Political Discussions
2009 - Attacks are unAmerican but in 2006/07 they are 'Democracy in action'
Posted by anticsrocks • 8/11/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: health care, hoyer, pelosi, protesters, town hall meetings, un-american
I ask all liberals on the board to address this.
Why is it okay for Codepink to disrupt public meetings in 2006 or 2007 in protest to the war, but in 2009, public meeting disruptions are "un-American?"
About the Codepink disruptions in '06 and '07 Pelosi said the following:
"It's always exciting,'' she told reporters after the meeting. "This is democracy in action. I'm energized by it, frankly."
www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/01/15/PELOSI.TMP
"I always say the best preparation for combat is combat," she responded. "So just go for it, I respect your enthusiasm."
www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/22/usnews/whispers/main2969866.shtml
We have all seen the videos and pictures of the health care town hall meetings. Here are some pics of Codepink attacking Condi Rice.
www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN24604518
So all that is okay, but in an OP-ED piece Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House and Steny Hoyer, House majority leader called the latest health care protesters 'un-American.'
"'Un-American' attacks can't derail health care debate
However, it is now evident that an ugly campaign is underway not merely to misrepresent the health insurance reform legislation, but to disrupt public meetings and prevent members of Congress and constituents from conducting a civil dialogue."
blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/08/unamerican-attacks-cant-derail-health-care-...
Where was the outrage by Pelosi and Hoyer when Codepink attacked Condi Rice?
User Comments
-
Who the flip is Code Pink?-
You're not serious. Are you?
-
-
It wasn't right then and it isn't right now. The woman above should have been taken away be security.
It's always democracy if you agree with me. It is fraud, intimidation, etc. if you don't, e.g. "honk to impeach", "my America is dead" because we lost the democratic vote, "time to succeed" because our duely elected officials have different principals than me. -
I don't think that the activities now are unAmerican at all. I do find the immediate turn about to be rather amusing, however.
For example:
The actions in '06-'07 were "unAmerican" and even so much as "treasonous" to some, but now they are democracy in action?
Pretty funny, no?-
I agree that the label "un-American" does not apply. Indeed, it has no value whatsoever, though I can understand the temptation to use it against people who have been so willing to use "Americanism" as a political club in the past, including last fall.
The turnabout is indeed remarkable. John Stewart had some fun yesterday: www.hulu.com/watch/88827/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-mon-aug-10-2009 -
What part is funny,
that people who said things were unamerican are acting in a way that would be close to what they said were unamerican.
Or that the people who were outraged about being called unamerican are now all too happy to use the same rhetoric.
There is absolutely nothing funny about this, all this shows is a growing polarisation, where encroaching on free speech and peaceful assembly is equally embraced by both sides as soon as it benefits them.
And for anok, (Shouting at someone IS peaceful assembly, breaking shop windows and tipping cars / throwing rocks at police isn't) -
It's funny that just last year I was being told:
"Proetsting is for hippies"
"You're unamerican"
"You're a traitor to your country"
"You're a stinky hippy living in the past - protests are useless"
All by people who were...protesting....
Reporter: "Why are you here today?"
Counterprotestor: "To let these hippies know that protesting is dead!"
Reporter: "So protesting has no place in democracy?"
CP:"Hell no!"
Reporter: "Only UnAmerican hippies protest?"
CP: "Yeah!"
Reporter "And if you protest you're a dirty hippy and a traitor?"
CP: "YEAH!"
Reporter: "And you're here today protesting the protestors to make that point clear?"
CP: "HELL YEAH!"
Reporter "So you're a dirty hippy, stuck in the 60's, uselessly protesting which makes you a traitorous unamerican?"
CP: "Well no...we're different....uhm....
Stupidity makes me laugh all the time
And I'd rather throw a brick than be a stupid hypocrite. -
Where is that story, if there was a reporter there has to be something out there.
Or is this another one of your "you'll just have to trust me" stories? -
"It's funny that just last year I was being told:
"Proetsting is for hippies"
"You're unamerican"
"You're a traitor to your country""
Um, not by me.
Protesting is the quintessential American activity. I have no problem with peaceable protests. I do have a problem with anarchy. (sorry) I have a problem with violent protests. I have a problem with our elected officials calling peaceful protests which disagree with their agenda 'un-American.'
-
-
The problem has to do with framing this as two equal sides. The sides are not equal. You have a hegemonic power, its media, its legal system, its corporate political partisans (which includes both sides of the aisle). You have those who are resistant to this power, they have no media, they have no legal recourse, they have no political representation, they are imprisoned, they are targeted. So someone arguing for the status quo and someone arguing against it are not equal from the outset. Dissent in the United States was shut down with the quelling of Shay's Rebellion, and the Sedition Act of 1798.
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
