on being against these Reforms. So what was Barack and Pelosi's response? To ignore us and go ahead anyway.
Who cares what voters in Massachusetts declared? Apparently a Commonwealth with Harvard and MIT is just as stupid and ignorant as Arkansas and Alabama.
And that's what this Healthcare Reform is all about anyway. It's The Government making decisions for us. Because we're too dumb to do things on our own. At least Bill Maher has the stones to admit what Nancy Pelosi and the rest of those lefty elitists in Washington are thinking.
And I can't say that I disagree with him. People can be really stupid. But isn't that their right? If I don't want to learn about history, I don't have to.
I consider myself to be smart. So why should I be forced to take care of the masses of ignorant (48% according to the Gallup poll on Healthcare Reform) drones out there?
We're too dumb to manage our own lives, yet we're somehow smart enough to select someone who is. Why even hold elections if we're so stupid?
Barack is patting himself on the back for this sweeping, groundbreaking, historic legislative concoction of his. Yet there's no mandate for such dramatic change to occur. More people are against it than for it. And even if the polls are in error, there's certainly no clear or decisive majority driving this legislation through Congress at such breakneck speed.
Barack can spout the word "bipartisanship," but when it comes down to it, he and the Democrats are only interested in bipartisanship if the Republicans happen to agree with them.
Abraham Lincoln famously said that this Government is "Of the people, by the people, for the people." Yet it hasn't listened to the people, it's ignored them. It claims to be working for the people, while at the same time dismissing them.
The loudmouth morons at Town Halls and in Tea Party rallies may be morons, but a moron gets 1 vote, a genius gets 1 vote. We're a lower-case "r" republic, which means that we choose people to REPresent us in Government. Not control us.
At least, that's how it's supposed to work.
Posted by rob at 1:00 PM