Source
I’ll say this for Life Under the Obama Regime, the inclusion of communist-inspired propaganda art has certainly upgraded and enlivened political expression. This is much more captivating (and substantive) than, for example, the played-out Bushian beheadings and vampires. (H/T)
Then there is the spreading Joker, which apparently has been collecting new captions
Art appreciation aside, does anyone remember the recent demonizing of corporate fellows who dared to take private jets to business meetings? Remember how they offended both the president and Maxine Waters, who was so overwhelmed by their evil she had to be calmed down during questioning? Remember how those private jets became emblematic of the larger problems of corporate greed and entitlement, how flying corporate jets was an earth-killer and a devilish misuse of revenue when bottom lines were going red and there were shareholders to answer to? Here we are, just a few months later, and Congress orders three earth-killing private jets, misusing revenue when bottom lines are red and there are taxpayers to answer to.
They don’t seem to care about that “answering to” part.
These elitists commissars are going to shame the rest of the country into mass transit and long lines, while they drive by us in their limos, making the power sign and telling us -between their bites of pate foie gras and sips of bubbly- to “keep it real” as they are driven to the airport to board their private jets. And there will be countless schlemiels who will stand there on the corner, applauding the elites as they ride by (or perhaps simply trying to keep their hands warm) before going home to write in their diaries (because their blogs are gone) “saw Emmanuel pass by in limo! He looked right at me and brought his thumb to his nose, like at the inauguration! The idiots around me gasped and grumbled, because they didn’t get it, but I got it, and I felt like such an insider!”
Speaking of blogs and computers, Linda Douglass, who used to be a reporter for ABC before she became an Obammunist Propagandist, tells us that there are some people out there “with a lot of time on their hands” who are using the President’s own words to spread lies and disinformation on the benevolent Health Care Solution currently being rhammed down our throats. She is urging the other people with a lot of time on their hands to report that first group of liars to the White House, so they can um…correct their thinking.
Anyone recall how, after 9/11 -after we’d been attacked in NYC and DC- the Bush Administration said: “If you see anything suspicious, you ought to report it,” causing conniptions on the left? How dare the Bushies ask people to snitch for security reasons! Now, for mere policy, that has become an acceptable, “if you see/hear anything disobedient, be the tattletale.”
 |
 |
Man, when they said “OBEY” they really meant it, didn’t they? (H/T)
Lots of double-standards, these days. Remember when Obama told his supporters to “get in the faces” of non-supporters? Remember when protests and demonstrations were patriotic and grass-roots efforts worthy of some notice and respect? Remember what fake, organized protests look like?
This morning the airwaves were all obediently echoing today’s DNC talking points: all the Town Hall protesters and Tea Party folk are “fake” protesters, who are “too well dressed” to be real protesters (no jeans or Che shirts, apparently) and all reminiscent of “those protesters back during Bush/Gore.”
They’re trying, of course, to hasten back memories of the bad-old-days when Bush did not steal the election (per the NY Times) and regular people would not countenance locked doors, closed shades and weird recounts. I think they should be careful about dredging up those days. Florida may have seen protests by Pale Men in Bermuda Shorts and Socks but Gore and the left did not exactly cover themselves in glory in 2000, either.
Here is a look at these well-dressed fake protesters.
It seems to me the Bushies handled dissent better than the Obamites. If you don’t believe me you might find this enlightening
And as to charges of fakery and David-Axelrod-Invented “astroturfing” (projection, anyone?) at the townhall meetings, I have yet to see anything confirming or proving the allegation that “the evil insurance companies are bussing these people in,” but I do see that Americans are eager to attend these town halls, which rather belies the charge. The fact that I know ordinary people who have attended some of these meetings – not because they’ve been “organized” or “bussed in” like ACORN protesters, but simply because they heard about a meeting and got off their duffs to attend – belies the DNC-approved-Chris-Matthews-embraced narrative,too, but I wouldn’t expect anecdotals to convince.
Hmmmm…I wonder if I will be expected to Obey and Inform on them like a good citizen?
Forwarding an email of his own, Obama rallies the troops by crying – once again – “this is our moment!”. Sort of like astroturfing or umm..attempting to manufacture support. Allahpundit notes the hypocrisy/creepiness factor
Meanwhile, Rep. Doggett is annoyed that the people who elected him to represent them dare be upset that he’s going to vote against their wishes. What do they think this is, after all? A representative democracy, or something?
Finally, I got a comment yesterday that I did not allow, since it broke the rules about threatening me with death. Let me just say that if you are desirous of “beating” me “to death,” you are not following the Obama Rules. You’re not supposed to flagellate me. You’re supposed to flag me, and my fishy facts, which are stubborn things.
Go. Inform. Obey.
Related:
Spengler: Don’t Wait for Obama to Fail
DISINGENUITY: Think Progress/MSNBC Manufacture “smoking gun mob” memo
Catholic Key: Wonders if Snitching was what Obama meant on Inauguration Day
Cornyn to the President: “Dude! What the Heck?”
Daves Top Ten Reasons: Why The Recession Will Last Forever
AP: Oops, our bad, Yes, Obamacare WILL fund abortions Dude, shouldn’t lie to the pope
More on: the creepy “science czar”
Ruth Marcus: Quit lying about raising taxes, Mr. President
Bookworm: What your representatives think of you and Erasing the Past
No, The Recession is not over
Maggies Farm: Self-Flaggelates
Hot Air: 39% need to snitch on 52%
Wesley J. Smith: If Rationing isn’t part of Obamacare why is it being pushed so hard?
Dostoevsky: Notes from the Underground.
