Patterico's Pontifications

8/10/2009

Pelosi finds dissent un-American… now.

Filed under: General — Karl @ 12:05 am

[Posted by Karl]

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer attack anti-ObamaCare protesters at Congressional town halls in the USA Today:

These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.

Pelosi knows a thing or two about raucous protesters, and has not always considered them un-American. Since becoming Speaker, she has occasionally run into resistance from the antiwar movement generally, and Code Pink in particular. In January 2006, Pelosi got a decidedly mixed reseption at a town hall meeting in San Francisco:

Dozens of heckling, sign-toting anti-war protesters tried to take center stage at the congresswomen’s town hall forum on national security — calling for an immediate de-funding of the Iraq war and impeachment proceedings against President George Bush.

***

The protesters stood quietly in front of Pelosi waving their signs for the entire two-hour meeting, while hecklers from the audience frequently interrupted the talk.

***

But Pelosi never summoned help from police or security. She negotiated with the hecklers and at times even thanked the protesters for their advocacy and enthusiasm.

“It’s always exciting,” she told reporters after the meeting. “This is democracy in action. I’m energized by it, frankly.”

Or this incident from June 2007:

The congresswoman who hails from liberal San Francisco was introduced on Wednesday by Rep. John Murtha, a longtime Iraq war dissenter. Murtha was greeted with raucous applause, but, at the mention of Pelosi’s name, members of the antiwar women’s group Code Pink were quick to shout at her and continued to do so throughout her speech until she responded.

As Pelosi was discussing “…preserving our climate, protecting our country, growing our economy and strengthening our families as we care for our children and preserve our planet,” activists from the group interjected.

“And bring our troops home now,” a protester yelled from the crowd, following by several other “now”s.

“Preserving our planet is a national security issue…,” Pelosi said and paused. “I always say the best preparation for combat is combat,” she responded. “So just go for it, I respect your enthusiasm.”

“Your impatience with the war is justified,” Pelosi said, trying to ease tensions between those heckling her and those shushing the hecklers.

The Hill reported:

At the end of her remarks, she said, “Instead of fighting with us, which is your right to do, let’s work together.”

Pelosi would later complain about Code Pink protesters and refuse to meet with them, but that is a far cry from branding them un-American.

“Un-American” is an epithet Pelosi and other top Democrats save for the Right. Sen. Blanche Lincoln apologized for calling anti-Obamacare protests un-American, with a big whiff of political expediency. Pelosi, safely entrenched in San Francisco, has accused the GOP of being un-American time after time. It’s not difficult to find example after example of top Democrats questioning the patriotism of their opponents.

As for her attempted government takeover of the US healthcare system, Pelosi writes that “it is healthy for such a historic effort to be subject to so much scrutiny and debate,” and that “[t]he dialogue between elected representatives and constituents is at the heart of our democracy and plays an integral role in assuring that the legislation we write reflects the genuine needs and concerns of the people we represent.”

The reality is that Pelosi wanted the healthcare bill passed before the August recess and threatened to keeping the House in session through the August recess to pass its healthcare overhaul. She had no use for a dialogue between the members of her caucus and the voters who elected them.

Nor was she encouraging debate within the House of Representatives. Pelosi has run a more debate-free House than the GOP did from 199294-2006, and was willing to shut down the House to shut off debate about it. So it is no shock that Pelosi will not promise a week to review the final text of a health-care reform bill before a vote.

In sum, Speaker Pelosi is quite tolerant of disruptive protests, so long as they are on the Left. And if Pelosi is not the person most responsible for trying to shut down democratic debate on healthcare and other vital issues, she is certainly in the front row of the team photo. Is there a word for that?

–Karl

123 Comments

  1. If the Dems keep doubling down on these attacks, not only will the 2010 election be a bloodbath for them, but I suspect that certain unions will find they suffer a large drop on membership, or a complete change in union leadership.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:23 am

  2. [...] Excellent round up of Pelosi hypocrisy over at Patterico’s. [...]

    Pingback by Gazzer’s Gabfest » Having reached bottom, Nancy continues digging… (b98ad6) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:33 am

  3. Scott, that’s what cracks me up about the SEIU thuggery. They expect to ram EFCA (cardcheck) down our throats, but the recent union activities can hardly have endeared them to anyone. Bad planning all around.

    Comment by Gazzer (409de8) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:36 am

  4. I did not catch where Nancy mentions in her article about the violence and arrests starting at these town halls only after Obama and other democrats organized their special interest groups to go and shut down free speech.

    Which then resulted in assaulting senior citizens
    and beating down a black man in the streets of St. Louis.

    “Truth to Power” and “dissent is Patriotic” is
    now “un-American” and “Racist” now that a democrat is in office.

    Nancy seems to have forgotten these days:

    Dissent is Patriotic
    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_qwNGaeCRkvY/Snr0blSdVsI/AAAAAAAABKs/kEBjBPmSY0I/s1600-h/dissent.jpg


    Nancy seems to have forgotten the last 8 years of this also:

    Um Nancy!!
    http://massbackwards.blogspot.com/2009/08/for-first-time-in-her-adult-life.html

    and this

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_qwNGaeCRkvY/SnpmR2aWagI/AAAAAAAABKk/DRIgjuVlmRw/s1600-h/bhjpg.jpg

    Well liberals can induce all the selective amnesia they want,there are millions of Americans that have not forgotten and will not fall for this latests liberal propaganda campaign.

    Comment by Baxter Greene (af5030) — 8/10/2009 @ 1:03 am

  5. Nice try socialist queen.

    After 8 years of this:

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_qwNGaeCRkvY/SnpmR2aWagI/AAAAAAAABKk/DRIgjuVlmRw/s1600-h/bhjpg.jpg

    ….you and your liberal friends have no credibility what-so-ever in setting standards concerning the uses of free speech.

    Comment by Baxter Greene (af5030) — 8/10/2009 @ 1:25 am

  6. Problems with posting going through,sorry if it doubled.

    Comment by Baxter Greene (af5030) — 8/10/2009 @ 1:28 am

  7. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task for decades.

    glub

    Comment by mary jo (42470c) — 8/10/2009 @ 2:40 am

  8. oh. Hey Karl, lookit! This is neat. Remember how Miss Nancy said how…

    Health coverage for all was on the national agenda as early as 1912, thanks to Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose presidential run. Months after World War II came to an end in 1945, President Harry Truman called on Congress to guarantee all Americans the “right to blah blah blah blah blah

    That’s exactly what NPR says!!! They has a cool flash graphic thingy and everything!!!

    One great way I think for so nobody gets drownded would be for all of Barack Obama’s media to say the same stuff. I think this will help promote the healthy scrutiny and debate that Miss Nancy calls for.

    People must be allowed to learn the facts!

    Comment by happyfeet (42470c) — 8/10/2009 @ 3:04 am

  9. In related news, Ms. Pelosi has asked the House caterers to rename all tea-related products served in the mess “Freedom Drinks.”

    Comment by coondawg (16c406) — 8/10/2009 @ 3:42 am

  10. And….Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Hoyer give the best proof yet of my summary of the mantra of the Progressive Left:

    “..that’s different!™…”

    (insert foot stomp).

