Right Wingers Wreak Havoc on Philadelphia Town Meeting

[kentuck]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/denise-dennis/right-wingers-wreak-havoc_b_249897.html

<snip>
Philadelphia, PA -- August 2: This afternoon, at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, I saw the face of ignorance and hate--and it wasn't pretty.

When Health and Human Services Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius and Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA) came to the National Constitution Center to answer questions about health care reform, they were greeted by an overflow crowd of approximately 400 people, the majority of whom were supporters with legitimate questions.

Unfortunately, though, a well-organized, belligerent and loud group of right-wingers stood in the aisles and across the back and disrupted the town meeting throughout. They yelled, shouted and jeered, and it was clear that they were not there to participate, but instead to try to disrupt the meeting and make it difficult as possible for anyone else to ask questions. They jeered from the moment the director of the Constitution Center stood to welcome everyone. For a few days leading up to the town meeting, e-mails circulated around Philadelphia warning that the "tea-baggers" were planning to protest the meeting and, although there were fewer of them than there were supporters--they made more noise shouting about "socialism," "abortion," and "assisted suicide."

To show their support, the audience stood and applauded Secretary Sebelius and Senator Specter numerous times. There were people in the crowd wearing purple t-shirts with gold and white lettering that said "Health Care Now We Can't Wait."

..........more

[Warpy]

1. The only things to do are either call the cops

or circle them and shout "SHAME!" at them while chivvying them toward the exit.

[timeforpeace]

13. Requiring health insurance rather than providing universal health care pisses off people across the

spectrum, not just right wingers.

[KittyWampus]

39. you really are doing this intentionally. Repeatedly you've been told these are astroturfing Repubs

and yet you persist in posting your attempt at excusing them.

[JDPriestly]

55. Why do you dislike requiring health insurance, timeforpeace?

[dflprincess]

84. Romney Care is not working in Massachusetts, it won't work on a federal level

The way HR3200 is written, most of us (or our employers) won't be eligible for even the pathetic public option included in that bill and we will be forced to continue to contribute to the profits of outfits like United Health Group, Cigna or Aetna.

Given the high out of pockets many private plans have (and the high "cost-sharing" in the public option) there is no guarantee that the forced purchase of health insurance will guarantee or improve access health care.

That's why I dislike mandated coverage.

[JDPriestly]

87. In can understand how you feel. Single payer works very

well. Did you back that? That was my first choice. Personally, I think our whole health care system is likely to break down if we do not reform it. H.R. 3200 has a lot of problems, but it is better than the alternative of doing nothing.

[dflprincess]

92. I do back singler payer and I'm being coming more convinced

that nothing is better than the faux reform contained in HR3200. Obama has said it will take "years" to ramp up the public option and the CBO has estimated that by 2019 only 10 million people will be covered by the public option. In the meantime most of us will have to depend on the same bunch of thieves that have broken the system. Yet he tells us a single payer system would be "starting from scratch" even though it could be built on Medicare.

I don't understand why, when Obama admits the insurance companies are dishonest and Pelosi has called them immoral they are both so determined to keep those same companies as major players in health care.

I agree with you that if we do nothing, the system will collapse - and maybe that's a good thing. If it collapses there won't be a whole lot of choice left but to extend Medicare to everyone.

[damntexdem]

60. It may piss some people off. But if we do not have universal coverage ...

then we MUST mandate it for all, while subsidizing it for those without the ability to pay. Otherwise, the free riders will cost all of us. And the free riders are most likely to be the types of nutcases who come to teabag public forums.

[ima_sinnic]

89. oh bullshit. they can arrest me first for refusing to fork over money

to corporate thieves in exchange for--what? "coverage" that will be denied if I actually make a claim? I will kill myself before giving one dime to those swine.

The idea of "mandated" health insurance is akin to being forced to swear fealty to the king. I am not a serf, I don't work to line the pockets of fat-ass shit-head CEOs who live in multimilliion-dollar mansions. FUCK MANDATED HEALTH "INSURANCE." IT IS A FUCKING SCAM.