Quinnipiac: Americans not happy
First Things: Obamacare and Catholic Health
Radio Patriot: Has a roundup
August 5th, 2009 | 2:15 pm | #1
[...] The Anchoress reminds of when the Left went nuts over Bush/Cheney post-9/11 programs to combat terrorism: Anyone recall how, after 9/11 -after we’d been attacked in NYC and DC- the Bush Administration said: “If you see anything suspicious, you ought to report it,” causing conniptions on the left? How dare the Bushies ask people to snitch for security reasons! Now, for mere policy, that has become an acceptable, “if you see/hear anything disobedient, be the tattletale.” [...]
August 5th, 2009 | 2:19 pm | #2
[...] his administration handled demonization, my dear and cherished blogging patroness, The Anchoress, has a wonderful compare-and-contrast, including the fact that inclusion of communist-inspired propag…. A real mob-head actually wrote her a death threat! Your not suppose to threaten, you are suppose [...]
August 5th, 2009 | 2:25 pm | #3
[...] Island Temple of Mut: Sweet Tea! Tea Party Victory! Huzzah! The Anchoress – A First Things Blog: Obey-mian Representative Democracy Nice Deb: July 4th Tea Parties/Celebrations Gateway Pundit: Claire “ACORN” McCaskill [...]
August 5th, 2009 | 2:37 pm | #4
The more I think about Boxer’s (my Senator’s!) comments about protesters, the more angry I get about it. My husband and I are struggling to hold on to jobs in a state which should offer a model of everything that is wrong with socialist policies. I prefer to ignore politics. I never donated to a campaign before I donated small amounts to Sarah Palin, at real sacrifice. I’ve never been to a town hall meeting or political protest, but I definitely am one of those eager to go now. And my elected representative has the gall to dismiss my concerns as the self-interest of paid lobbyists!
Speaking of Palin, it makes me feel the same way that the vilification of Sarah Palin does, since I identify with her so much: To see what the elites really think of me. That goes both ways. I no longer patronize the media sources who did that, and I really don’t have to put up with it from my elected representatives.
August 5th, 2009 | 2:40 pm | #5
[...] to Obama: Disband the Internet Snitch Brigade. The Anchoress chimes [...]
August 5th, 2009 | 2:44 pm | #6
I just sent a short, polite note “informing” on myself to that flag@gov.com address, letting them know that I disagree with abortion being covered in the health plan, and that if I am incorrect to please correct me. I’d rather be on the list sooner than later!
August 5th, 2009 | 2:45 pm | #7
[...] Obey-mian Representative Democracy – The Anchoress [...]
August 5th, 2009 | 2:50 pm | #8
Steve Benen over at the Washington Monthly site has, as you might imagine, a different take on the “informant” issue and the controversy attending same.
[Remember this? Remember the ACLU having fits because Bush suggested that -since we'd been attacked- if anyone saw anything suspicious, they should call authorities? That's quite different from, "if you hear fishy things in casual conversation about policy, you should let us know". Benen's "aggressive campaign to mislead" is nonsense. Unless the videos of Obama endorsing single-payer health plans and various commissars agreeing are all "fake" too. -admin]
August 5th, 2009 | 2:58 pm | #9
The Dear Leader wants to know if we see or hear or read anything about the healthcare policy that is supicious?
Should we just send them the link to the HR 3200 and be done with it?
August 5th, 2009 | 3:05 pm | #10
I love you dearly Anchoress, but some days, your blog (information) makes me overwhelmingly ill.
I’ve never seen such hubris in elected officials and disdain by elected officials for American citizens. I keep wondering if we have been invaded by evil zombies in an undeclared war on Americans and everything that name used to stand for.
[Sorry, Sadie. When it gets to be too much for me, I go read nun-sites. They're calming!
-admin]
August 5th, 2009 | 3:26 pm | #11
[...] Anchoress – Obey-mian Representative Democracy Sphere It Share and [...]
August 5th, 2009 | 3:28 pm | #12
A death threat?!?!? Dang! I didn’t see it!
But you know how to shot those down really quick!
August 5th, 2009 | 3:36 pm | #13
Worrabout them American journalists being released in North Korea- are you going talk about that?
[No, I didn't even know they were gone. Not on my radar. Can't cover it all, after all! admin]
August 5th, 2009 | 3:43 pm | #14
Excellent post, Anchoress. We should all turn ourselves in and inundate their website with “I am Sparticus!”
August 5th, 2009 | 4:07 pm | #15
Anchoress,
I did what I had to do, being, the patriot that I am. I turned myself in to the WH. I emailed the following and plan on emailing it several times.
Dear White House,
I am hereby turning myself in to the White House Dissent Management Czar. I disapprove of the government run health care bill and I will tell everyone I know that its a crummy idea. You have my IP and my email. If you would like my physical address and zip code and cell phone #, just let me know so that I can provide it for you and you can monitor me at all times. If you want me to turn myself in to the police, I can do that too.
Sieg Heil! And have a nice day!
Susie XXX ( a well-dressed-by-Kohl’s mob member)
Dear White House,
I am hereby turning myself in to the White House Dissent Management Czar. I disapprove of the government run health care bill and I will tell everyone I know that its a crummy idea. You have my IP and my email. If you would like my physical address and zip code and cell phone #, just let me know so that I can provide it for you and you can monitor me at all times. If you want me to turn myself in to the police, I can do that too.
Sieg Heil! And have a nice day!
Susie XXXX ( a well-dressed-by-Kohl’s mob member)
Friendswood, TX
August 5th, 2009 | 4:08 pm | #16
oops-sorry for the double posting…
August 5th, 2009 | 4:27 pm | #17
US journalists pardoned after Clinton visits North Korea
[Hmmm...whose blog is this again? Oh yeah. Mine.