    Seriously, that is the thing: they don’t get democracy. Part of democracy is respecting opinions with which you disagree. These characters only respect those with whom they already agree—and if you don’t believe the way they do, you are eeevvviiiilll (something folks on both sides of the aisle need to watch). So it was fine for the Code Pink protestors to do their thing. But protesters against policies that Ms. Pelosi is pushing? Un-American!

    Add the “snitch-email” problem and Jonah Goldberg’s book is more and more true every day. Watch for lots of pundits to explain how all of these actions by the progressive Left really are standing with the Founding Fathers (homophobic sexist racists landowners that they were), and that Goldberg can’t write, and so on and so on. Look for lots and lots of astroturfing here and elsewhere.

    I believe that the Left not only thinks they are righteous, but that they will never lose power. After all, the gold standard of law (I think) is to imagine that law in the hands of your bitterest enemy, and still feel okay.

    Comment by Eric Blair (0bb481) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:09 am

  11. I think I just had my patriotism questioned…………..

    Comment by Techie (482700) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:45 am

  12. These tea partiers should follow a more code pink model: Interrupt, get arrested, event goes on.

    [note: fished from spam filter]

    Comment by imdw (f74515) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:55 am

  13. Stop the presses (or whatever the blogosphere equivalent is)! Karl discovers hypocrisy in politics!

    Both sides decry when others do to them what they’ve done to others. Both sides do to others what they’ve complained about when done to them.

    There is no principled consistency in politics, each side picks the tactic they think will carry the battle of the day. Disrupt a meeting? Impugn the motives of your opponents? Accuse your opponent of being a racist or unpatriotic? Misrepresent both your position and that of your opponent? Just par for the course. And they do it because it works. The public doesn’t care about the tactics, they’re not going to turn down something they like or accept something they don’t like because one side isn’t playing fair.

    By the way, sissies complain about the tactics their opponents uses. Oooh, they’re not fighting fair, they’re being hypocrites, they’re calling me names and taking my comments out of context.

    While the fight over healthcare reform isn’t quite the same as a firefight in Iraq, it is nonetheless very important… and when something is very important, keeping yourself and your friends alive is key and pretty much everything and everyone else comes in second. I’d rather fight dirty and beat Obama and Pelosi than to fight fair and lose. And complaining about Pelosi’s hypocrisy ain’t going to sway many minds or votes.

    Comment by steve sturm (369bc6) — 8/10/2009 @ 6:26 am

  14. Whiny beeyotches

    Comment by JD (0be158) — 8/10/2009 @ 6:32 am

  15. Why do you think her family sent her to washington while she had school-age children at home? And I truly hope the dems in congress are enjoying their pick of a woman to lead them. I’m telling you, between the women the liberals have picked and the afro-american leaders (even business leaders)I am turning into a hateful person and I don’t like it….I’m sixty years old and have never felt this way before.

    Comment by J (0f2b1a) — 8/10/2009 @ 6:39 am

  16. Steve Sturm wrote:

    “Both sides decry when others do to them what they’ve done to others.”

    and

    “I’d rather fight dirty and beat Obama and Pelosi than to fight fair and lose.”

    Either Mr. Sturm is not really a conservative, or else none of us should want him to be. This is both factually incorrect and morally offensive.

    Yes, it’s common in human conduct for individuals to unconsciously adopt a different standard for their opponents than they do for themselves; but it is the nature of civilized adulthood to identify and prevent those urges. Republicans routinely denounce their own for hypocrisy when they see it. Democrats seldom do. There is a difference.

    As to fighting dirty and winning, allow me to be the first, Mr. Sturm, to suggest that if I ever catch wind of you doing any such thing, I, a staunch Republican, will be first to blow the whistle and have you ARRESTED and THROWN IN THE DAMNED PRISON. If you cannot win honestly, you do not deserve to win. And if our nation is such that honest men cannot win honestly, then our nation will crumble, and deserves to.

    [note: fished from spam filter]

    Comment by Plumb Bob (04f227) — 8/10/2009 @ 6:46 am

  17. The Definition Of Chutzpah…

    Via House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer: These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. No. Wi…

    Trackback by Joust The Facts (cda54c) — 8/10/2009 @ 6:48 am

  18. Liberalism is a mental illness which Pelosi, Hoyer, Obama, happyfeet, and other Democrats regularly demonstrate.

    Comment by PCD (02f8c1) — 8/10/2009 @ 6:48 am

  19. TEA Partiers = Gandhi…

    Trackback by Polimerican (3552e7) — 8/10/2009 @ 6:56 am

  20. PCD – You really are way way way way wrong about happyfeet.

    Comment by JD (45da85) — 8/10/2009 @ 7:00 am

  21. PCD is just sad because Bush isn’t able to make the wars anymore and BARACK OBAMA is taking us out of the wars and giving us FREE HEALTHCARES and everyone is getting new cars almost for FREE (just have to pay the taxes) because of the new laws and CHANGE that Barack made and PCD hates but we have the change anyways because of the PEOPLE.

    Comment by happyfeet (rell one not dhnger) (71f55e) — 8/10/2009 @ 7:24 am

  22. Karl: You might want to revisit this part of the post…
    Pelosi has run a more debate-free House than the GOP did from 1992-2006…
    since the GOP took control following the 1994 elections!

    Comment by AD - RtR/OS! (07b20a) — 8/10/2009 @ 7:28 am

  23. So Pelosi is either mentally ill or a pathological liar.

    What is new here?

    Comment by HeavenSent (01a566) — 8/10/2009 @ 7:29 am

  24. Plum Bob, Trojan Horse ROTFLAMAO!!!!

    Pixie Dust and Unicorns plus a poor interpretation of what Strum wrote.

    Under the Plum theory you are always in the minority, always complaining, never doing and ALWAYS holier than thou.

    Another Cocktailer (or Democrat in disguise) who is frankly lost.

    Comment by HeavenSent (01a566) — 8/10/2009 @ 7:33 am

  25. Happy, I didn’t vote for changing the government to a Socialist Dictator with unelected, unconsented to Czars. Maybe you think the Constitution is a piece of toilet paper, but I don’t.

    You Donkey-crats are so hypocritical, that you prove you are the Un-Americans over and over again.

    Ain’t no such thing as a free lunch or free healthcare, but dolts like you will lie, cheat, and steal to destroy the country and deny your actions are at fault.

    JD, I’m not wrong about happyfeet. I’ve seen true belivers like it before, in California. Look at how bad California is now.

    Comment by PCD (02f8c1) — 8/10/2009 @ 7:59 am

  26. Anyone who’s witnessed the disgusting actions of the Code Pink wackos at military funerals knows that any politico equating them with the current protestors is so off the mark that it begs credulity. The fact that Pelosi tolerated their presence while condemning a bunch of soccer moms and senior citizens worried about their health insurance speaks volumes about her morality and fitness for office.