Why is Obama not using the power of his office to knock some sense into Congress and pressure them to create a single-payer, universal plan, as he so conveniently gave lip service to, conning people into thinking that was what he would really fight for before 11/08? LBJ got Medicare within 11 months, and he did it by being assertive and taking no shit. sheesh, Obama is being a WIMP about this. Why is he not being bold and showing real leadership on this issue? Instead, we have people Max Baucus deciding our fates.

I can see now that I will never see a doctor again in my lifetime, and I'm 63.

[Hello_Kitty]

90. Ya know, 'free rider' totally sounds like a RW meme to demonize the uninsured.

The uninsured truly have become the new Welfare Queens, and what's even worse is that the characterization is coming more from the left than the right.

[eridani]

93. "Coverage" is NOT care! I refuse to be forced to pay for "coverage"

I will gladly follow a requirement to pay for CARE.

[elehhhhna]

94. Healthcare Insurance used to be called MEDICAL insurance, btw...

and the possesion of it does NOTHING to ensure access to affordable medical care, so it's NOT the answer.

[bluestateguy]

2. The Code Pinkers of the Right

Like a bunch of insolent little children.

[JuniperLea]

7. I don't recall Code Pinkers ever going out with the sole purpose of disrupting...

They generally have a counter-message and some actual things to talk about from another perspective.

I'd love to see any of these idiots with a microphone in their face being asked questions about their position.

[Cha]

37. I agree with

you.

[JDPriestly]

59. That's true JuniperLea. The Code Pinkers are a small group

and they are well informed. Also, they know when they start out that some of them, if not all, will be arrested.

That is what will happen here. The leaders of the protests (like leaders of all protests) will be arrested if they don't follow the rules of the forum. That's what it is about.

[Captain Hilts]

78. Yes, they most certainly have. nt

[Hello_Kitty]

88. I'll never forget how a Code Pinker practically ruined Valerie Plame's testimony.

And I will never forgive Code Pink for it.

Plame had finally gotten the chance to testify before Congress about being outed by Cheney and Rove. She did brilliantly. She was poised and confident and articulate. But some idiot from Code Pink just had to be in the background mugging for the camera so obnoxiously that it totally distracted from the testimony. Thanks a bunch, Code Pink idiot. :sarcasm:

[lamp_shade]

18. That was my first thought.

[devilgrrl]

61. Yep, Code Pink = Insolent Children.

Yep
Uh huh
Right
Sure

[Captain Hilts]

79. When they took over Pat Leahy's office, etc. they are. nt

[BlooInBloo]

3. And the terrorism begins.

[JuniperLea]

9. Continues...

They are just more blatant about it now.

[MadHound]

11. Overreact much?

I mean really now, do you really think that a bunch of people raising a ruckus is "terrorism?" If so, you're lumping an entire group of people, namely political protesters on both sides of the debate, under the umbrella of terrorism. Are anti-war protesters terrorists when they heckle politicians? Are leftists who heckle RW politicians terrorists?

Your comment sounds like something Bush would say in order to crack down on all forms of free expression and dissent. You may not like what these people have to say, I don't like what these people have to say, but in this country they have the right to say it, and if you're denying that free speech to them under the rubric of terrorism then you're also denying it to me and thousands of other leftists under the same rubric. At worst these people would be guilty of disturbing the peace and could be kicked out of the meeting, but they certainly aren't terrorists.

[quiet.american]

12. Let's not pretend these stiflers of free speech are there to "say" something.

This is a Republican-lobbyist orchestrated movement to tear down any chance of real health reform happening for purely political purposes -- political purposes the GOP hopes will turn out in its favor.

I'd be willing to bet there are many paid GOP staff amidst this "rabble;" they are not there to debate, listen, question. They are there to prevent anyone else with a serious purpose from doing so. That is stifling free speech, not participating in it. Let's not even pretend these are truly "concerned citizens."

We all got the memo.

[MadHound]

15. So right now, despite the warnings of this happening last week, we're getting our asses kicked

At townhall meetings throughout the country. We're getting beat at a game that is normally played on the leftists court. OK then, the answer isn't to label these people terrorist, or to somehow stifle their free speech. Rather, get our own troops into these meetings, show up in force in order to take these idiots on.