I write about what interests me, and never, never allow anyone else to decide what I should write about. I'm Irish that way. -admin]
August 5th, 2009 | 4:37 pm | #18
Thank you dearest, for the link.
It’s getting truly frightening, isn’t it?
[No, I'm not frightened. All things work to the good. Don't forget it -admin]
August 5th, 2009 | 4:44 pm | #19
[...] The Anchoress — A First Things Blog said, [...]
August 5th, 2009 | 5:03 pm | #20
Let’s just keep in mind that it is Democrats, not Republicans, who are blocking the health care proposals from moving forward.
August 5th, 2009 | 5:09 pm | #21
Liberal Fascism: The White House Smells Something ‘Fishy,’ and It’s You…
Well, my friends. The next stage of Hope and Change has begun. Now, if you express opposition Barack Obama and the Democrat-majority Congress’s government-run health (s)care plan, you can potentially be flagged by a listener at the White House’s websit…
August 5th, 2009 | 6:34 pm | #22
Dear Obama Administration:
re: Clarification requested
I’m unclear what you are asking? Information on fish oil as medicine, fish-based therapies, getting fish the vote so you guys can really make a joke (no Joker pun intended) of America? Those of us who stood guard within meters of the Soviet army know the consequences of the failed policies with which President Obama and his cabal are enamored. You have enraged millions of patriots by your crass grabbing of our freedoms, our futures, and our fortunes. So far, you have set race relations back decades, destroyed the financial markets, driven business and jobs out of the country, and infected the American system with the most poisonous and corrupt political practices ever. It is obvious from your tax returns that you feel no personal responsibility to do charitable works, your biggest tax deduction being the Democratic Black Caucus, a racist organization by name, and the next largest to Jeremiah Wright’s group, racist by deed. What was once done by family, church, and community when self-reliance failed, the government has misappropriated and turned into a vote purchasing system, an enabler of laziness, and a destroyer of lives and cities,. The generations of dependency should be ended, as should this progressive movement to “fundamentally change America”.
As for flagging someone to you commie rat bastards, I flag myself. You people are a danger to yourselves and to the nation.
ps my real name was used in message to flag@ WH
August 5th, 2009 | 6:40 pm | #23
[...] or at the very least explain what the White House would do with the information it collects. The Anchoress reminds us of when the Left went nuts over Bush/Cheney post-9/11 programs to combat [...]
August 5th, 2009 | 6:45 pm | #24
Does this mean I’m not going to be approved for back surgery?
White male check
Veteran check
Conservative check
P/O’d & vocal check
Funds groups check
Over 60 check
That would be yes, no surgery. Take the blue pill.
August 5th, 2009 | 7:02 pm | #25
[...] Obey-mian Representative Democracy [...]
August 5th, 2009 | 7:23 pm | #26
Dear Anchoress: Today I saw pictures of dear little girls being “married” to Hamas young men.
I could not bear even reading about this evil.
When the world’s evil gets too much for me, I pray loudly. Then scan Martha Stewart magazines and calming craft, clothing, and gardening sites just to see that there is a beautiful normal out there.
August 5th, 2009 | 7:23 pm | #27
Come on you guys and gals, you have to stop blaming your American President for all these misunderstanding! Have you not been reading SHS where Wesley told you about “Invasion of the body snatcher” and “IT” is true, while you sleep at night they simply need to take over your most powerful brain cells and then the rest will follow. I kid you not, “IT” is that easy and as a matter of fact, the Egyptians went through “IT” also and out of Love, they left a few of their Pyramids for U>>S, so check “IT” out for yourself! WHY DON’T YOU?
Give “IT” UP sinner vic! Wesley never said any such things cause “IT” was just you trying to put “Words” in his mouth and for the truth FOLKS, you simply need to look at pass history files. I hear that God’s Angels are keeping an eye on “First Things” so the file should still be intact until “The Judgement Day” so we’ll see you all there right guys? What’s five or six days of not sleeping cause the worst that will happen to you is that you might end UP in a mental hospital. Trust me “IT” is all worth “IT”
I hear ya! There’s nothing wrong with Victor, sinner vic and all his imaginary friends, “IT” is the rest of the world!
Come on folks, this guy doesn’t even know if he’s coming or going so who are we going to trust?
Peace
August 5th, 2009 | 7:23 pm | #28
I sent my name in and told them to come and get me because I have told everyone I know they are lying b@###rds. I guess I really need that reeducation camp.
August 5th, 2009 | 10:14 pm | #29
I’ll say this for you, Anchoress, you do a lot of research before you start a thread. But I’m curious as to why you feel you need to come up with labels like “Obammunist Propagandist”? I’m sure that’s fun to write, and OK, you feel like the guy’s moving us towards socialism, but why insult Linda Douglas as a propagandist? Do you speak that way of conservative political operatives?
Bush’s meeting with with Cindy Sheehan was smart politics. The Obama folks would probably be smart to ditch their efforts to paint teabaggers as dupes, but of the things thoee DNC talking points you criticize the media for echoing, which of the things they complain of do you condone, putting devil’s horns on pictures of elected officials, hanging members of Congress in effigy, questioning the President’s citizenship, or using Nazi SS symbols? And “look what the lefties did to Bush is two-wrongs-make-a-right logic. Obama told people to “talk to” and “argue with” friends and neighbors, not to disrupt public discussions. All those yellers had the opportunity to make statements and pose questions in due time like anyone else.
And I think Bush had good cause to ask us to report suspicious activity. Likewise, any government official of political operation has every right and reason to ask their supporters to report what they believe to be lies and misinformation. “Disobedient, tattletale,” Big Brother? Be serious. Try freedom of speech.