    Comment by Dmac (e6d1c2) — 8/10/2009 @ 8:01 am

  27. Okay, PCD. We will have to agree to disagree.

    Comment by JD (3af77e) — 8/10/2009 @ 8:16 am

  28. Plumb Bob: Nice to know A STAUNCH REPUBLICAN thinks making up stories about the other side, misrepresenting their positions and being hypocritical are subject to criminal prosecution.

    ‘Losing with honor’ is something one does ONLY when the stakes are low. When life and health are on the line, such as with the Dems plan to screw, I mean, rework, health care, one doesn’t play by Marquis of Queensbury rules… not if one truly loves their family.

    Go ahead and play martyr if you are truly willing to go down rather than resort to tactics you’d prefer not to have to use. I bet your family will be so grateful to you when the health care they receive is on a par with that of Canadians and the Brits.

    Comment by steve sturm (369bc6) — 8/10/2009 @ 8:30 am

  29. Dmac: Pelosi’s constituents either (1) don’t care about her morality and fitness for office, as they care only if she delivers the liberal agenda, or (2) they equate morality and fitness with office with her ability to deliver a liberal agenda. And judging by the election results, her constituents are plenty pleased with her (the ones who aren’t happy think she’s not being aggressive enough in going after the racist, selfish, stupid and corrupt Republicans).

    Comment by steve sturm (369bc6) — 8/10/2009 @ 8:34 am

  30. I would ask how liberals live with themselves after all this, but it seems they live with themselves just fine. That means they are either psychotic or evil, either way we need a divorce from them on the grounds of irreconcilable differences. We can split the assets 50/50, but the debt should be split based on who ran up which bills.

    Comment by Ray (3c46ca) — 8/10/2009 @ 8:35 am

  31. My,my,my. PCD must be new to comment threads on some websites I thinks.

    Comment by MikeD (c83900) — 8/10/2009 @ 8:52 am

  32. The fundamental fact here is that the rallies against Congress, both about taxes and the health reform legislation, are unusual because they involve people who have not previously been involved in this sort of thing. The Democrats can get union members out on demand because they are required to participate in picket lines and have other experience with demonstrations, especially the minimum wage types like SEIU. They are probably paid to attend. I know that picket line members are paid. This is very different. I attended a tea party in Mission Viejo on April 15 and there were 500 people out there for hours with hand made signs. I don’t know when we have seen anything like this in many years. The Viet Nam war protestors were kids. These were mostly middle aged people.

    I don’t know what this all means but I would be concerned if I were Pelosi. I doubt she is smart enough to be concerned but Hoyer is and he may be making plans for another career after November 2010.

    Comment by Mike K (2cf494) — 8/10/2009 @ 8:54 am

  33. Sorry, PCD. ‘feets just likes to take the “parody leftist” approach every so often. Mistaking his sarcasm for earnestness is a little too easy, because (a) he never uses smileys, /sarc tags or “j/k”s, and (b) as you’re well aware, the Lefty True Believers are far, far beyond parody.

    Comment by PCachu (e072b7) — 8/10/2009 @ 8:54 am

  34. My my, how things have changed, wasn’t steve here not so long ago, saying we had to take what we could get, people don’t care about principles, they have to have their needs met, otherwise the GOP would fade into history, that was the gist of it, I recall.

    Comment by narciso (996c34) — 8/10/2009 @ 9:00 am

  35. People need to understand why Professor Gates’ disrespect gets the press and Kenneth Gladney’s brutal beating is ignored:

    To be a victim you have to be innocent, and conservatives are never that — they’re just getting what they deserve, in the minds of the liberal press. Conservatives aren’t “people.”

    Comment by Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 8/10/2009 @ 9:15 am

  36. Words from the near future: “Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Libertarian Party?”

    Comment by Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 8/10/2009 @ 9:17 am

  37. I remember when I used to get annoyed with happyfeet, I think with regard to Bristol Palin, before I caught on to his shtick. Happyfeet is probably my favorite commenter here.

    It’s a shame that we can’t get along without taking this stuff so personally. I’m one of the worst offenders in that regard.

    Comment by Juan (bd4b30) — 8/10/2009 @ 9:26 am

  38. Mike K: you’re dreaming if you think Hoyer is in any danger of losing his seat.:

    1 – gerrymandering has left very few seats up for grabs (and Hoyer and Pelosi sure made sure their districts aren’t one of those few).
    2 – While there are some conservatives in liberal districts, no matter how much they show up at meetings and huff and puff and threaten to blow the house down, they are very much outnumbered.
    3 – When you’re outnumbered, you are irrelevant.
    4 – Liberal voters in liberal districts do NOT toss out liberals for making conservatives upset. In fact, they reward them with re-election.

    Comment by steve sturm (369bc6) — 8/10/2009 @ 9:29 am

  39. Nice work Karl.

    Comment by maxpower (2f7fa0) — 8/10/2009 @ 9:30 am

  40. Steny Hoyer was always probably nearly as liberal as Boxer, although I don’t think he’s part of the progressive caucus. He has really given up that figleaf with this op ed. The point is the swing districts are the key

    Comment by narciso (996c34) — 8/10/2009 @ 9:54 am

  41. I would say that this is a classic case of projection. Nancy Pelosi knows that, given the chance, she would shut down any opposition in a heartbeat (or ensure the lack thereof). As a result, she cannot conceive that her opposition will try to behave morally and honestly.

    Comment by Sabba Hillel (153338) — 8/10/2009 @ 10:15 am

  42. [...] Below The Beltway, Michelle Malkin, The Swamp, Founding Bloggers, The Plum Line, Riehl World View, Patterico’s Pontifications, JammieWearingFool, YID With LID, Blue Crab Boulevard, QandO, Donklephant, TPMDC, Don Surber, The [...]

    Pingback by Democrats channel the Bush Administration | Political Byline (e78bc3) — 8/10/2009 @ 10:28 am

  43. MikeD, you are new around here, aren’t you? Are you going to ask me for pictures proving I’m not tatooed with Swastikas? Are you going to ask me what mob I subscribe to? Do you want to see my papers? (Said in mock Nazi SS accent.)

    Comment by PCD (02f8c1) — 8/10/2009 @ 10:29 am

  44. It doesn’t feel like projection to me so much as the roll out of a marketing plan. This oped could have been written as soon as it was clear that nothing would happen legislatively in August. Nancy’s staff wrote the oped and then they scheduled publication with USA Today people to follow the accusations of GOP astro-turfing and incivility what were slated to precede the ramping up of dirty socialist astro-turfing and timed to coincide with other dirty socialist media efforts such as NPR’s initiative discussed back at #8.

    And I think it’s far more likely that NPR got its talking points from Miss Nancy than Miss Nancy swiped the Bull Moose angle from NPR, and NPR’s had their thingy up since July 28… a few days after it was clear that the August deadline had been blown.

    Comment by happyfeet (71f55e) — 8/10/2009 @ 10:38 am

  45. If anyone’s surprised about Hoyer’s idiotic column today, they must have missed his inane townhall meeting vid where he ignored his constituent’s questions and launched into his “they also questioned the Erie Canal’s worthiness” story. True douchebaggery like this must be seen to be believed:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-RzbOMBmRM&feature=related

    Comment by Dmac (e6d1c2) — 8/10/2009 @ 10:41 am

  46. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer attack anti-ObamaCare protesters at Congressional town halls in the USA Today:

    These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.