But you go limiting free speech on the right, well then you're limiting my speech and that of every other American. For shame.

We got surprised once, fine, shit happens. But rather than going to drastic matters get your ass from in front of that computer this weekend and go out and do something constructive, be that liberal counterpoint in these meetings.

[quiet.american]

19. I don't know who these "leftists" are of whom you speak.

And let's not pretend this is about "free speech." It's not. That is a false premise.

The only ones denying anyone else their right to free speech are these lobbyist-paid and Kool-Aid-drinking townhall riff-raff.

I'm sure wingnuts would love for all these townhall meetings to deteriorate into brawl-a-thons -- we are smarter than that.

[MadHound]

20. This is all about free speech

Hate to tell you this, but we live in a country where individuals can, to a large extent, speak their mind to anybody, including politicians.

Let me ask you this, would you deny Code Pink their right to disrupt political meetings in order to protest the war?

[quiet.american]

24. I'm former USAF, so I don't need any lectures on "country."

False premise again.

Code Pink protested and disrupted.

These thugs are there to shut down and stifle free speech for the purpose of derailing healthcare reform. There were no Code Pink shoutdowns when Bush was running around trying to privatize Social Security. There were no GOP representatives who had to be escorted to safety because they were threatened by a Code Pink lynch mob.

These thugs are not there for a legitimate purpose. If you want to compare them to another group, Jonestown comes to mind.

[MadHound]

27. You may be former USAF, but apparently you do need a lecture on country

You're throwing in and calling these people terrorist. You want to limit their freedom of speech. You most certainly do need a civics refresher.

Geez, you think that this is bad, you would have had a cow back in the day. Go check out your history of political meetings and debates during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. We somehow managed to survive and thrive despite all that dissent.

[quiet.american]

30. The premise that they're practicing "free speech" is false.

They are practicing **stifling free speech.**

[Jennicut]

33. Exactly. Since when is supressing the right of others to express their free speech

free speech?

[MadHound]

36. So let me ask you, since you decided to jump in on this

Are Code Pink and other anti-war protesters who do similar disruptive tactics also suppressing others' right to free speech. Are they, as BlooinBloo puts it, terrorists?

[MadHound]

34. Geez, you are out there, aren't you

So again I ask, are Code Pink and others who disrupt politicians in much the same way not practicing free speech?

[quiet.american]

40. Let me answer again -- that's a false premise.

There is a difference between protesting, protesting to disrupt, and agitating.

Agitators who seek to shut down genuine discourse are not practicing free speech -- they are against free speech. There is no comparison to those who are exercising their free speech rights.

[MadHound]

44. A false premise in your mind only,

Meanwhile, here in the reality based world, our Constitution, court rulings and judicial precedence all support the fact that this is Constitutionally protected free speech, as much as you, I and others dislike it.

[quiet.american]

47. I'm sure their lawyers will be glad to argue that for them once the disorderly charges begin. nt

[MadHound]

53. Didn't see that anybody was arrested.

I guess that the police and/or organizers of the event know their First Amendment better than you do and didn't want to risk an embarrassing court case.

[quiet.american]

57. Didn't say anyone was -- yet.

And by the way, since you love to reference Code Pink -- their members have been arrested many times.

[Jennicut]

35. Exactly. Since when is supressing the right of others to express their free speech

free speech?

[glinda]

76. This is NOT free speech. This is an organized attempt to harrass and disrupt a peaceful discussion.

So what is next? Shooting someone and calling it free speech? For pete's sake. This people are ignorant and stupid and led there by their stupidity and fear from another source. This source should be busted.

[Cha]

43. Exactly..they're there to shutdown

the meetings at any cost. The question is..what to do about it?

[MadHound]

49. Yes, but they certainly aren't terrorists as previous posters have said,

And they have the Constitutionally protected right to do these things.

The fact of the matter is that the left has had a virtual monopoly on protesting and such street tactics. This weekend we got our ass handed to us by the right wingers who pulled this off. Rather than eliminating free speech we need to suck it up, go into these meetings and beat these people at their own game.

