Tuesday, August 11, 2009

New Leadership, Please

You know what just about the most "un-American" thing I can think of is? A Congressional leader calling his or her political opponents "un-American" for protesting government actions. Let's call them ugly, loud-mouth, ignorant SOBs, but let's leave un-American out of it.

For fuck's sake. This is what our political opponents do. They brand dissent as un-patriotic. To them Code Pink is just shy of an official terrorist organization. What do they do? They stand up at meetings, shout down the speaker, and make their voices heard. We admire them. We admire anyone who has the courage to stand up to the powers that be and makes their voice heard.

And these townhall protesters are no different than we are. Well, I guess I'd like to believe that they're wrong, whereas my lefty groups are right, but how can for one hot minute anyone who reads this blog think that these people have invalid views or don't deserve to be heard just because they were organized into going to an event by Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh. I am a union organizer, I am astroturf by definition. Sure, members may walk into my office to tell me about some issue they have and I can use my skills to organize them, but this never happens over politics. Nope, I'm out there trying to get three to five people to show up for some half-assed rally. Let's just take (and leave) EFCA as an example.

Lastly, I will not abide by my leadership pretending like a townhall meeting means something. That they are some genuine exchange of views between a Congressperson and the citizens. That Peter Defazio has yet to make up his mind about this crazy health care bill and that the fine citizens of Drain, Oregon are going to provide some magical insight that really opens his eyes. It's bullshit and we all know it. Townhalls, at best, provide a politician political cover or anecdotes, otherwise they are pretty useless. Somehow the thought that organized hicks might be standing up and making a mockery of these dog and pony shows does not rock me to my American core. They always were political theater, the last thing we should be upset about is that they'll be good political theater. Heaven knows, if it weren't for the chance that I might be engaged is some actual heated political yelling, I doubt that I'd be driving down to the Grove tomorrow at 8 am to hear Defazio spout hackneyed talking points for a bill he probably doesn't genuinely support - which, in my book, is pretty un-American.

15 comments:

mike3550 said...

Great minds think alike. Of course, so do terrible minds. I'm not sure what that does for us.

wobblie said...

I'm with you on 99.9% of this. Yelling at our elected representatives is a time-honored tradition to be treasured, even if the yelling is coming from our opponents. There's no doubt our side's leadership is shamelessly cribbing from Bush-era "how to silence your critics" response sheets. There's also no doubt that right-wing protesters aren't astroturf - they're legitimately pissed off (even if I think the reasons they articulate for said anger mask something deeper). And I whole-heartedly agree with you that the town hall meeting is just kabuki theater, part of the pretty tinsel of "democracy."

That said, there are things going on here that are worrisome. Why is the office of an African-American congressman being painted with a Swastika? Why are people bringing firearms to public events with elected officials? And if this diary is to be believed (and I'm taking it with more than a few grains of salt), why is a sitting legislator seemingly calling for a "revolution" against an elected government (yes, yes, I know... like a "Gingrich" or "Reagan" revolution)? Did we see anything like this in 1993?

I'm not trying to infer anything about most of the people at these town halls, who I'm sure are confused, scared, some of them misinformed, some of the misinformed willfully so, but mixed in with this is a more sinister element that has no problem making its presence felt, and that profoundly worries me.

dave3544 said...

Wobs,

I think we should be just as concerned about the wackos at town hall meetings as we are about the mask wearing wackos in the Whit. IOW, not much at all. The worst thing we could do is pretend like they are actually a threat to the nation in any way.

wobblie said...

Are they a "threat to the nation"? No. Could they actually end up killing a flesh and blood human being because of a political disagreement? You know the answer to that.

I'd also add that the anarchists in the Whit weren't operating with a wink and a nod from prominent, well-placed individuals.

Lynchings by the Klan were never a threat to the nation, either, and they were winked at by the power structure as well. Again, this has nothing to do with 99.9% of the people yelling at the town halls. But I don't think you can ignore threats of political violence, especially when these threats have the tacit approval of the powers-that-be.

S said...

I was feeling pretty strongly one way about this, and I still do, for the most part, but I get it. Just because I don't agree with the dissenters does not mean they don't have a right to dissent, or be obnoxious assholes. Yelling, being disruptive, garnering attention...these are tactics utilized in the past for some pretty damn important social and political movements.

That being said...where's the legitimacy? If you're going in there JUST to be a disruptive asshole, what's accomplished? Certainly you've made your point, I guess, but nothing productive has been done.

I know I'm a bit of a Pollyanna when it comes to this kind of thing; I know you think these Town Hall meetings are bullshit, but I'm really not sure what the alternative is. I'm not sure how we're supposed to actually have any sort of exchange or dialogue (please forgive my husband's influence here, obviously) that is productive, if everything is a screaming slander match, with people doing creepy, crazy shit and disrupting for disruption's sake.

I guess where I'm at is if we think we have to scream loudly and stamp our feet and make asses of ourselves simply to be heard, then that's the game that will continue to be played. I'd like to think that's not how it has to be, but hey...like I said, Pollyanna all over the place up in here.

dave3544 said...

Triple L,

It's possible that it is just because I am a cynical bastard, but I do not believe that there is a way to have a "productive" dialogue about these issues. At least not with "citizens." We don't know anything, we have nothing to add to the debate. The best we can do is show up, show passion, and imply that if our Congressman does not comply with our hysterical desires then we will work to defeat them in the next election.

That said, I don't really see the difference between the rantings of the tea-baggers and the rantings of your average speaker at an anti-war rally. Town Hallers = Code Pink. What constitutes a "pretty important social movement" is a matter of politics. Of course we think we're right, but then, so do they.