    Pelosi knows a thing or two about raucous protesters, and has not always considered them un-American. Since becoming Speaker, she has occasionally run into resistance from the antiwar movement generally, and Code Pink in particular. In January 2006, Pelosi got a decidedly mixed reseption at a town hall meeting in San Francisco:

    Dozens of heckling, sign-toting anti-war protesters tried to take center stage at the congresswomen’s town hall forum on national security — calling for an immediate de-funding of the Iraq war and impeachment proceedings against President George Bush.

    ***

    The protesters stood quietly in front of Pelosi waving their signs for the entire two-hour meeting, while hecklers from the audience frequently interrupted the talk.

    ***

    But Pelosi never summoned help from police or security. She negotiated with the hecklers and at times even thanked the protesters for their advocacy and enthusiasm.

    “It’s always exciting,” she told reporters after the meeting. “This is democracy in action. I’m energized by it, frankly.”

    Or this incident from June 2007:

    The congresswoman who hails from liberal San Francisco was introduced on Wednesday by Rep. John Murtha, a longtime Iraq war dissenter. Murtha was greeted with raucous applause, but, at the mention of Pelosi’s name, members of the antiwar women’s group Code Pink were quick to shout at her and continued to do so throughout her speech until she responded.

    As Pelosi was discussing “…preserving our climate, protecting our country, growing our economy and strengthening our families as we care for our children and preserve our planet,” activists from the group interjected.

    “And bring our troops home now,” a protester yelled from the crowd, following by several other “now”s.

    “Preserving our planet is a national security issue…,” Pelosi said and paused. “I always say the best preparation for combat is combat,” she responded. “So just go for it, I respect your enthusiasm.”

    “Your impatience with the war is justified,” Pelosi said, trying to ease tensions between those heckling her and those shushing the hecklers.

    The Hill reported:

    At the end of her remarks, she said, “Instead of fighting with us, which is your right to do, let’s work together.”

    Pelosi would later complain about Code Pink protesters and refuse to meet with them, but that is a far cry from branding them un-American.

    “Un-American” is an epithet Pelosi and other top Democrats save for the Right. Sen. Blanche Lincoln apologized for calling anti-Obamacare protests un-American, with a big whiff of political expediency. Pelosi, safely entrenched in San Francisco, has accused the GOP of being un-American time after time. It’s not difficult to find example after example of top Democrats questioning the patriotism of their opponents.

    As for her attempted government takeover of the US healthcare system, Pelosi writes that “it is healthy for such a historic effort to be subject to so much scrutiny and debate,” and that “[t]he dialogue between elected representatives and constituents is at the heart of our democracy and plays an integral role in assuring that the legislation we write reflects the genuine needs and concerns of the people we represent.”

    The reality is that Pelosi wanted the healthcare bill passed before the August recess and threatened to keeping the House in session through the August recess to pass its healthcare overhaul. She had no use for a dialogue between the members of her caucus and the voters who elected them.

    Nor was she encouraging debate within the House of Representatives. Pelosi has run a more debate-free House than the GOP did from 199294-2006, and was willing to shut down the House to shut off debate about it. So it is no shock that Pelosi will not promise a week to review the final text of a health-care reform bill before a vote.

    In sum, Speaker Pelosi is quite tolerant of disruptive protests, so long as they are on the Left. And if Pelosi is not the person most responsible for trying to shut down democratic debate on healthcare and other vital issues, she is certainly in the front row of the team photo. Is there a word for that?

    –Karl

    Comment by BTN (864b78) — 8/10/2009 @ 10:56 am

  47. BTN conveniently reposted the post from above, so you do not have to scroll to the top to see all of the research that Karl didn’t do, nobody you personally know.

    Comment by JD (0f9c01) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:18 am

  48. Te sock-puppets must have quite the hangover after their multi-day bender …

    Comment by JD (b537f4) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:27 am

  49. Oh man, now the drug companies are told they can expect cuts to drug prices unless they spend $150 million on ads promoting health care.

    Pelosi will have no problem with that arrangement.

    dissent, however, must be racist and uniformed. not just the dissent that shows research, but the fundamental dissent about spending lots of money when we’re in deep debt, or the government having way too much power. all that dissent needs to stop, or the democrats will put your ass in the ER.

    Comment by Juan (bd4b30) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:30 am

  50. We go out and challenge “representatives” because there is almost no avenue left open for expression.

    As a Californian, my reps send me form letters about how great they are when I write them. News outlets blatantly lie or omit conservative perspectives. Blogging and talk radio is all well and good, but the Obama voters are the ones who believe what CNN tells them, I know plenty.

    Like most, I’m middle-aged and never protested anything before. I’m a mild-mannered and reserved person, I don’t like shouting and confrontations. But I feel sure that if I don’t shout and confront, I will be ignored, as usual.

    Comment by jodetoad (059c35) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:31 am

  51. “Mistaking his sarcasm for earnestness is a little too easy, because (a) he never uses smileys, /sarc tags or “j/k”s”

    On the other hand, happyfeet is very friendly when you disagree with him, and if you read him often, it’s more than obvious where he stands on socialism. I think he’s funny, and I don’t think it’s fair to apply a style guide to him. It’s the fuckin’ internet and it’s not important.

    Comment by Juan (bd4b30) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:33 am

  52. Juan – They are basically extorting the pharmaceutical companies.

    Comment by JD (355e34) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:40 am

  53. I have, and will continue to state, the opposition to this Lunatic Left assault must be figuratively violent, frequent and with as much vitriol as can be mustered by normal humans.

    Persistent beatings help demoralize the opposition. Just do.

    Otherwise, the Lunatic Left will not stop, they will never be truthful, they will use the media to carry their water. Their thoughts must be attacked and demonized every step of the way. Every step must be met with a disproportionate response in order to overwhelm their ability to respond.

    It works in influencing the middle so crucial to the debate. It wins elections.

    The most Lunatic Left have “defined the middle” in the last few elections and it is time Conservatives define the middle once again.

    Comment by HeavenSent (01a566) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:44 am

  54. JD, I’m having a hard time accepting that this is really happening.

    That Obama has more than 25% approval is far more disturbing than the fact that Obama is acting like a crazy socialist friend of Bill Ayers and Rev Wright.

    The problem is that the nation is not flipping out. Sure, the tea party patriots are, but many of them won’t be around in 30 years. Brave New World.

    Comment by Juan (bd4b30) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:45 am

  55. thank you, Mr. Juan.

    People really have no sense of what’s going on I think… NPR had a bizarre story on that.

    brb

    Comment by happyfeet (71f55e) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:48 am

  56. You shouldn’t have to apologize to PCD for his own stupidity. Whomever snorted their lunch while he was cooking in her womb owes him that.

    Comment by Nobody you personally know (e7c459) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:56 am

  57. here

    Public Baffled By Health Care Arguments

    is the title but in the article you learn that…

    When pollsters ask straight-up questions about whether people favor or oppose revamping health care, there is a little more opposition than support, Blumenthal says.

