The web is buzzing about violence and vandalism directed at Democrats.
The vandalism began last weekend, when the House debated the health bill for final passage. In Wichita, someone broke the window of a county Democratic Party headquarters with a brick that had “No to Obama” and “No ObamyCare” written on it. Lyndsey Stauble, executive director of the Sedgwick County Democratic Party, said she went to work Saturday morning to clean up the shattered glass around her desk.
… Over the next 24 hours, thrown bricks shattered the glass doors and windows of party headquarters from Rochester, N.Y., to Cincinnati. A propane gas line at the Charlottesville home of Rep. Tom Perriello’s brother was severed Tuesday after a self-identified “tea party” activist posted what he believed to be the Virginia Democrat’s address on a Web site and urged opponents to “drop by” to convey their opposition to his yes vote on the health bill.
A brick was thrown through the Niagara Falls district office of Rep. Louise M. Slaughter (D-N.Y.), who also received a threatening voice-mail message referring to sniper attacks. The front door to the Tucson district office of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) was shattered. And Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), whose last-minute negotiations to bar federal funding of abortion helped secure the bill’s passage, received a fax with a drawing of a noose and an anonymous voice mail saying: “You’re dead. We know where you live. We’ll get you.”
In Washington on Wednesday, the attacks were roundly condemned, with some congressional leaders wondering whether the long fight over health care had unleashed an ugly dimension to the modern political discourse.
“If we fail to learn the lessons of our history, we are bound to repeat them,” said House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.). “I think all of us learned some great lessons from the ’60s and ’70s, and there are some lessons that none of us want to repeat, but one thing we know, as Steny Hoyer said, ‘Silence is consent.’ ”
House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) called the incidents unacceptable.
“I know many Americans are angry over this health-care bill, and that Washington Democrats just aren’t listening,” Boehner told Fox News Channel. “But, as I’ve said, violence and threats are unacceptable. That’s not the American way. We need to take that anger and channel it into positive change. Call your congressman, go out and register people to vote, go volunteer on a political campaign, make your voice heard — but let’s do it the right way.”
To start with, Boehner is absolutely right. These attacks are unacceptable, and if the perpetrators are caught, they should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
However, there are several interesting things that went floating through my head when I read the MSM’s take about these incidents.
First, it’s disturbing that the MSM has automatically shifted into the “all-righties-are-nutjobs” meme. It’s to be expected, of course, but it’s simply wrong, wrong, wrong. The media loves the crazy-right-wingers angle, but rarely do you ever hear about the violence you see regularly on the left side of the aisle. Liberals tend to resort to violence much more often than conservatives do. Conservative bloggers have already started rounding up the evidence to prove this point. Sister Toldjah eviscerates the media and provides several examples of lefty violence. John McCormack notes that not too long ago, Stupak was getting death threats from supporters of the Obamacare bill, not opponents. Newsbusters examines the media’s myth of right-wing violence, and provides more examples of lefty violence — including a liberal who bit off a conservatives finger, Hummer dealerships that were burned down, SEIU union thugs who beat a black conservative man, liberal threats to bomb the 2008 Republican National Convention, and more. Glenn Reynolds also remembers a lot of violence being directed towards conservatives and Republicans here. Remember the bullet-ridden Bush-Cheney headquarters? Vandalized GOP offices? And who can forget the hatred spewed onto conservative women? Michelle Malkin is practically an expert in this category, although she’s by far not alone. Being conservative and having a vagina means that you are worse than Bushitler McChimpyhalliburton to the left. Women are supposed to be liberal, and they’re all supposed to be in love with abortion. Express anything to the contrary, and you must be destroyed — or, at the very least, reduced to a some kind of crude sexual slave to Republican men.
The point of all this is, violence is just as prevalent on the left as it is on the right. At least with conservatives and tea parties, the violent wackos are just a few lone nutjobs that are immediately denounced by practically everyone else in the movement. With liberals, the violence is welcomed and applauded if it’s even mentioned at all. Most of the time, there’s just silence, and there’s never a denunciation of the violence from liberal leaders.
When you think about all of this, can Democrats really afford to make such a big drama out of this? These incidents are wrong, and like I said, the people responsible should be held accountable to the fullest extent. But perhaps Democrats should examine and deal with the amount of violence in their own party before they start looking to condemn the few instances in ours.