August 5th, 2009 | 10:21 pm | #30
Way to go, Ken – using some silly sexual slang really improves your credibility, buddy.
Read U.S.C. 552a and learn – Obama’s fishing scheme is not only asinine – it’s illegal.
August 5th, 2009 | 10:38 pm | #31
“Take back” free speech? You and your cohorts should get a life on this one. Nobody has threatened to take anyone else’s free speech away. Period. Obama has not. The people in the White House have not. The prominent Democrats in the Senate and House have not. Ordinary Democrats hither and yon, from sea to shining sea, and even up where Sarah Palin shoots moose, have not.
What’s more, you all know it.
There is not a single one of you who has any serious fear that just as you are sitting down to dinner tomorrow a team of armed men will burst in the door and take you away to a unknown prison cell because of anything you have said or written. Nor do you have any fear that it would happen to, say, Michelle Malkin.
Period.
That’s the sort of thing that happens to people in places where “free speech” is seriously threatened.
What you are doing is all grandstanding. It is all a bundle of chickenfeathers.
Someone once said [Oh, heavens me! I think it was Elanor Roosevelt!] that it is better to light a candle than curse the darkness. So I will make a sincere and positive wish that all your fairy godmothers offer each of you a two-week, all expenses paid, vacation in, say, Saudi Arabia, and that you take them up on it.
But if you do, be sure to leave that little gold cross you wear around your neck at home. It’s not legal to wear it, or even to possess it, there. Don’t take any Bibles with you, or rosaries, or any hard, or downloaded, copy of First Things. The very least that could happen to you is that the customs agents will confiscate them from your luggage or your person.
Remember that a government agency, The Committee To Promote Virtue and Prevent Vice, sends out both armed and unarmed people in public to ensure that Saudi citizens and expatriates living in the kingdom follow the Islamic mores. And always be aware that even as a tourist, the slightest mention of your religion in public could get you deported, jailed, or even judicially flogged.
And if you can manage to keep that low a personal profile for two weeks over there, and make it back, you will finally have some experience of what real “suppression of free speech” is like.
Now why is all this grandstanding taking place? Because most of you, most of the time, don’t have the interest and won’t make the effort to directly confront the issue of health care costs in a fashion such as this:
I don’t think there is anyone here who says – ala Rush, for instance – that the healthcare is fantastic and needs no adjusting. But the “rush” to do this resembles the “rush” to war that so many have since regretted, and which should certainly have taught us something about running headlong into uncharted waters. The “we’re going to do this whether you like it or not” attitude, and the sheer scope of this plan demands that we get better from our government than “we’re not even reading the bill, you people are just unreasonable,” and vague promises like “you can keep your doctor and your insurance” which run against all sense when upon consideration, companies facing 8% payroll penalties discussed in the legislation (page 149, I think) will quickly bail from offering anything but the “public option.”
This is perfectly reasonable and highly useful. You could actually begin to examine whether it was congruent with the facts and ask the person who wrote it what they would propose to “adjust” healthcare, since it isn’t fantastic. You could also ask them how long an “unrushed” attempt to address the problem should take and what else it would entail.
These are questions that presumably have real answers, even if the author might not have the answers ready at the moment.
And it actually appeared in this blog five posts back. But it took a new commentor who crossed the line on the comments section rules, and needed to be informed so, to get such a useful and sensible thing to appear here.
But then, of course, I suppose that trying to examine and question anything so sensible and relevant from the standpoint of disagreement with it has a “chilling effect” on free speech.
Or at least a chilling effect on saying anything that could be submitted to such pertinent questioning when you are unprepared to deal with it.
August 5th, 2009 | 10:45 pm | #32
Gerry, any sexual slang you find there was pure ignorance on my part.
And the Obama folks set up a Fight the Smears website during the campaign, requesting infor from supporters. How is this request any different? What is wrong with asking people for information? You may be able to make some legal case against it on a technicality, but that only evades the question. The spectre you want to evoke is of governmental retribution. And for that you lack evidence.
August 5th, 2009 | 11:21 pm | #33
Gina, I’m moved by your comments here. I don’t think Boxer’s mistaken that the insurance companies are ginning up some of this protest — why wouldn’t they? But if she implied that none of it is spontaneous, I think she owes many of her constituents an apology.
In regards to Palin, this isn’t the place to repost why I dislike her so much, but I hope you’ll try to believe that much of that media ridicule stems not from her politics, but from what people like myself, rightly or wrongly, perceive as character flaws. In other words, it’s not elite snoberry, not a reflection of what they think of people who fit her socio-economic profile — not about you.
August 6th, 2009 | 6:54 am | #34
Joseph, when all parties in the conversation are intellectually honest, your approach is the preferred approach.
However, when our legislators engage in the practice of intellectual dishonesty …
… like, say, throwing around a debunked talking point about “47 million uninsured” to justify installing a public option they say “promotes competition” (in an already-quite-competitive market) …
… a public option that is promoted without mentioning the significant risk of it gravitating into being the ONLY option for all 300 million of us …
… and any attempt to criticize it is summarily blown off by said legislator as “uninformed”, or tainted by “greed”, or is “manufactured by special interests” …
… your approach only gives that intellectual dishonesty a veneer of respectability, kind of like UN membership does for dictators.
It is not a lack, either of time or alternative solutions, that leads us to add righteous indignation to the brew for this tea.
It is the fact that those in power have shown us that are unwilling to seriously consider those alternatives, because they do not fit their over-arching ideology of statism … and because they consider themselves our intellectual superiors, and therefore see us as not worthy of THEIR time.
Yet they realize the nakedness of their position … and therefore it is THEY, not us, who are not taking the time for rational analysis here; instead, they know the time window to impose their will upon this nation is very narrow, and are acting accordingly.