    But when the surveyors ask more specific questions about what the plan might include, there is “remarkably consistent support in the 50-55 percent range,” he said.

    which only sounds like people are baffled insofar as this deranged cumquat of a dirty socialist pollster doesn’t say what happens if you “ask more specific question” about non-dirty socialist proposals a plan might include.

    But the point of the article is to establish that if people aren’t rabidly embracing dirty socialist health care then they’re stupid or confused according to NPR.

    Comment by happyfeet (71f55e) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:00 pm

  58. Juan – The take-over of banks and the auto companies was an object lesson for the healthcare debate. Pharma and the rest of the healthcare industry knows to what extent this band of dirty little socialists will go to in order to achieve their ends. They know that it is easier to participate and get the best deal possible as opposed to letting this merry little band of thieves take over their industry altogether.

    Comment by JD (b9ca6b) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:01 pm

  59. [...] Patterico made the odd argument that Pelosi’s refusal to meet with Code Pink somehow means she holds Code Pink in higher regard than the current right-wing mob. National Review’s Jonah Goldberg implicitly made the really odd argument that offensive rhetoric from a few far left protesters in San Francisco somehow makes it respectable to embrace offensive rhetoric from far right protesters. [...]

    Pingback by Bill Scher: Oh-So-Sensitive Conservatives Get Their Feelings Hurt By Pelosi and Hoyer | My 2 Cents Worth (adb15b) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:05 pm

  60. What JD said but also Barack Obama don’t care if he do it sloppy. Cash for Clunkers is very very sloppy economics. Same with health care. Barack just wants to crawl on top of our little country and do his dirty socialist bidness. The details can come later.

    Perfect example is how hell-bent they suddenly are on “closing the doughnut hole.” An assistance program becomes a wholesale entitlement program. It’s Obamacare in a nutshell. Once any framework is in place they figure they can ratchet up the dependency later while mandating cost reductions and reducing or rationing what’s covered where costs are intractable.

    Comment by happyfeet (71f55e) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:09 pm

  61. Bill Scher is not a rocket-scientist.

    Comment by JD (b9ca6b) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:14 pm

  62. Nancy is a prime example of why SF should NOT be re-built after the Big One…

    Comment by mojo (8096f2) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:22 pm

  63. Bill Scher is a certifiable loonwaffle. Bill and Radley would get along quite well.

    Comment by JD (4951a1) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:31 pm

  64. I don’t think Mr. Scher realized he didn’t have anything to add to the discussion. This is unfortunately sort of an ineluctable consequence of incoherence. If incoherent people knew they were incoherent then it would be like what happens when an incoherent tree falls in an incoherent forest… nobody would have to hear about it.

    Comment by happyfeet (71f55e) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:33 pm

  65. Bill Scher blog post just says that conservatives didn’t like dissent in the past and that we don’t have the freedom to libel. It’s completely asinine and not worth clicking over to read, which I guess most can surmise by the trolly trackback. Bill must have thought his ideas wouldn’t attract attention on their own merit, so he needed to goad and insult.

    He also must have missed all those times when Bush praised America for allowing so much protest of Bush and his policies. Bush never ordered me to get in anyone’s face, and he never sent thugs in to put anyone in the ER.

    It’s the limo lib democrat who has always hated dissent against the left. They think those who disagree with them are liars and evil and refuse to even consider their point of view. It’s the right that embraces classic individual rights like freedom of religion and speech.

    It’s Obama who said that seeing what’s being voted on, lots of transparency, and lots of nonpartisan discussion was valuable… but that was before he was president. Now, he thinks it’s offensive to protest congress voting on bills that haven’t been written, much less read. He wants you to email him and flag my dissenting opinion.

    Bill Scher, the ACLU, and the left in general has an opportunity to prove they love this country. They could condemn the union thugs, the white house’s snitch program, the ‘get in their faces’ ‘I won’ ‘get out of the way and don’t talk much’ attitude. They don’t because they think condemning oppression is some kind of trick used only to help your team win the big game. Sadly, that big game is what used to be democracy.

    Comment by Juan (bd4b30) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:40 pm

  66. Mike K: you’re dreaming if you think Hoyer is in any danger of losing his seat.:

    1 – gerrymandering has left very few seats up for grabs (and Hoyer and Pelosi sure made sure their districts aren’t one of those few).
    2 – While there are some conservatives in liberal districts, no matter how much they show up at meetings and huff and puff and threaten to blow the house down, they are very much outnumbered.
    3 – When you’re outnumbered, you are irrelevant.
    4 – Liberal voters in liberal districts do NOT toss out liberals for making conservatives upset. In fact, they reward them with re-election.

    Comment by steve sturm

    Oh, I didn’t mean he would lose his seat. I think they will lose their majority. Rahm Emmanuel, whatever you think of his job as White House CoS, did a great job of recruiting candidates to run against Republicans in 2006 and 2008. By doing so, however, he made many of those new Congressmen hostages to a moderate policy by the Democrats. Obama could have engaged Republicans, especially in the Senate, and built a policy shop that would be almost invincible. He didn’t do that, probably because he is inexperienced and an ideologue who cannot believe that others don’t think as he does.

    What will happen now is that those Congress members who make up the Dems majority are being sacrificed for ideological conformity. I have been increasingly frustrated the past decade as Republicans drifted left, including Bush. The spending and increase in government made me almost despair of anything happening to stop that drift.

    Well, something happened and it is called ObamaPelosiReid. Somebody on one Sunday talk show said that only Obama could unite the Republicans. He’s done more than that. He has scared the American public into looking for the first time in years at the future of statism. This could be a tipping point of history. Republicans in the 1930s never got together a coherent strategy against Roosevelt. When they finally found a candidate, Willkie, they almost didn’t nominate him. He came very very close to defeating Roosevelt in 1940 but few know that. It took another decade before they got themselves objective enough to see a successful candidate, Eisenhower.

    I think the Democrats are now living the same sort of scenario. Bush I lost the 1992 election through his own hubris and Gingrich let himself be outmaneuvered by Clinton in 1995. Democrats were very lucky to win both elections. They have convinced themselves that they are the future and, with the crappy education system we have, they could have been right. Obama has saved us. Take a look at England if you want to see what we could have had if the Democrats had been more astute.

    Comment by Mike K (2cf494) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:41 pm

  67. [...] Events, Flopping Aces, American Power, Daily Dose, Confederate Yankee, Hot Air, Riehl World View, Patterico’s Pontifications, Political Byline, Below The Beltway, Politics Daily, Balloon Juice, YID With LID, Donklephant, [...]

    Pingback by Un-American | Outside the Beltway | Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs (139676) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:47 pm

  68. Mike K, I hate to sound utterly paranoid, but we’ve got to have free elections for Obama to have saved us.

    Essential to free elections is a valid census, confidence in many processes, freedom from voter intimidation, enforcement of basic registrations and voter rolls, and I could go on. Complying with the HAVA actually gets the DOJ to file an injunction against your secretary of state.

    I pretended for a while that the Ayers and Wright attacks just pointed to Obama being a sleazy ‘please them all’ politician. his policies have proven he’s actually a lot like Ayers and Wright. Can we overcome the 2010 census? I expect to see the SEIU at the polls, and I’m not hopeful that Obama’s view of dissent, Zelaya, and Iran, add up to an honest election system.

