Why is it that when liberals protest at public venues, it’s practicing their Constitutional right to free speech; but when conservatives do it, they’re an “angry mob?” Wait, they’re not just an angry mob, they’re a “well-funded” and a carefully "orchestrated" mob to boot. Haven’t we all lost count of how many times a conservative candidate is accused of ties to "wealthy special interest groups"? If a liberal doesn’t have newsworthy info on a candidate, they can always return to their default response that he must "have strong corporate backers.”
And yes, this has occurred many times here in Wisconsin too. For instance, when “mommy advocate” Rose Fernandez ran for DPI, she was accused by liberal bloggers for nefarious connections to wealthy corporate backers - an issue I took the personal liberty to dismantle in March. Below is a screenshot of a local blog that served as the most involved advocate of this lie.
And while they were making their case, they conveniently glossed over a rather obvious fact that Tony Evers was backed by the wealthiest and most influential lobbyist group of them all – the WEAC. The WEAC not only gave Evers the maximum contribution allowable under law, but they spent over $200,000 on television and radio ads in key districts of Wisconsin.
And after Evers won the election, the contribution tally was released. Low and behold, we find that Rose Fernandez had relatively few political connections and wasn’t backed by powerful interest groups after all. On the contrary, her campaign funding was deficient. And yet, I’m still waiting for the apology of Cory Liebmann for lying about Rose Fernandez and muddying up her name on his blog. And for what I might ask? Rose is one of the sweetest ladies I've ever met. (And this is not just a platitude, I truly mean it.)
Unfortunately, this “corporate backing” tactic is now being applied to ordinary citizens frustrated with the attempt in Congress to spend more of their money on supposed “health care reform.” According to the Hill, DNC spokesperson Brad Woodhouse blasted the GOP for enabling special interest groups to incite angry mobs at these town hall events. Brad Woodhouse described the situation like this:
"These mobs are bussed in by well funded, highly organized groups run by Republican operatives and funded by the special interests who are desperately trying to stop the agenda for change the President was elected to bring to Washington. Despite the headline grabbing nature of these angry mobs and their disruptions of events, they are not reflective of where the American people are on the issues - or the hundreds of thousands of thoughtful discussions taking place around kitchen tables, water coolers and in homes."
The idea, here, is to discredit the public outcry against the “public option” either to fire up counter-resistance groups (AFL-CIO), or to reassure our representatives that they can vote "yea" for the bill without serious drawbacks. What is completely dumbfounding is that the DNC actually believes that the anger displayed at these listening sessions does not represent the American people. Do they follow the polls?
Current Rasmussen polls show that 80% of those with health care insurance rate their health care as good or excellent. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that people want reform within the current framework of the private insurance industry rather than the government seizing complete control.
Rasmussen also reports that a little more than 20% are willing to pay more taxes for universal coverage. Thus, only a small minority are willing to pay the extra trillion dollars for what democrats are calling real reform. If Republicans were smart, they would make it clear that Obamacare will increase their tax burden, not lower the costs of health care.
The math is not difficult to understand - even for the DNC. The public outcry is not a well-funded protest by republican operatives, nor is it a manufactured event by rightwing tea party organizers - at least not yet. These are people who are finding out that H.R. 3200 has many questionable provisions that grants the government too much intrusion into our lives and too much power over our health care. Why else are President Obama's approval ratings on a steady decline? Of those not affiliated with any political party, 22% strongly approve of Obama's performance while 40% strongly disapprove.
Bluedog Democrats are not in a good situation either. If they don’t vote for the bill, they strain relationships with their democrat colleagues, some of which are powerful people. If they vote for the bill (essentially calling the bluff of their angry constituents), they are unlikely to stay in office long enough to rectify their mistake.
Let's be clear about something. These citizens caught on video scolding their representatives are being uncivil and disrespectful. However, they feel that this is the only way to make their message resoundingly clear. A harsh and emotive confrontation is much more likely to leave a lasting impression with their representatives than a civil gathering where Senators and Congressmen robotically read from 3X5 cards drafted by Pelosi. And Pelosi isn't the most popular figure in Congress either. Those with a very unfavorable view of Nancy Pelosi are at 45% while those with a very favorable view of her are at just 9%. She's not the perfect person to by leading the charge against angry citizens.
Expect the media and liberal bloggers to be airing examples of conservative extremists in order to shortchange a growing movement. On one website already, we have a photo of a protester at a rally holding up a sign of a swastika with Obama’s name on it. We have no idea if the person is a liberal pretending to be a conservative trying to discredit a protest (which has happened during some McCain rallies caught on Youtube) or just a conservative who really believes that Obama is running the beginnings of a Nazi-ish government. Either way, it’s of no importance. No political group is without its own crazies. Have we already forgotten about liberals adorning Bush posters with swastikas and Hitler mustaches? Randy in Richmond, over at Fairly Conservative, does a good job sharing some light on how liberals apparently have a short term memory about their own extremism.
Ultimately, the American people have to decide either to accept or reject the false dichotomy that corporate America is responsible for every public uprising to government expansionism. If liberals are successful at dubbing these town hall events as manufactured protests by special interest groups, then they may be handing over control of Congress to Republicans in the next election. Here is a point to consider. The last week of July marked the highest support for Republicans in two years, averaging a 5 point lead on Democrats. If Democrats were smart, they would keep an ear to the ground and pay close attention to the polls.