When our legislators are willing to sit down and listen to us … indignation and all … then respond in an intellectually-honest manner, we will use your approach.
Until then — GAME ON!
August 6th, 2009 | 9:22 am | #35
Ken: “Gerry, any sexual slang you find there was pure ignorance on my part.”
“The Obama folks would probably be smart to ditch their efforts to paint teabaggers as dupes,”
Then why call us “teabaggers?” That is a disgusting sexual insult commonly used by the left. After I read that, I ditched the rest of your posts because it revealed to me what your real intent was.
Joseph Marshall: We are not (as of yet) been denied free speech to the point you’re saying; however, we are being subtly threatened. How? By the White House asking people to report us and our sites. That doesn’t scare you? Why the heck not? Even the most basic of history reveals these tactics by Stalin and Hitler. My husband works for the federal govt and has seen an email warning of repercussions if they don’t toe the line in political correctness. This is beyond what you would expect legally and it was very subtle but definite. You knew what was being said.
Does anyone remember reading Animal Farm?
August 6th, 2009 | 10:11 am | #36
[...] website access for people who wanted to pass information on suspicious activity to the FBI. As The Anchoress recalls, the Left acted as though Bush had called forth the Ghost of Orwell himself and created Big [...]
August 6th, 2009 | 10:51 am | #37
[...] promises and hypocrisy (as the Anchoress, one of the most respected bloggers on the internet, does here) I’m willing to wait longer and judge the administration on its longer-term [...]
August 6th, 2009 | 11:35 am | #38
Sue from Buffalo, I had no idea “teabaggers” was an insult, and I also have no idea what the sexual connotation of it would be. I must heard the word somewhere and had it lodged in my subconscious, because I have no memory of using it. If I’d reread what I’d written in haste, I would have changed it to tea partiers.
August 6th, 2009 | 11:37 am | #39
And it actually appeared in this blog five posts back. But it took a new commentor who crossed the line on the comments section rules, and needed to be informed so, to get such a useful and sensible thing to appear here.
I’m glad you think so. I’ve been saying the same thing on other sites where I interact with Obama supporters: “You have to think of this as Obama’s Iraq War.” Because that’s what is happening.
And it’s nice enough to suggest that we calmly, rationally offer counter-proposals to fix health care problems that actually do exist (versus the manufactured crisis the President keeps referring to). The Obama-Pelosi-Reid trifecta are not allowing that, however. Not only are they trying to bull their way into this, twisting arms and rushing rushing rushing to get something, anything resembling socialistic medicine into law where it will be difficult to dismantle it again, they are also explicitly shutting out and shouting down dissenters even in their own party. If anyone is using mob tactics, it is Obama and Pelosi.
This is a serious defect of leadership. I personally feel that we have no President now, in anything except the most technical sense. Our country is leaderless. What we have is a bureaucrat and an agitating political functionary trying to fundamentally change our institutions of government and the social fabric. My impression of Obama was confirmed when I read yesterday that he characterizes this debate as “the defining moment for our movement.” Our movement. Not our country. Not the half of the electorate who didn’t vote for him during an election when a lot of us were disgusted with the GOP and not pleased with our own candidate. Obama is only concerned about the radical ideological wing of his political circle.
Because of that, I wouldn’t follow this President anywhere, let alone into a “fundamental remaking of America,” as is his stated goal.
August 6th, 2009 | 12:01 pm | #40
Gina, in trying to rush a bill through, the Obama team is only doing what Bush did with the Patriot Act. You can argue that time was of the essence re: the Patriot Act and that we can afford to go slower on health care, but the political realities are the same — the longer the bill is debated, the more ways its opponents will find to object to it. Twisting arms is how bills get passed. You’re blaming Obama for living in the real world, for being practical.
August 6th, 2009 | 12:04 pm | #41
Gina, in trying to rush a bill through, the Obama team is only doing what Bush did with the Patriot Act.
Something Obama himself decried, that the left characterized as fascist?
So, add hypocrisy to my list of complaints.
[For that matter, we've listened to the press and the left beat their breasts for the past 7 years because "they didn't ask enough questions" in "the rush to war." Shouldn't we then, go out of our way to ask as many questions as we need to and NOT "rush" to pass legislation which will change a huge part of American life? -admin]
August 6th, 2009 | 12:08 pm | #42
I don’t remember the Left calling the rush fascist, just the bill. And only add “hypocrite” if you also opposed Bush for rushing. Otherwise apply it to . . .
August 6th, 2009 | 12:21 pm | #43
Ken –
IMO, there’s a vast difference between a campaign asking to be informed versus the White House asking to be informed. You truly see no difference?
Joseph – As every action begins with the thought, every big thing in government begins with a small thing. Outrage is the only proper response to the request for info on people with different opinions. One could point to the left getting outraged at things Bush did – that they were following the same principle. In all fairness, perhaps some of the things they ‘overreacted’ to stopped something worse from happening!
August 6th, 2009 | 12:45 pm | #44
JuliB, no I don’t, and if there is a difference, you ought to be able to say exactly what is is.
Here is the White House’s request in its entirety:
“There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.”
What exactly is sinister and un-American about that? They want to know what their opponents are saying so they can refute it. Is the party in the White House obliged to operate without the best possible information?
[Once again - and I hate myself for a sucker, for playing into your little web, Ken - You can't see what's sinister about people forwarding emails to the White House, and passing on snippets of "casual conversation" when they have NO IDEA what the WH plans to do with any of that information? Come one, Ken, you're being willfully obtuse at best and sneakily disingenuous at worst. I can't help but think if you'd find an identical statement from the Bush administration to be so benign and worry-free. I do wish you'd stop representing yourself as anything a talking-points-all-approving guy from the left, albeit a civil one!