    I hope to hell you’re righter than me.

    Comment by Juan (bd4b30) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:51 pm

  69. [...] Events, Flopping Aces, American Power, Daily Dose, Confederate Yankee, Hot Air, Riehl World View, Patterico’s Pontifications, Political Byline, Below The Beltway, Politics Daily, Balloon Juice, YID With LID, Donklephant, [...]

    Pingback by Complaining About The Health System Plans? You’re Un-American. John Boehner Responds » Pirate's Cove (368bcc) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:57 pm

  70. [...] Events, Flopping Aces, American Power, Daily Dose, Confederate Yankee, Hot Air, Riehl World View, Patterico’s Pontifications, Political Byline, Below The Beltway, Politics Daily, Balloon Juice, YID With LID, Donklephant, [...]

    Pingback by Complaining About The Health System Plans? You’re Un-American. John Boehner Responds : Stop The ACLU (dae8af) — 8/10/2009 @ 12:59 pm

  71. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.

    Where was this silly-ass hypocrite when it was her leftist comrades-in-arms shouting down conservative views?

    Comment by Blacque Jacques Shellacque (1641e7) — 8/10/2009 @ 1:18 pm

  72. No, actually PCD, I have been visiting this site for a couple of years now–I just don’t comment much. But, regarding your insightful remarks at #42, I frankly don’t much care about your conservative bona fides, have no interest in your papers (voiced in a mock Nazi SS accent), or whether you have swastikas tattooed on your ass. But I also spend a fair amount of time at protein wisdom (where I also don’t comment much) and have followed happyfeet’s musing both here and there for a number of years. For that reason I don’t think I would ever reasonably classify him and his thoughts with Pelosi, Hoyer, or Obama in any context. I shouldn’t have made any cryptic comments alluding to a defense of happyfeet– he can defend himself perfectly well. So now I think I’ll join JD and just quietly bow out. But you would know, if you had followed happyfeet’s comments for a somewhat longer period of time, or maybe given a bit more thought to what I said, that you are not quite as astute as you seem to believe you are.

    Comment by MikeD (c83900) — 8/10/2009 @ 1:21 pm

  73. I can’t believe it’s been that long. And now it seems the whole Internets is Before Twitter and After Twitter. It was definitely BT when I started saying things out loud at PW.

    I miss Jeff.

    Comment by happyfeet (71f55e) — 8/10/2009 @ 1:34 pm

  74. So we are supposed to trust our healthcare to people who describe people who oppose their policies as Nazis and un American? People should see what Cuba’s healthcare looks like.

    Comment by Thomas Jackson (8ffd46) — 8/10/2009 @ 1:37 pm

  75. Comment by PCD — 8/10/2009 @ 10:29 am

    Ok dude. I’m just now seeing some of this, and seriously, shut up.

    Happy is nor even remotely what I would call a Democrat, let alone a democrat, liberal, or leftist. And I have seen Mike D around here for a while.

    You’re making yourself look like an unmitigated jackass, and really should just stop and follow the first rule of holes.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 8/10/2009 @ 1:41 pm

  76. Steny Hoyer and “… his “they also questioned the Erie Canal’s worthiness” story…”
    Comment by Dmac — 8/10/2009 @ 10:41 am

    The good Majority Leader needs to be reminded that Congress had nothing to do with building the Erie Canal, it was funded by private investors; and, since it didn’t cross state lines, there was no Interstate Commerce to regulate (and no ICC at that time either).

    They DO take us for complete idiots!

    Comment by AD - RtR/OS! (07b20a) — 8/10/2009 @ 1:48 pm

  77. “And if Pelosi is not the person most responsible for trying to shut down democratic debate on healthcare and other vital issues, she is certainly in the front row of the team photo. Is there a word for that?”

    Yes — The House Committee On Unamerican Activities.

    Comment by Federal Dog (2db423) — 8/10/2009 @ 1:52 pm

  78. Yeah, feets. I miss Jeff too.

    Comment by MikeD (c83900) — 8/10/2009 @ 2:14 pm

  79. Elmendorf just blew another hole through Obama’s left flank regarding his fraudulent “preventive health care” cost savings:

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/08/congressional-budget-expert-says-preventive-care-will-raise-not-cut-costs.html

    I like this guy more and more – the last honest Dem in the country, apparently. Looks like Rahm and Obama’s little “chat” (i.e. threaten to break his legs unless he toes their line ASAP) with him last week backfired all over their faces. Watch what happens if Holder tries to prosecute the CIA for actions during the past 8 years – end of story.

    Comment by Douchebag you personally don't know (e6d1c2) — 8/10/2009 @ 2:45 pm

  80. AD, I’m betting that FDR talked about the Erie Canal on television on the eve of the construction.

    Comment by SPQR X (26be8b) — 8/10/2009 @ 2:48 pm

  81. I think the Holder CIA story is an example of Obama getting ready to distract his more obsessed followers with bread and circuses if they don’t get the government option.

    Juan, the census will not affect the 2010 election. I agree that a bit of paranoia is in order but we are probably safe unless O gets a second term.

    Comment by Mike K (2cf494) — 8/10/2009 @ 2:52 pm

  82. Comment by Scott Jacobs — 8/10/2009 @ 1:41 pm

    He has never been anything but a j@ckass. Give yourself a little treat and click on his blog and read it. Just make sure you don’t have anything you aren’t in a position where you can choke on anything before you do. It is a comedy of errors and ridiculous hyperbole.

    Comment by Nobody you personally know (e7c459) — 8/10/2009 @ 2:58 pm

  83. Typos!

    Make sure you aren’t in a position to choke on anything.

    Normally I would just let it go and take the needling, but I think this warning should be given unequivocally. Somebody could die if they read PCD’s site without proper precaution.

    Comment by Nobody you personally know (e7c459) — 8/10/2009 @ 3:15 pm

  84. Mike, of course, the 2010 election will be long over before the Census is sorted out. In fact, I assume this census will take quite a while for results to come out.

    But we’re very far in the hole for regaining the house and the senate might be completely impossible. I can’t see how that is, given current policies, but I’m just in a bubble.

    Even if we do regain the house, that’s not enough to stop the census from being a problem. The house can’t pass any bills to reform anything unless they get Harry Reid on board in the Senate. Your confidence is more useful than my pessimism. Sarah Palin might be able to turn a few of those moderate seats you’ve mentioned back over to our side. I definitely don’t think the economy will turn around by the election, and Obama won’t be on the ticket.

    We’ll see, I guess. I’ll work hard for the GOP, even though I keep swearing I’m done with that.

    Comment by Juan (bd4b30) — 8/10/2009 @ 3:20 pm

  85. Pelosi also grandly announced she had the votes for passage.

    I believe the best policy is to laugh at her ineptitude. If the attack from the Right can be done with humor, the vast middle will be more receptive to the core message.

    Comment by Ed from SFV (b0b64b) — 8/10/2009 @ 3:24 pm

  86. Comment by SPQR X — 8/10/2009 @ 2:48 pm

    Is this a Nom de Guerre for Slow Joe?