[quiet.american]

58. You keep saying "we" but you certainly sound like "them." nt

[MadHound]

65. Yeah, I was wondering when that insinuation would come around

Check out my profile, I've been around here a lot longer, posted a hell of a lot more than you have, and I'm probably a hell of a lot more on the left than you are. That's why I'm so passionate about defending free speech, since out here on the left we've been constantly threatened with its removal for years and decades.

[quiet.american]

67. I'm an old-time DU'er, too and never see us refer to ourselves as "leftists."

We also don't usually stick our head in the sand and try to call the actions of those attempting to stifle free speech, free speech.

But they do say the Democrats have a big tent.

[MadHound]

73. Wasn't referring to DUer's when I use the term leftist

There are some leftists on this site, but I was referring more to those of the liberal stripe out in the real world, and sadly, that doesn't include many Democrats, which have slowly but surely slid to the right over the past years and decades.

[ima_sinnic]

91. making noise is not "free speech."

if I go into a meeting and start saying something like "wah wah wah wah wah wah" etc. ad nauseum, is that "free speech"?
That is essentially what these assholes are doing. They aren't "saying" anything. "Free speech" means that you have the right to express an opinion. What is their "opinion"? They are just saying words like "abortion" and "euthanasia" that have no relevance and no meaning in this context and saying them for the sole purpose of turning a meeting into chaos. They aren't contributing any ideas, or expressing an opinion about anything already proposed.

They need to be escorted OUT, the same way Code Pinkers and all protesters are always escorted out and even arrested.

[JDPriestly]

63. As I said before, Code Pink members got arrested.

They expected it and deserved it. We all have free speech rights, but they can be regulated. If you go beyond the persmissible time, place, manner restrictions in your protest you get arrested. It's as simple as that.

[quiet.american]

68. I will not pretend that what FreedomWorks is up to, is "free speech." nt

[Hotler]

81. At the RNC the repugs called out the goon squads

to help protect the rights to free speech by the protesters. :sarcasm: Why didn't the Dems do that there?

[Hansel]

77. So the disrupter shouting at the person who asked about single payer

to "SIT DOWN!" "SIT DOWN!" "SIT DOWN!" is exercising his right to free speech? These people are not there to exercise free speech. They are there to prevent other people in the audience with different viewpoints from exercising their free speech. They are screaming out spin from a list of talking points about the health care reform written by Freedom Works (a lobbyist organization) and then are refusing to allow the reps to answer their "supposed concerns".

They are hooligans. Let's not pretend that this is about good Americans, who we happen to disagree with, exercising their freedom of speech. These people are thugs and are potentially dangerous to others in the audience.

If we fall for the premise that this is all about free speech, we lose.

[dana_b]

83. exactly. They are infringing upon others right to free speech

by not letting them speak. It's all a bunch of crap and if people can't step up to the mic in an orderly way, they should be kicked out.

[Odin2005]

99. Your right to swing your arm ends at my face.

You're right to free speech ends when it consists of thuggery designed to prevent other people from exercising their free speech

[BlooInBloo]

14. Tiller's killer comes from the same source.

Any other questions?

[MadHound]

17. Yeah, and the Weathermen were members of the anti-war left,

And the Unibomber was from the world of academia. Does that mean that hippies and professors are terrorists? According to your logic they are.

You have no rational basis to label these people terrorists, no matter their political leanings. And frankly, in these post 911 days, labels such as terrorist truly matter and you shouldn't bandy them around so casually.

So, are left wing anti-war folks terrorists because they heckle politicians in the same manner?

[quiet.american]

21. We don't have to go back decades to find examples of right-wing terrorism.

These are paid and manipulated thugs, pure and simple.

[MadHound]

25. We don't have to go back decades to find examples of left wing terrorism either

The Unibomber worked in the nineties, was caught in the nineties. Oh, and what about the work of ELF and ALF in this century?

