In a USA TODAY op/ed piece published today, Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer echoed the sentiments of other Democrats that the angry citizens who are disrupting Democrat Town Hall Meetings are un-American. In the piece entitled, 'Un-American' attacks can't derail health care debate, Pelosi/Hoyer make the argument that these citizens are un-American by virtue of the fact that they are disrupting the meetings and thereby preventing a civil debate.
"........, 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. These tactics have included hanging in effigy one Democratic member of Congress in Maryland and protesters holding a sign displaying a tombstone with the name of another congressman in Texas, where protesters also shouted "Just say no!" drowning out those who wanted to hold a substantive discussion."
As I pointed out in a previous post, the tactics which they decry now, are the very tactics which they have used in the past to effectively block legislation, change policy, and prevent a civil debate; (which they never, ever really want to have in the first place). What they really want is for the right in this country to shut-up. Oh, yeah! That is the American way, right?
But, we conservatives have always been in favor of civil and constructive discourse. We have always been in favor of having the debate. We have played nice and gotten nothing for it. And then, we played nice again. We have played nice until it was time to not play nice. That time is now.
If Pelosi/Hoyer think that Americans going to Town Hall Meetings and expressing passionately their opposition the the Health Care bill is un-American, what, pray tell, would they consider to be the American way to conduct public discourse? The way Democrats prefer to do it? At farcical Town Hall Meetings where the attendees are hand picked, the questions and answers scripted well in advance, where no dissenting voices are heard, where the public watching on TV see and hear only that which they want them to hear, and all of it at tremendous public expense? Is that what the Democrats consider to be the American way to engage in free political discourse?
If Americans should agree to that, then the Dems might as well pass out the chains and shackles, and we will put them on ourselves.
Troublesome Bible Examples
15 years ago
6 comments:
What has happened here, is that the morons in Washington has lost sight of the fact that they are not the bosses....we are. And I think it is time that we started replacing them with others that will remember that little fact.
-Robert-
The funny thing is that anti-war protesters were called Un-American back in 2005 & 2006, but yet now these same folks that promoted such protests are calling those against ObamaCare "Un-American". I guess the definition of treason or patriotism depends upon the opinions of those in power.
Both sides have shown their ignorance at some point, it is just time for the liberals to do it.
This is a lie!! She said their disruptive behavior was un-american
Excuse me, Wiz! What exactly is the difference?
If I were to call someone 'un-American', I would be doing so based upon their actions.
When Democratic actions have been called un-patriotic, Democrats quite rightly deduced that they were being called un-patriotic.
Next time you visit, perhaps you could leave an intelligent comment.
It is the same as acting like an idiot and actually being an idiot.
Every tree is known by it's fruit, just as every man is known by his works.
A husband is a cheater because he is unfaithful to his wife.
A man is a thief because he steals from others.
One cannot label a behavior without so labeling the person performing it. I cannot say that abortion is murder with out implying that someone is a murderer.
In your original comment you labeled my post as a lie, in doing so did you not call me a liar by implication? When I say that Obama's policies are socialist, am I not implying that Obama is a socialist?
I inferred that Nancy Pelosi was calling the protesters un-American because she implied it, just as Hillary Clinton inferred that she was being called un-patriotic when Republicans clearly implied it.
The concept of communication by implication and inference is common in human discourse. It is surprising that you are not familiar with the concept.
Post a Comment