Wobs, I was trying to avoid the Weather Underground/Bill Ayers references, but you have compelled me. Our side has its violent fringe as well, let's not pretend it doesn't or participate in the conflating of the mainstream with the wackos who jump on the bandwagon.

wobblie said...

Again, it seems to me that most of the people we'd consider leaders on the left - elected reps, pundits, etc. - were all pretty unequivocal in denouncing Ayers and Weather Underground (for actions that occurred 30-40 years ago). Are leaders on the right backing away from their wackos?

Here's the thing, I guess. I don't associate the wackos with the citizens going to town halls and venting a spleen. I do, however, associate the wackos with right-wing leadership, many of whom, again, seem to be looking upon such behavior with a wink and a nod.

The bottom line, I guess, is that I don't have a problem with the GOP and health insurance lobbyists telling their supporters to go to town halls and give their reps hell about government health care. They can have at. But this is being mixed in with "we need to stand up to tyranny/we need another revolution/etc. etc." along with a concerted effort to dehumanize political opponents that's coming from people with prominent platforms. That, to me, seems to be stoking the extremist elements within their ranks.

Dennis said...

One of the things I see people worried about with the crossover between the right-wing wackos and elected officials is the amount of pure nonsense - death panels, Obama's health care logo (he doesn't have one - nor does he actually have a plan, either, since he's letting Congress write the bills so far), and the like - that is being repeated and encouraged by elected representatives. Ideally, elected officials are supposed to be the knowledgeable ones, as you've pointed out, Dave. But when you have Michelle Bachmann or what's-his-face from Georgia spouting the same batshit insane stuff, I think it raises a good question about the legitimacy of elected officials as qualified to work on something like health care.

And no, I am not so naive as to think politicians are actually experts (with rare exceptions, of course). But I think what I see is a new low for the level of discourse that's being pushed not only by extremists but elected officials, and that should be cause for concern, right?

dr said...

I'm about 80% with you, false dave.

Here's where I definitely agree. The fact that a rally requires "organizing" doesn't render it illegitimate, or unreflective of grassroots sentiment. Just try to organize a rally in support of EFCA if you don't believe me. (oh wait, we were supposed to leave that topic)

But I do have a problem with these demonstrations and, sometimes, with Code Pink. I do think there's a difference between making yourself heard and shouting others down, and I think that the rallies go over that line. The contrast with the way dems organized around social security -- by turning people out to town halls for the purpose of asking pointed questions -- gets at the distinction I'm pointing to here.

That said, I take your point about the deep nature (i.e., inherent bullshittery) of the town halls. I don't really understand how the institution has persisted, b/c (speaking as an activist and cynic) they look more like targets than like locations for deliberation.

Anonymous said...

there's only one thing that warms the cockles of my cold, cold heart more than watching a really successful-looking protest by either of our currently-constituted national factions, and that's watching right-wingers try to pull off a successful-looking protest and failing.

our credentials as political cynics are not the issue here, false dave. the issue is that these whackaloons want to kill the president. they, collectively constituted, want to kill the president like "the city of dallas" wanted to kill JFK on November 21, 1963, which is to say: a lot. personally, i don't like thinking about all my time knocking on doors for this hawaiian motherfucker going to waste.

one can fairly impugn these batshit crazies without implying either a. the purity of the town-hall meeting as a political genre or b. the irreproachable ethics of any of the players on our side, is what i'm getting at.

AP

ash said...

I'll cast my lot with the "you're right on about the un-helpfulness of the anti-American label and the fact that townhalls are basically bullshit political theater" crowd, but that's as far as I can go with you on this one. Wingnuts (of any stripe) can rant and rave at public meetings until they're blue in the face. Rant on, crazies! But the fact that some of these nutcases are showing up ARMED to these things, with signs about the need to spill the blood of tyrants is beyond troubling to me. And yes, I believe it DOES make a difference that their explicitly violent wingnuttery is being legitimized and supported by leaders on the right and right-wing elements in the mainstream media. When have we EVER seen anything equivalent on the left? When has it ever been the case that a violent lefty fringe movement has been celebrated by liberals and progressives and heralded (or even taken seriously) in the media? I'm not talking about every Screamy McAngrypants who shows up to vent at their congressperson, of course. But there are elements of the opposition that I find truly scary.

wobblie said...

Screamy McAngrypants FTW!

And again, we have elected officials saying shit like this:

[Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA)] also spoke of a “socialistic elite” – Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid – who might use a pandemic disease or natural disaster as an excuse to declare martial law.

“They’re trying to develop an environment where they can take over,” he said. “We’ve seen that historically.”

They're stoking their extremists.

ash said...

Agree with wobs that the leadership (and others) are stoking their extremists. And seriously, not to sound all paranoid and alarmist, but that is really NOT TO BE TAKEN LIGHTLY. See Lex's post over at the OG and the comments--esp. from anon (was that AP?) about coded stoking. These are not anarchists in the Whit "armed" with a brick to chuck through a Starbucks window, and the wingnuts on the right aren't going to sit around agonizing in 6-hour meetings trying to reach consensus on whether a "diversity of tactics" is a Good Thing or not. These are the same people who will "air their grievances" by driving a fucking Ryder truck full of fertilizer and fuel oil into the daycare center of some random federal building. They are armed, dangerous wingnuts. To me, that's scary.

Dennis said...

Then there are things like this.

wobblie said...

I'd also like to point out that people are flying off the handle because of the tentative steps we're taking to become slightly more like Canada. God forbid we have some debate about something like paying dues to the UN.