But the thing is, heckling and disrupting a political meeting isn't terrorism, and if you're trying to call it such, well you're probably more fucked up than this idiots disrupting these meetings simply because you are willing to trash the First Amendment in order get rid of that which you disagree with

Sorry, but as the old saying goes, I don't agree with what these people are saying, but I will defend their right to say it. After all, if they have their free speech stifled because of this, well I guess I'm next, then you, then everybody will be quiet Americans. Is that what you want, no dissent? If so, there are many fine totalitarian countries that don't allow any speech to disturb your world view, go find one.

[quiet.american]

26. Sorry, that dog just doesn't bark. nt

[MadHound]

28. Spoken like one who simply doesn't have a coherent, logical answer,

But wants to hang onto these fascist feelings anyway, logic be damned.

[quiet.american]

29. Congratulations, you're the first person to ever call me a "fascist."

I refuse to lull myself into a false premise that these folks are practicing free speech when they are not. Their objective is to **stifle** free speech by whatever means necessary. And those are actions that are truly against the precepts of our democracy.

[MadHound]

41. Apparently your lack of comprehension about the First Amendment extends to your reading ability

I said that you had fascist feelings, I didn't call you a fascist.

Now then, let me ask you this. Let's say we get these people shut down and shut up by violating their First Amendment rights under the auspices that they are "terrorists" as BinB states. What is to prevent some future Republican administration from pulling the same stunt on anti-war protesters who do the same thing? Remember the justifiable outrage over free speech zones and other tactics used during the Bush regime? But you're OK with such tactics being used because this administration has a D behind its name hmm. Hypocrite much?

[quiet.american]

42. False argument. My reading skills are just fine, thank you.

I also don't have to resort to personal jibes. And by the way, which is it to be -- am I a leftist or a fascist?

[MadHound]

51. Well, I could truly say what you're acting like, but hey, I like hanging out here

So I won't.

However the fact of the matter is that these people have the right to do what they did, protest and make a scene. To call them terrorists, or to try and take away their First Amendment rights is absolutely wrong. Sorry, but you don't have the weight of the Constitution or judicial precedence on your side.

[quiet.american]

56. And yet -- the charge of disorderly conduct exists within the framework of the Constitution.

Taking actions that make members of Congress fear for their safety is not "free speech."

Busing portable thugs across the country to deliberately shut down debate is not "free speech."

Of course, these folks will drape themselves in the flag -- they always do -- but their actions -- stifling free speech to make a buck from an insurance company -- or for those short of a brain cell or two - to deny themselves better healthcare -- are shameful.

[MadHound]

62. And you were with the Air Force, tasked with protecting our freedom

Thank God you're no longer in that position, because your concept of individual freedoms in this country is seriously skewed.

Nowhere in this article did it say that members of Congress feared for their safety.

Another question, that I'm sure you'll ignore like you ignored the others, but hey, I'll try anyway. Did you feel the same way about the tens of thousands of anti-war protesters who were bussed into Washington to protest, to raise hell? Or is it just because these people are coming from the right instead of the left?

What you seem to forget in your rush to stifle competition is that whatever you do to the right in this country you also do to the left. If you take about the right's ability to raise a ruckus in town meetings, well you're taking it away from the left also.

And to label them as "terrorists" well, that just goes to show how far out there you are. Hmm, where have I heard this before, protesters as terrorists? Oh, yeah, back in the Bush administration. Congratulations, you and Bush would agree on something.

[quiet.american]

70. Of course it wasn't in this article. It has been posted elsewhere.

And nowhere have you seen me refer to these folks as terrorists (deleted -- I shouldn't have said what was originally in here -- it was a purely personal jibe), but I will not play this game of "oh my, they're just practicing free speech!"

[MadHound]

74. No, you haven't referred to these people as terrorists,

But you've certainly hinted at it, insinuated it, and in every way except implicitly saying so, implied that these people are terrorists. So let me ask you then, yes or no, are these people terrorists?

[quiet.american]

75. You may think that, but that may not be the truth about what I think about this.

Personally, I think the poster who originally used the term "terrorism" wasn't being entirely serious. My quibble is that these people seem to be on a mission to suppress free speech -- and that makes my blood boil.