Can you honestly say that Cornyn is unreasonable in his letter to the White House or that he is quite correct that Obama himself would be objecting to this idea if it had come from Bush? You like to make extremely fine and picayune distinctions (such as "I heard the left call the Patriot Act fascist but not the 'rush" to it'" - which is nonsense, btw, you know very well (you are too well-read not to) that they called all of it fascist, and ran around carrying swastikas (even American flags with swastikas for stars) but that's besides the point. Can you SEE the distinction between people asking the government for policy time, information and INPUT and the government asking to be informed on the citizens who have a right to ask for precisely those things? -admin]
August 6th, 2009 | 12:51 pm | #45
The difference?
The PATRIOT Act wasn’t going to lead to a wholesale, ideology-driven transformation of 300 million individual lives on a day-to-day, highly personal level … and unlike the medical profession and insurance companies, the primary targets of the PATRIOT Act were ACTIVELY TRYING TO KILL US AT THE TIME!
I find it so ironic that those who screamed the loudest about the PATRIOT Act and wiretaps … all logical extensions of Executive wartime powers, BTW … are among the most eager to sign over their health care to the government.
Compared to Obamacare, the PATRIOT Act reads like a Cato Institute position paper with respect to the potential for civil-liberties abuse.
And don’t give me that “keep your insurance” misinformation; send it to flag@whitehouse.gov instead …
… because the potential for “entitlement creep”, coupled with the same people facilitating the entitlement writing the regulations for the alternatives, makes it VERY probable that the “public option” will end up as the ONLY option … and all but irrevocably so.
IMO, too high a probability to take even a BABY step towards the public option.
And the above is true, no matter how pure the motives (he won’t be here to maintain his “guarantees” forever, even IF he wanted to), or flowery the rhetoric, of the President. He’s not the only one driving this train towards a cliff.
August 6th, 2009 | 12:54 pm | #46
As a Canadian I admire the passionate energy in which American politics is pursued. I think it is outrageous to set up “snitch sites” to catch those citizens who dare to question and disagree with the Health Care reorganization. If I was a US citizen, I would send my favourite fish recipes to the White House. Do you think that would be “fishy” enough to get me on the enemies’ list? Cheers.
August 6th, 2009 | 1:10 pm | #47
…”in trying to rush a bill through, the Obama team is only doing what Bush did with the Patriot Act.”
Well you know what? The Patriot Act stunk too. It doesn’t make this bill okay! And anyone who thinks it DOES is suffering from the strange “red, blue” delusion, in which he/she thinks that all “red” state people think one way, and all “blue” state people think another way. Most of us really do evaluate things separately, and we can dislike (or like) things on both sides.
August 6th, 2009 | 1:14 pm | #48
Ken: Sue from Buffalo, I had no idea “teabaggers” was an insult, and I also have no idea what the sexual connotation of it would be. I must heard the word somewhere and had it lodged in my subconscious, because I have no memory of using it. If I’d reread what I’d written in haste, I would have changed it to tea partiers.
I understand. Here is the definition.
[Edited to insert link. Point of order, I have had a couple of emails from angry people wondering why I tolerate Ken's maddening minutia and dubious distinctions in the comments section, and expressing deep doubt that Ken had no knowledge of the meaning of "teabagging," especially since Ken appears to be well-informed and much has been made of it at MSNBC, and left and right sites. I agree that Ken can seem annoyingly passive-aggressive sometimes but to a point, that's actually amusing to me; I only start to get antsy when he seems to be hijacking threads and acting like he's never asked the questions he asks, or received answers to same. At that point, I have to speak up and say, "move on, dude" because I can't stand being bored by repetition, and I hate feeling like I or my readers are simply being baited and toyed with.
That said, I am inclined to take Ken at his word that he did not know the meaning of "teabaggers;" I generally like to take everyone at their word, until their behavior demonstrates that I should not. Ken also asserts that he has "never read Alinsky" and I will take that on its face, as well, although -as I have said- he does seem to have a prodigious grasp of Alinskian tactics, particularly the "use the enemies own rules against them" part, which is cunning, since no one can ever wholly and perfectly live out their rules, mission statements, ideals, ideologies or creeds. Every exchange with Ken does eventually wind down to his wagging a finger at our failings as Christians, and yes, it's right out of the playbook. Still, I'm generally of a mind that as long as the rules are being followed, and no one is being sniffed at or condescended to (as we saw last night) there is no reason to ban a commenter. If you find Ken's numerous, relentless and tireless (and often disingenuous-seeming) challenges wearying, just do what I do when I reach that point and move on from them. Ken is perfectly welcome to comment here but when you've had enough, just walk away. And I will try better to take my own advice!
admin]
August 6th, 2009 | 1:22 pm | #49
Ken, just a tip. When debating Tea Party types about health care, don’t bring up the Patriot Act as an example of bad government. Many in the Tea Party movement had reactions to the Patriot Act ranging from mild concern to, on the more libertarian end, rabid opposition. Besides the fact that the constant “but Bush was evil too” refrain doesn’t get you very far, it betrays a misreading of the moment.
If I’m in a car with someone speeding and weaving in around traffic, I might say “hey slow down.” My protests might get a little louder as the velocity and recklessness increases. By the time I see the car careening towards the edge of a cliff, I’m probably going to be at full holler, and it doesn’t matter who’s in the driver’s seat.
That’s where the Tea Party movement is coming from. Many of us were upset about Bush’s increase of the deficit, about the phrase “compassionate conservatism” (which carries an implied slam of actual conservatism), his consolidation of power in the executive, and his prosecution of unnecessary wars. If you didn’t hear our complaints, perhaps it was because the screeching of the left drowned them out?