    Comment by AD - RtR/OS! (07b20a) — 8/10/2009 @ 3:47 pm

  87. The White House is distancing itself from Pelosi’s and Hoyer’s un-American comments.

    Comment by DRJ (8d138b) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:07 pm

  88. Yeah, and of course the right hand has no idea what the left hand is doing, eh?

    Comment by Dmac (e6d1c2) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:18 pm

  89. DRJ – Given that the White House’s position is to minitor speech at flag@whitehouse.gov, punch back twice as hard, and getting in their faces, this does not surprise me. Apparently the angry mob of astroturfers was too big of a lie, even for Teh One.

    Comment by JD (26478a) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:23 pm

  90. There’s nothing “right” about these leaders, so I’d say the left hand doesn’t know what the left foot is doing.

    Comment by DRJ (8d138b) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:23 pm

  91. Let me be clear. I don’t want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking.

    Comment by Barack Obama (71f55e) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:26 pm

  92. Sockpuppets are lame, even when satirical.

    Comment by SPQR X (26be8b) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:28 pm

  93. DRJ – I could not agree more.

    Comment by JD (26478a) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:30 pm

  94. There’s nothing “right” about these leaders, so I’d say the left hand doesn’t know what the left foot is doing.
    Comment by DRJ — 8/10/2009 @ 4:23 pm

    Is a co-blogger eligible for comment-of-the-day? ‘Cuz that was outstanding!

    Comment by Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:32 pm

  95. Comment by DRJ — 8/10/2009 @ 4:23 pm

    And DRJ wins the internet…

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:39 pm

  96. I don’t think it’s a puppet what was made out of a sock if it’s an actual quotational quotation what is being properly attributed. It’s like how on Jeopardy even if the answer is in the form of a question it’s still the freaking answer. Or like how when someone says “knock knock” you’re all like “who’s there” even as it’s dawning on you that there’s probably no one really there.

    ok so I added the let me be clear part.

    Jeez.

    Comment by happyfeet (71f55e) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:40 pm

  97. ok do over.

    To my mind, Barack Obama’s widely-reported sentiment of the other day that “I don’t want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking” stands in stark contrast to the “real vigorous conversation” that his spokesperson avers is “part of the American tradition.”

    I find it… hypocritical. I really do. And I am troubled.

    Comment by happyfeet (71f55e) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:47 pm

  98. It is pretty ironic to hear that lyinh liar Burton talk about a robust debate when Teh One is telling people to quit talking an get out of his way.

    Comment by JD (456430) — 8/10/2009 @ 4:53 pm

  99. NYPK, I stand by what I said in all cases. You can resume kissing Obama’s lying butt.

    Comment by PCD (fb6979) — 8/10/2009 @ 5:55 pm

  100. Scott, I guess I’ll have to disagree with you, too. In Obama’s socialized destruction of the country, I’m not giving one inch anywhere.

    Comment by PCD (fb6979) — 8/10/2009 @ 5:57 pm

  101. In Obama’s socialized destruction of the country, I’m not giving one inch anywhere.

    oh. I’d never thought of it like that before. You’ve really turned me around here. In spite of my deep investment in Hope and Change I find I no longer believe Barack Obama, nay, the entire Democratic Party, to be a suitable vehicle for the achievement of these goals.

    Socialized. Destruction.

    NOT IN MY NAME!

    I would instead urge that Republicans return to First Principles and look to build upon their party’s proud if neglected legacy of fiscal responsibility, limited government, the advancement of freedom abroad and of a reverence for individual liberty here at home.

    Let’s do this. I’m so in.

    Comment by happyfeet (42470c) — 8/10/2009 @ 6:11 pm

  102. Not even to those people who are on the same side, PCD?

    Seriously?

    Dude, you’re nuts. I’ll say it again. Leave MikeD alone…

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 8/10/2009 @ 6:12 pm

  103. Gold standard!

    Comment by Juan (bd4b30) — 8/10/2009 @ 6:15 pm

  104. #

    Sockpuppets are lame, even when satirical.

    Comment by SPQR X — 8/10/2009 @ 4:28 pm

    oh.

    face. palm.

    I would have gotten that earlier but I’m an idiot so sometimes I don’t get things right away but then later I do and it can be awkward.

    Comment by happyfeet (42470c) — 8/10/2009 @ 6:21 pm

  105. PCD:

    Do you stand by the typos on your site as well? How about the fragments or completely nonsensical sentences? I understand that I made one earlier, but if I could go back and edit the comment I would. You actually have that power on your site, but you just too moronic to even know where they are.

    The topics of your blogs are quite sophomoric as well. Now you’re picking fights with people who generally agree with you. You just can’t win.

    Comment by Nobody you personally know (e7c459) — 8/10/2009 @ 7:51 pm

  106. Comment by Thomas Jackson — 8/10/2009 @ 1:37 pm

    It is not unamerican to disagree with an administration or legislator. It is unamerican to attempt to stifle any debate by shouting down one’s ideological opponents. As much as you may think that Bill O’Reilly’s show represents the only true American way, I assure you that this country was founded by those who (respectfully-in most cases, I’ll give you that Alexander Hamilton had a problem with this) disagreed with each other.

    Comment by Nobody you personally know (e7c459) — 8/10/2009 @ 7:55 pm

  107. Thanks Scott, but I’ll probably survive PCD just fine. You are right about those hole thingys though. Some, I guess, just beg to be made deeper.

    Comment by MikeD (c83900) — 8/10/2009 @ 7:57 pm

  108. Nypk – Is it fun to argue with the voices in your head?

    Comment by JD (a5b324) — 8/10/2009 @ 8:05 pm

  109. happyfeet:

    I don’t know who you are, but I salute you!

    Comment by Brooks (cc5654) — 8/10/2009 @ 8:08 pm

  110. It’s really useless to fight directly against her arguments. She knows they’re lies, we know they’re lies–everyone knows they’re lies. It’s just a game.

    Comment by qwfwq (774312) — 8/10/2009 @ 10:07 pm

  111. Link

    >Dissent is American and patriotic. Trying to stifle dissent is
    >not.

    William Pierce and the neo-Nazi National Alliance explicitly refer to themselves
    as “dissidents”. Do you consider their message of Holocaust denial and race
    hate “patriotic”? Or is only SOME dissent patriotic?

    You may believe, and largely speak as you wish. You have no right for you or
    your beliefs to be either popular or respected. The alternative is a legal duty
    for everyone to respect the beliefs and pronouncements of NAMBLA and the Church
    of the Creator.

    Comment by Michael Ejercito (833607) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:06 pm

  112. #104

    Its understandable why no one would know you. I really do not care to visit the sewers of Paris where you must haunt.

    Now I wouldn’t know why you think I watch or even agree with Bill O’Reilly, except perhaps you have watched too much Oberman. Did you even bother to read my comment. Is your poor little addled mind too delusional to grasp that a group that calls those who disagree with them Nazis and worse are unlikely to be the suitable or trustworthy judges of what medical care reform. Certainly such individuals are NOT TO be trusted with such power.