There was one other thing that I kept thinking over and over again when I heard about these incidents. The Revolutionary War wasn’t fought for much more than this. The American people are angry — furious, in fact. They’ve been steadily fighting this bill for the past year. They’ve made their voices heard. It couldn’t have been more obvious if it had bit the Democrats on their collective noses. Yet Democrats passed it anyways. They completely ignored the will of the constituents they are elected to serve. Did they really expect that there would be no consequences? Actions bring results, and they aren’t always good. You take an angry populace who is begging you to listen to them, and then do the exact opposite of what they want, and you’re just asking for trouble. It’s to be expected that a few people are going to go off the deep end. And yes, those people should be punished. But come on, Dems — you gotta realize, you reap what you sow. Not too long ago, citizens of the British empire were overtaxed and living under tyranny. It didn’t take much more of a spark to set off a war. Democrats seem to be emulating the British tyranny now. Another revolution isn’t the answer, but like I said — actions have consequences. You cannot trample the rights of the American people without some pushback.
This is a lesson to be learned by Democrats, not by tea partiers or conservatives or Republicans. They wrought this hell upon the country, and eventually, they’re going to have to pay… although hopefully, it will be in a non-violent manner which consists of voting their sorry asses out of office in November.
UPDATE:
I had originally cross-posted this at the Green Room at Hot Air. It was removed because apparently what I wrote comes across like I am condoning the violence and the attacks. I just want to be clear: this is not the message I am trying to convey. I also don’t believe that secession or revolution is the best course of action, and frankly, I get irritated when people talk about it as if it is a viable option. To me, that’s a huge overreaction. Yes, our representatives in Washington are not representing us well. That doesn’t mean that it’s time to overthrow the government. We still have the ability to vote them out in November. When the day comes where we can’t vote out our congressmen or our president, well, then we can talk about the possibility of revolution. Clearly, we are far from that. There were just a few points I was trying to make. One, that Republicans suffer the same violence and vandalism that Democrats do, if not worse. Two, that Democrats were making a mountain out of a molehill. Three, that the Revolutionary War happened because of a tyrannical, oppressive government. The British were sending combat troops into colonial towns and dissolving local governments; militias were established because of this. While our current situation is not nearly as dire, we are being faced with a governing majority — the Democrats — who are marching in lockstep towards tyranny. Fourth and finally, that Democrats have to accept that actions do have consequences. It doesn’t excuse the violence, but it is still the truth. I don’t mean that they deserve it or even should have expected it — simply that they had to realize there would be negative repercussions if they passed Obamacare against the will of the people. I encourage these actions when they are legal — getting involved in tea parties, volunteering with your local GOP, helping register people to vote, calling or writing your congressman, etc. Illegal activities, such as throwing bricks through a window, are WRONG. There is no excuse and the people responsible should be punished. I never intended to convey a different message, which is why I repeated my belief that the offenders should be punished repeatedly throughout the article.
I hope this clears up my intentions and my thoughts in this piece.
Again, I concur with this post.
The Green Room version was taken down, so I will reiterate. >> The Founders were no doubt regarded as madmen and criminals by some during the 1770s, but, ultimately, history has vindicated them as reasonable, rational men who saw tyranny and said “This ends now”.
To be perfectly honest, I dread the coming storm. I am just trying to warn my friends and family so they aren’t taken by surprise when things go insane. I don’t quite know what to do, other than pray – a lot – and enjoy the day.
Matthew 6:34 – have a nice day, everyone.
Not cross-posted at the green room anymore, Cassy. Ed and AP decided that the subject matter was too incendiary, and the post was completely removed.
No longer in the Green Room @ HotAir…..
Y’know, I sympathize with having a sense of decorum, but somehow I don’t see running around going, “No Reichstag fires! No Reichstag fires!” as actually doing anything to avoid having a Reichstag fire. Quite the contrary, in fact — the people who actually set the fire are likely to be encouraged.
A post earlier in the morning, by Howard Portnoy, I believe, entitled “what did the democrats expect?”. I logged in to post on it, and shortly afterwards, it was gone.
Allahpundit mentioned that we do have representation in Congress, which makes the entire scenario we have now quite unlike 1776, except for several things which I am sure we are all aware of in our hearts.
#1: Democrats operate by cheating.
#2: Republicans won’t have the gall to actually overturn Obamacare.
#3: Our ‘representatives’ are the actual problem.
Half the nation believes we ought repeal Obamacare. That’s great!