[alarimer]

96. Obama and his government can do no wrong.

Didn't you know that? :sarcasm:

When we protest Bush, it was okay (well, they actually never let us in to their town hall meetings) but when they protest (even though it's a stupid protest) they are terrorists, at least according to some. Not to me. I dislike this health care reform for other reasons (such as it's not single payer and will almost certainly do no good at all and set back the cause of REAL health CARE reform for many years) so I don't really care about the protesters but they are almost certainly not terrorists. At least not yet.

[JuniperLea]

4. Why can't they be tossed out for disturbing the peace?

I have no problem with someone there giving a differing opinion or asking pointed questions, but this is stupid. But then, stupid is as stupid does. I suppose that's all they have.

[Fuzz]

5. Call Officer Crowley

[crickets]

31. Exactly. Skeptical questions and expressions of disagreement are fine,

but making a ruckus just to make sure no one is able to get anything out of a town hall meeting is disturbing the peace. People who are doing this should, at the very least, be escorted out and told not to return.

I don't understand why a publicized, organized effort at deliberate disruption is being allowed to continue without any preventive actions being taken.

[quiet.american]

38. To tell you the truth, because reps are the last to know and take this thing seriously.

We've known about this on DU since, what -- Saturday?

I knew then that reps -- Dem, and so-called moderate Republicans -- wouldn't be aware of, and prepared for, this coming tactic at all -- after all, it was posted on a blog! Not to say they don't pay any attention to blogs -- but let's face it, even with scorched-earth politics, they seem to live in a genteel bubble sometimes... with their "friends across the aisle" that they "love and respect..."

Now they have to play catch-up.

[crickets]

95. Point taken. Hopefully Durbin is getting the word out.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/03/durbin-townhalls-gone-wild/

Now that it's been covered thoroughly by both Keith and Rachel, there's really no excuse for a rep to get caught by surprise again.
We shall see.

[Lifelong Protester]

101. I agree with you

disruption of this type trespasses on the free speech of others...disagreement and alternative views are welcome so we can get to the 'truth' or 'core' of something, but being disruptive so NO ONE has a chance to speak is a trespass of others' right, I feel.

[Solomon]

45. They weren't in their own homes.

[JDPriestly]

66. That is what will happen, and of course, that is what they are

hoping for. I have to say that liberals in Congress and President Obama are going to learn an important lesson from this, if they only pay attention. You strike when the iron is hot. They should have refused to adjourn Congress until they had passed the health care reform. There is a moment. Once it's lost, it is lost. They lost the moment and will have a difficult time getting the same momentum.

Obama spent too much time trying to cajole the right-wingers. That's not the way you get things done. It's called the politics of appeasement and it fails every time. This is entirely Obama's fault.

[Hansel]

82. The leaders need to take control by setting ground rules from the start

No signs. Everyone needs to raise their hand to ask a question. No shouting or outbursts. Everyone needs to sit in a chair unless they are asking a question. Once a question is asked, they need to sit back down and wait for the answer without interrupting and shouting at the speaker. No one is to shout out while others are talking. If they cannot abide by these rules, they will be asked to leave. If they don't go willingly, they will be escorted out by the police.

These rules should be included in any public announcement or invitation for a town hall meeting. They should be handed out as the people come in and posted on the door and enforced. The reasons for these rules are clear. It is a public safety issue. The mob mentality is dangerous and the congressmen need to make sure it does not take hold. Also, everyone has the right to exercise their freedom of speech without intimidation from hooligans.

I'm not sure why this is so difficult to deal with.

[crickets]

98. It isn't so difficult to deal with. This is a sensible, fair solution.

It's common sense, really. No one's free speech is trampled on because everyone is free to speak--just in a civilized manner that doesn't drown out the proceedings and cause chaos.

[Mz Pip]

6. How do these tactics help their cause?

I would think being rude and obnoxious would just piss more people off than win them to your cause.

I hope that the local people in these meetings realize that this is a well planned GOP tactic with the sole purpose of shutting down the flow of information.

[hootinholler]

22. They are not trying to win anyone over

They are simply preventing Democrats from getting our message out and taking questions.