    Your comment was most enlightening. It was confused, insipid “this country was founded by those who disagreeed with each other” to the point of being delusional. Those who disagreed with the founding fathers wanted to hang them for treason. You might want to read about the British opinion of the founding fathers if you can put down your Oberman text.

    The founders fought for the same principles, they sacrificed for those goals, and they did not call their brothers in arms Nazis. They did not describe those who had a different vision of independence or the Constitution as “mobs.”

    I realize that few here are as gifted as you and lack your unique insight into our founding fathers. Resorting to such cheap tactics as making up words and putting them in my mouth only gives insight into your character.

    Comment by Thomas Jackson (8ffd46) — 8/10/2009 @ 11:38 pm

  113. #110 -
    You need to read the Jefferson/Addams papers if you think the Founding Fathers didn’t disagree; also, comments like his “delusional” and “addled little mind” don’t really give your points any purchase – they simply lessen your position.

    Comment by the Virginian (0635b6) — 8/11/2009 @ 12:27 am

  114. [...] related news, Patterico has the definitive take-down of Pelosi’s execrable accusation that town hall protesters are “un-American.” It seems that Ms. Pelosi has used [...]

    Pingback by Plumb Bob Blog » Well Dressed Men (04f227) — 8/11/2009 @ 6:11 am

  115. “Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.”

    As much as I think Pelosi is driving our country straight into the poor house, I agree with that statement.

    Unfortunately it came in the larger context of her drowning out opposing views.

    Comment by Harvey M Anderson (a664fb) — 8/11/2009 @ 10:52 am

  116. Dissent is American and patriotic. Trying to stifle dissent is not.

    I completely agree! Now why can’t you apply that logic to those representatives who are willing to listen to their opponents, but only wish to state their own cases? They are being shouted down without being able to present their sides. You are defeated by your own logic.

    Comment by Nobody you personally know (e7c459) — 8/11/2009 @ 3:47 pm

  117. #111

    You sir are a total dolt, now this handicap doesn’t diminish your position, it just clarifies it. If you think the founding fathers were united in common purpose that is your particular delusion. AND YES YOU ARE EITHER DELUSIONAL OR ILL INFORMED.

    If you believe the Founding Fathers were as polarized as our system is today then you reveal your education and grasp of the subject. If you do not understand that the respect that Adams and Jefferson held each other, then you reveal your understanding.

    Your inability to grasp the Federalist and Anti Federalist Papers render your comments laughable. Our founding fathers despite their differences were united in a common goal something that only a fool would compare with today’s politics much less todays healthcare debate. One side dictating to the other. Ignoring the content of my comments is just the sort of device that trolls utilize when they can not defend thier own arguments.

    Sock puppets of the world unite!

    Res ipsa loquitur.

    Comment by Thomas Jackson (8ffd46) — 8/11/2009 @ 5:15 pm

  118. Why don’t you document your position, instead of referencing the the papers then coming to your conclusion without any reasoning? It is easy to hide behind the word ‘troll’ without actually doing any work.

    Comment by Nobody you personally know (e7c459) — 8/11/2009 @ 9:36 pm

  119. Seeing as how you are, in fact, an aggressively dishonest troll who has intentionally tried to co-op someone else’s handle, the extent of what you should expect is mockery and scorn.

    Comment by JD (7a2548) — 8/11/2009 @ 9:50 pm

  120. Oh, that isn’t him? What the hell? Find your own nick ‘personally’!

    That’s just pathetic. Are you trying to be a groupie or something?

    You are barely articulating a position anyway. Obama himself told the right to shut up, and told his stooges to ‘get in our faces’. the dem majority leader also called them nazis. Forget it. The democratic leadership clearly is trying to shut up the citizens. S

    Comment by Juan (bd4b30) — 8/11/2009 @ 9:55 pm

  121. 114
    You are obviously talking about this “respect” that that Jefferson and Adams had AFTER their public life was over. They were bitter rivals that agreed on very little, both during the Revolution and after as they ran for President…

    “From that point forward (the signing of the Declaration) the clashes between Adams and Jefferson were widely known. During Adam’s two terms as vice president under George Washington, more than one conflict arose between him and Secretary of State Jefferson. As a Federalist, Adams found his political views quite at odds with the man who would become the leader of the rival Democratic-Republicans. When Washington left the Presidency the battle for a successor was bitterly fought between Vice President Adams and Secretary Jefferson. Adams defeated Jefferson by a 3 vote margin (71-68 electoral votes), becoming our second president. That bitter campaign was renewed in 1800 when Jefferson defeated Adams to become our third President. So intense was their rivalry that, on the day of Jefferson’s inauguration Adams was carriage-bound out of the new Capitol City when the new president assumed office. (The recent death of his son in New York provided a convenient excuse not to attend the inauguration of the incoming president.)”

    Their grudging admiration of one another didn’t come until they were old men out of the public life. Their presidential campaigns at the time made today’s mudslinging look tame by comparison and their belief of States Rights versus the strong Federal govt. is the same division that ultimately led to the War of Northern Aggression/the Civil War/The Recent Unpleasantness. That very division remains to this day.

    I simply stated that the Founding Fathers strongly disagreed with one another about the course to plot, not the fact that a course needed to be plotted. I see that very dynamic at work today – I’m sure there is more name calling coming from your direction, but, like it or not, the truth is the right isn’t making the case for leaving health care as it is; rather, they believe that the Dems plan is the wrong way to go about reformation. There are many better ideas than the rather bloated power grab the left is attempting.

    The more things change, the more they stay the same… you may fire when ready, Gridley…

    Comment by the Virginian (0635b6) — 8/11/2009 @ 10:27 pm

  122. #118
    Any comparison between the disagreements between Adams and Jefferson and Obama vs America only frame your ignorance. Adams and Jefferson did work together. Obama has opennly said he wanted no input from his opponents.

    Try telling us this degree of ignorance caharacterized the realationship between our founding fathers who only managed to devise the Constitution whatever their disagreements were.

    To compare their disagreementw with the civil war is simply nonsense. The failure of Lincoln and the other radicals in the South to seek compromise caused the civil war just as Obama’s “I won” argument is dividing the country.

    Bold assertion isn’t the same as documenting your points nor making mindless claims. You also ignore that the founding fathers were united in creating this country during the revolution. But to yield on this point only serves to demonstrate the bankruptcy of your claim.

    I do not see the need to continue this senseless debate. We all know the founding fathers hated each other and never worked together, ever.

    Pathetic.

    Comment by Thomas Jackson (8ffd46) — 8/12/2009 @ 4:27 pm

  123. [...] Teh Resistance Blog: Will Obama Appoint a Circumcision Czar? Patterico’s Pontifications: Pelosi finds dissent un-American… now. Reagan Action: Reagan Activists Must Stop Fairness Doctrine Hot Air Green Room: Facing health care [...]

    Pingback by Rush Limbaugh & Glenn Beck: The Highly Anticipated “Free Speech in Jeopardy” Interview (5-part video) « Frugal Café Blog Zone (a66042) — 8/27/2009 @ 6:41 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4012 secs.