What about the other half?
More prayer is required.
Hmmm, I somehow deleted half my post. I was mentioning that Mr. Portnoy wrote an article on a similar topic to Mz. Fiano’s earlier this morning, and that it included the word ‘revolution’.
I rather expect that the frequency of ‘moderations’ on HotAir will continue to spike in the coming weeks, and do little but frustrate people already frustrated to begin with.
Again, more prayer is required.
As I had commented on Green Room post:
While we enjoy the rule of law, all should abide by it equally. For Democrats to be whinging about threats and vandalism at this point is just like a kid that slaps her brother and then runs behind her mom.
I had to digest this post first before I replied. This may be lengthy, so my apologies in advance.
First of all, Boehner is wrong. If it were so simple as registering and voting, we wouldn’t exactly be in this mess to begin with. The politicians are all utter contemptable crooks and it’s getting worse. They promise the world, people vote for them and they then proceed to do the exact opposite of what the people want them to do. Now, to be fair, we the people failed in our part to watch them. When people decide that football games or Dancing with the Stars is more important than participating in “boring” politics, then it’s hardly surprising that this is the end result.
I have mixed feelings about all of this. While I don’t condone the violence at this time, I understand it. People are pissed. It seems that the government has slowly outmaneuvered us into the position we now face. And to be honest, this whole thing smacks of a giant Alinsky play. Pick an opponent, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it. Well, guess what folks, it’s working (unfortunately). The conservatives have been maneuvered into a position where if they do nothing, then we get steady doses of socialism. If we play the legal game, then we’re a bunch of big “meanies” standing in the way of history. If we go further than that, then we’re all a bunch of nutjobs who want to tear the country apart. Any way you look at it, it doesn’t look good.
I don’t really see a whole lot to be gained by legal recourse. I hope I’m wrong. I really do. I have a really bad feeling that we’ll elect a bunch of Republicans in November, they’ll do the typical song and dance that they’ve seemed to have done all this past decade and do absolutely nothing of substance when they get in. We’ll see. However, John Cornyn’s comments the other day don’t exactly reassure me.
So if that totally fails, then the only two options I can see is either sitting idly by and watch this country slowly turn socialist or worse and “getting the guns out.” Neither is a fantastic option.
The Democrats are betting that seven months will be enough time for the anger to subside, while they go (along with some Republicans) on their merry way of re-shaping this country. Now that the health care fight is (more or less) over, you can bet that they’ll start moving on cap and trade, amnesty, etc. Amnesty will be a really big one for them because of the potential voting swing for them. So the question becomes: how many Americans are angered by all this? Do they even vote? Do they even care? I mean, we know lots of people are, but has anyone actually estimated the numbers? That would help. We know that conservatives totally oppose this and we also know that liberals are all for this. But what about the rest? That, to me, is the big question.
Which leads me to the last option. The “gun-nut” one. First of all, is this even an option? Yes, it sounds all big and bad, but has anyone really thought of the implications of such a course of action? Once that line is crossed, there’s no turning back. That’s probably the most frightening thing about it. This country will never be the same (and it may not be regardless of what happens). And I can guarantee you that should this option be exercised by people, it’ll lead to martial law. There’s no way around it. Forget posse comitatus. The military will clamp down on armed dissent very quickly. For those who think that the army or the marines would not fire on their own citizens, remember this: they swore an oath to defend the Constitution against enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC. Make no mistake, they will do their duty regardless of what their opinions are on the subject. The very ones who are our greatest protectors will most likely wind up being our greatest oppressors.
The guns and ammo thing are not going to be much use against Apache gunships, Abrams and Predators (and then you have the elite snipers). If you need examples of this stuff in action, go to any Youtube video showing how our military has taken out fighters and compounds in Iraq in Afghanistan. In virtually every video, the poor stupid bastards didn’t even know they were being targeted.
Then there’s the issue of how out of hand it would get. Once you have people running around with guns, this would wind up being not only ideological, but most likely ethnic as well. In short, this could become one hell of a gigantic bloody mess.
To say that we need to proceed cautiously is an understatement.
Unfortunately, Mat, I tend to agree.
There’s a bit of a difference between a powderkeg musket and a M1 Abrams tank.
Not to mention, that in today’s age, a Civil War would almost guarantee invasion by a foreign power if our militaries are focused inward.