-Hoot

[fascisthunter]

54. a bully tactic

[JDPriestly]

69. It scares people. That's how it works. The difference between

these folks and Code Pink is that these folks are really aggressive.

[NJmaverick]

8. Way to win friends and influence people

[PA Democrat]

10. I got an email from Specter with the schedule of his town hall meetings

I figured the organized mobs of right wingers would be there to disrupt. I'm glad that there were many supporters of health care reform there as well. I plan to attend a meeting scheduled for my area.

[Cha]

46. Bring a bullhorn or

a megaphone!

[JDPriestly]

71. Organize some friends to go with you. Get as many of them as

you can to agree to meet beside you and then sit and stand together in a solid group. Bring along cloth signs that you can hold up showing what side you are on or stating your questions for the congressman.

[Zen Democrat]

16. This stuff started, for me, with disruptions of President Carter in 1980.

I've seen a lot of political rallies in my time -- right and left -- and I'll admit to actually going to a Spiro Agnew rally in 1968 when he came to the little town I was in and spoke across the street. I'm not proud of it, but it happened. I was also at a political rally in Pasadena, Texas in 1964 with an aunt and uncle I was staying with, and among the participants was George HW Bush and his family and he was running for something, can't remember what. But he was introduced as "a good looking man who will be President of the United States one day." That was such an odd thing to say about a man who had never been elected to any public office that I've never forgotten it.

Jumping to the chase, the first time I was at a political rally with organized disrupters was in 1980 when Reagan supporters tried to drown out Carter's speech with chants about the cancellation of the B-1 bomber. And then they chanted that Carter had sold out Taiwan by officially recognizing China as China. They were ugly, mean-spirited, and looked willing to get violent if necessary.

I saw similar ugliness at rallies for Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996, both times staged by the anti-choice nutjobs. And it's been downhill since then. \

Disrupting the health care forums is proof of a sickness in the land. Jeez, these people need health care for their mental conditions.

[WeDidIt]

23. First came the Teabaggers, and I laughed because they wanted to teabag everybody

Then came the Birthers and I laughed, because they were out of their cotton picking minds.

Next came the Deathers who were so deranged they convinced themselve that Obama wanted to kill their Grandma with healthcare.

And now come the Screamers, and I'm convinced every last Republican is fucking nuts.

[csziggy]

32. They should be treated the same way the single payer advocates were

At the healthcare hearings! Escort them out and arrest their asses.

[Solomon]

48. What. No tasers!?

Shoot. I could use a good laugh.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LynneSin]

52. Purple & Gold shirts are probably SEIU representatives. That union is big in Philly

and some of the hardest working people I've met in my lifetime especially when it comes to campaigning.

[Arkana]

64. I think that they should just be escorted (forcefully) out

so the townhall can continue.

[Joanne98]

72. Their going to have recess rallies on Aug 22nd in front of home offices.

Can we start getting organized with counter-rallies?



Operation Recess Rally
On August 22nd, 2009, during the break in session, we the people fully intend to hold mass rallies outside of every single congressional office in the country.

These events will represent a strong statement that we’ve been pushed to the edge and simply cannot be pushed any further. It is at this time that we will also hand deliver a coalition letter to every single congressional office in the country.

http://recessrally.com/about/

[marmar]

80. The only thing missing from that band of thugs was John Bolton.....

n/t

[Kievan Rus]

85. The GOP: the party of ignorance and intolerance

[and-justice-for-all]

86. We have to retalliate and stand up to those fucks...

if you don't, it will only make things worse.

[yellowcanine]

97. Right wingers are blowing it, imo. American people value fairness.

By obviously disrupting free political discussion the wing nuts are driving away moderate and independent voters and representatives who might otherwise be willing to listen to their point of view. The wing nuts are also generating sympathy for Obama with their endless "birther" nonsense and the shrill language being used against him. Plus the economic stimulus is starting to work and the "cash for clunkers" program has been wildly successful. Time is not on the wing nuts side and they know it. That is why they are going for broke now.

[Odin2005]

100. Right-Wing TERRORISTS.