None of it excuses Obama.
[Gina, good point. I knew many on the right and many libertarians who vociferously denounced the Patriot Act specifically because they felt it gave too much power to the Executive branch and that "even if Bush is trustworthy with it, will another president abuse it?" I recall being not complete formed in my own opinion of the Patriot Act, though I did understand we needed something in place after the attack. Interestingly enough, (and to Ken's credit, in a way) I don't hear the left denouncing the Patriot Act anymore, although I do know some righties who hold their head about it, now. -admin]
August 6th, 2009 | 1:57 pm | #50
Late to the party but all I can think of is this bumper sticker I saw once -
“I want to die in my sleep like grandpa, not screaming and hollering like the other people in the car.”
August 6th, 2009 | 4:24 pm | #51
[...] The Anchoress Michelle Malkin Please Share and Enjoy =) [...]
August 6th, 2009 | 4:24 pm | #52
Ideas fer your next Town Hall Protest? Well….. If they’re gonna diss you for your lack of style, you might as well give them something to work with
…….
uhm…. I’m thinkin’ for the gents. Ladies go look at the band and boarder pages XD …….
August 6th, 2009 | 5:12 pm | #53
Rich Casebolt, both sides on the healtch cate debate are “ideology-driven” — obviously. I think your comparison of the two bills is simplistic.
Gail, no one argues that the Patriot Act somehow made this bill OK. The debate is about the tactics.
Gina, “Bush was evil too” is not at all the kind of thing I say. Thank you for explaining where you are politically, but I continue to think alarm is a poor excuse for rudeness. The same points can be made politely.
Sue, thanks for the definition. I think. I’m sorry I read that.
Anchoress, either I’m being obtuse or disengenuous, or you guys are imputing the worst posible motives to your political opponents, whom you view as enemies. I might be all wrong here, but I’ve always interpreted Paul’s “love believes all things” as “love wants to believe the best about the other guy.” I really did try to give Bush and Co. the benefit if the doubt. I very much dislike the way Cheney hoarded power, but I don’t fault his motives. I don’t think it was because he was fundamentally greedy for power, which is what you guys always say about any leftwing idea that gives the government more power. And, no, I don’t fault Cornyn for asking for clarification.
You guys chafe if I “preach” and I don’t blame you, and I don’t presume my own sin doesn’t stink in God’s eyes, but there are so many snarky posts here, I just think there’s a general lack of charity towards the Left, and — here’s my point — it seems to poison people’s interpretations of Obama’s motives and intentions. In the same way, you can’t bring yourself to belief I’m not using tactics, being passive-aggresive, etc. That’s just kinda sad. I come here looking for a conservative Christian perspective, because I think the country needs one, and what I see is usually indistinguishable for the angry conservatism I can hear on the radio. Call that preaching if you like; I’m just reporting what I see and telling you it disappoints me and, when I let it, makes me mad (my fault). But from my reception, polite as yours is, I do feel like I’m spoiling the party.
Re: who called what fascist, maybe you’re right. I don’t read leftwing blogs, and I’ve only been watching cable news for a couple of years. Yes Obama is open to the charge of hypocrisy sometimes, if you want to apply it. I just expect politicians to act like politicians, which is to be even more inconsistent than the rest of us, but often with what they believe is our good in mind. The government asking what untruths are being told and who’s telling them — isn’t that part of how pols campaign for office? You’re presuming the worst about this administration, but I say Occam’s Razor: they can use the info to know what to rebut and where.
[Ken, whoever said Christians can't be snarky? It would be lovely if we were all saints but then we really wouldn't need Christ, would we? DO you come here "looking for a conservative Christian perspective?" If so, why? To be honest, I'm not a conservative (as so many conservatives were quick to point out to me during several fights through the Bush years) - I am the JFK/Hubert Humphrey Classical Liberal that, as things have moved steadily leftward, is now defined as "conservative." Christians are like anyone else and they can get just as fed up and ansty as anyone else, and yeah, snarky. I have no problem with snark, btw, particularly if it is witty, which mine usually isn't very. Saying "I'm so disappointed" can be interpreted (perhaps you do not realize it) as a very passive-aggressive sort of statement. "I pass no judgment, but I'm sooooo disappointed." I think one of my Aunties used to do that!
I DO NOT assign 'the worst' motives to opposition - witness, I went out of my way to say I take people at their word until I learn otherwise. Actually, If I assumed "the worst" then I wouldn't have any left-wing commenters here, because I'd be busy kicking them out as happens on so many leftist sites and couple of the righty ones as well. If you've been watcing cable news for "a couple of years" you should have seen a bellyful of "fascist" ranting, already, and if you watch MSNBC at all, you certainly have. You'd also of course know what a teabagger was, too, so perhaps you don't want MSNBC. - admin]
August 6th, 2009 | 5:55 pm | #54
“Ken also asserts that he has “never read Alinsky” and I will take that on its face, as well, although -as I have said- he does seem to have a prodigious grasp of Alinskian tactics, particularly the “use the enemies own rules against them” part, which is cunning, since no one can ever wholly and perfectly live out their rules, mission statements, ideals, ideologies or creeds. Every exchange with Ken does eventually wind down to his wagging a finger at our failings as Christians, and yes, it’s right out of the playbook. ”
Anchoress, I have noticed that, too. That’s why in another thread, I called him on it, big time. It p!$$%@ me off that he was throwing “the rule book” right at us when he obviously has no grasp of what Christianity really is.
It reminded me of the Saducees’ trick question to Jesus on the topic of the Resurrection. His Answer fits here: “Ye err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God.”
-admin]
[I am not sure anyone has a perfect grasp of "what Christianity really is," which is why, sadly, we have so many branches of it!