I liked Victor Davis Hanson’s comment (echoed by others) that the Left side of the house started this with some of the insane rhetoric around George W. Bush. Now they’re shocked that it’s turning around on them. Violence begets violence, and no matter where it originated, it’s wrong.
Cassie, you hit the nail on the head here. I am afraid some of the folks at HA lack the guts now to call it like it is. I doubt this would be the case if MM still was the boss, having been the target of so much hatred and violent wishes from the left.
Liberals commit ACTUAL acts of violence. They get away with it and are heralded as heroes among their ranks. Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn were actual TERRORISTS and they are on the government payroll.
Liberals make movies and write books about “hypothetical” assassinations of Republicans and they get away with it.
They make not-too veiled threats of violence if labor negotiations don’t go their way. They engage in riots when seemingly race-related cases don’t turn out to their liking.
They openly cheer the deaths or near deaths of political opponents.
Liberals openly support our enemies during wartime and undermine support for the war and our allies. Ann Coulter was not engaging in hyperbole when she wrote “Treason.”
Liberals LOVE feeling like victims. The funniest part of their delusion of grandeur is that if we really were the “Nazis” they say we are, they wouldn’t survive the accusation. The continuation of their respiration and heartbeat doesn’t shake them from the frothing lunacy of their viewpoints which are 180 degrees from reality.
a Civil War would almost guarantee invasion by a foreign power
By…whom?
France wouldn’t want to. Nor would England. Most of the rest of the world can’t project power very far from their shores – yeah, China, I’m looking at you. Canada? at most, they’d reinforce the Mounties at the border, and track down any illegal crossings as best they can.
Russia? they had problems with Afghanistan, directly across their border from them. You think they’ll succeed a continent away? they would be able to seize parts of Alaska, but much more than that and they’ll be overreaching.
Mexico? the cartels are already doing cross-border shenanigans. Perhaps an actual state of armed conflict will give the US border states the gumption to shoot the cartel’s men.
Darth Aggie,
I would agree. Invasion wouldn’t be an issue (NATO/EU has no force projection whatsoever). But all of the countries you mentioned would definitely take the opportunity to strengthen their own positions while we tore ourselves apart. China would definitely make a go at Taiwan, North Korea would probably get more aggressive with South Korea, Iran would become much more belligerent with Iraq, and the Taliban would retake Afghanistan and do a lot of damage in Pakistan. I post-Civil War outcome, regardless of who would “win” (would anyone really win?) would see a much different outside world than that one we’re used to.
I agree with the points about the military, and I would also add various law enforcement agencies as well. They would operate under the often quoted principle “the law is the law”. Even if the military or portions of it refused to act, the numbers could easily be made up. There’s the proposed Civilian Security Service, who numbers would be swelled by additional volunteers, recruitment of gangs, and emptying the prisons. Billionares such as George Soros would hire mercenaries, and they don’t care who they kill as long as they are paid. Also there would no doubt be UN Peacekeepers, which relates to the invasion angle. No one nation may be able to project its power, but a combined force could. How many millions around the world would volunteer for the chance to kill Americans? Mexico and Canada would offer themselves as staging areas, in the case of Mexico in return for “regaining” their “lost” terriories in the West. A united America could fight off the world, a divided America could not.
Ok, perhaps I’ve been reading too much speculative fiction. ;
My main concern would have been Russia and China, but D.A. sort of shot that down…
I would say Nukes could be an issue, but they’d still be an issue NOW anyway.
Josh,
I think Russia and China would be content to sit back and watch us fall apart. A divided America would be the best thing for them. They wouldn’t need to get involved.
Conankong,
The proposed civilian security service is actually already in the works. It was part of that whole volunteer program law that Congress passed last year. Look up National Service Reserve Corps and read that part in the bill (heck you can see that part in Google). That sounds close to the “internal security force” that Obama was proposing earlier. I mean, “emergencies” could mean practically anything.
Hot Air has lost their nerve.
If anyone has read the history before the Revolutionary War, it was our treatment of the Tax-Collectors that drew the King’s ire. The Health-Care bill doesn’t provide for any money for new Doctors or any college incentives to become one. What it does is expand the IRS by 16,000 agents. Wait and see when what happens when people like me can’t afford the mandate or the penalty. That’s when the real violence will begin. With A VAT and other taxes being bantered as the ONLY way out this mess, I seriously doubt a positive future is ahead of us.
19 Comments