August 6th, 2009 | 6:33 pm | #55
[...] is the other rebel Democrat! Report him to FLAG, [...]
August 6th, 2009 | 9:39 pm | #56
Newton, I’m not interested in arguing with you, but I am interested in what you thinks Christianity really is, since you think I’m missing it.
Anchoress, I don’t come expecting saints or people who never get mad at their government, and I come looking for a CC perspective because that’s what kind of magazine First Things is. But, yeah, classical liberal is the new conservatism, I guess, or part of it. So you got into a few fights with the real right (I did the same with the secular Left). . . how’s your nose feel now?
I’m sure my words can be read as passive-aggressiveness; on the other hand, it’s possible to be disappointed, to pass judgment on behavior but know good and well one has no right to pass judgment on people. I’ll bet you do it all the time.
“I DO NOT assign ‘the worst’ motives to opposition – witness, I went out of my way to say I take people at their word until I learn otherwise. Actually, If I assumed “the worst” then I wouldn’t have any left-wing commenters here, because I’d be busy kicking them out as happens on so many leftist sites and couple of the righty ones as well.”
There are folks here who apparently wish you would, but I’ll take you at your word. You’re pretty hard on Obama. though. I never expected to like or approve of everything thing he did in office, but I continue to see him as a good and decent man, no more hypocritical than anyone else trying to balance many goods, and certainly not the devious and arrogant caricature in those Joker and Inform-Obey posters you show.
And MSNBC is the only cable station I get. It’s probably where I heard the word ‘teabagger.” But — not to be sarcastic — it isn’t where I learned it’s supposedly a double-entendre. Really now — they’re not exactly given to pornographic metaphors there. Are you folks sure you’re not imagining this one?
["You're pretty hard on Obama. though. I never expected to like or approve of everything thing he did in office, but I continue to see him as a good and decent man, no more hypocritical than anyone else trying to balance many goods, and certainly not the devious and arrogant caricature in those Joker and Inform-Obey posters you show." - Gee, I could have said the same things about Bush, word for word, except I never went to anyone else's site, when they were showing pics of Bush in all manner of indecent roles, to tell them, "boy, you're awfully hard on Bush, he's just trying to keep the country safe; he's a decent man." I was sort of of the opinion that a blogger was entitled to his or her opinion, like anyone else. When I think it's appropriate to defend Obama or give him the benefit of a doubt, I do - notice I said I thought he could "roll" with the Joker poster as Bush did. If you look back to the pre-election cycle and even immediately post election, I was fairer than most to Obama, but he has done nothing as president to convince me that he hasn't pulled a bait-and-switch on us. As I wrote, he could stop this growing tension between left and right on health care right now, if he wanted to, but instead he seems intent on ratcheting things up. "Tell us about casual conversations; organize! I'll send Union thugs!"
And I wasn't the one who made the "obey" poster - there is a whole shop called the OBEY shop that sells Obama-loving propaganda. Beyond that I don't think it is "hard" on Obama to suggest that a president who wants informers and who seems to want everyone to just shut up and Obey to satirize him in just that way. This is politics; he's the president. If he (and his supporters) can't handle one-word satire based on their own political art, then they've got incredibly thin skins. I can't imagine how you'd react if (as happened on MSNBC) a newsreader referred to the president as "the monkey, there," as was done with Bush, so please, dry your tears, Ken. I'd say anything you see here is quite, quite different than putting devil's horns, or vampire fangs, or Hilter mustaches on him, as was done to Bush, or to portray him as a beast eating a human being. I think you like Obama better than I do, so maybe you're a little hyper-sensitive, because the stuff I post here is less-than-vicious. I didn't whine about the Devil horns on Bush, so maybe you could stop whining about people using Obama's own propaganda set-pieces against him, a little?
Now, if MSNBC is the "only" cable news you get, and you had no idea that teabagger was pornographic, and you think we're all imagining it, then I guess you must have missed it when Anderson Cooper made a classic-non-apologyapology for the adolescent, sniggering behavior of MSNBC in starting the "teabagger" narrative, and I guess you didn't know what Rachel, David and the rest were giggling about when the went "teabagger" night after night?. They also went porno a few weeks ago talking a "pearl necklaces." I don't even WATCH tv, and I know about that, so I can't imagine how you do not know these things. -admin]
August 7th, 2009 | 9:04 am | #57
[...] The Anchoress: Anyone recall how, after 9/11 -after we’d been attacked in NYC and DC- the Bush Administration said: “If you see anything suspicious, you ought to report it,” causing conniptions on the left? How dare the Bushies ask people to snitch for security reasons! Now, for mere policy, that has become an acceptable, “if you see/hear anything disobedient, be the tattletale.” [...]
August 7th, 2009 | 12:45 pm | #58
Anchoress, I’ll try to be brief, because I’m getting tired of this too.
Of course bloggers are entitled to their opinions like anyone else, but when they enable comments, they’re asking for other people’s opinions about what they’ve written or written about. And you don’t like my “daily finger wagging,” but what are most off your comments about Obama? Granted that you’ve encourage peaceful protest, but then you call certain people on the other side thugs and link to a site that calls them goons. (Meanwhile, you ask Obama to sue for peace). Aren’t your words just as warlike (and aren’t you just as determined as they are, as if there were something wrong with that)? You repeat the unfounded insult that Obama and Co. “can’t handle” sarcasm, and write as if I complained that the caricature is vicious when I’ve only said it’s inacurate and its inaccuracy stems presuming the worst about Obama’s motives. You say you started out giving Obama the benefit of the doubt, but now you blame him for playing politics. Who doesn’t play politics in service of their ideals?
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact