Right-Wing Thugs Disrupt Health Care Town Halls
Disruption is emerging as the Right's method of choice for fighting health care reform as the August recess and the ground war for reform begin. Weekend town hall meetings in Philadelphia and Austin were both disrupted by shouting bands of the same basic wingnut type we saw at McCain-Palin rallies in 2008 and at the teabagging events of earlier this year. As previously, video from these events clearly demonstrates just how crazy the grassroots Right has become.
At the Austin event Aug. 1 with Democratic Congressman Lloyd Doggett (pictured here, see video), the usual suspects showed up shouting "Just Say No" and waving signs that included the usual symbols of communism and fascism worked into statements against "socialized" health care, in addition to an image of Doggett as Satan. The protestors' continued shouting throughout the event was clearly an effort to disrupt it and to prevent any other voices being heard. The same was the case at an Aug. 2 event in Philadelphia with Republican-turned-Democratic Senator Arlen Specter and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius (see video). Here, wingnuts with bumber stickers on their heads shouted down speakers to the clear annoyance of others around them trying to listen. One woman held up a copy of the New American Bible and said, "This is the only truth," as though that were somehow an argument against health care reform.
These disruptive actions by Righties are not just an attack on health care reform but also an attack on democracy and open debate, since their express aim is to silence those with whom they disagree. The "me-first" mentality of anti-health care protestors was exemplified by one Carol O'Brien at the Philadelphia event, who told the Philadelphia Inquirer that extending health care coverage to 47 million uninsured Americans might mean that she would no longer be first in line at the doctor. "I don't want to have to wait for care," O'Brien said, clearly unconcerned about the amount of waiting others might have to endure without health care reform. Too bad Carol O'Brien is an unwitting stooge for an insurance industry that would deny care to her just as happily as she would deny it to others.
On the one hand I would hope that, in a public forum such as this, some rules of order might be enforced to prevent disruption and allow all voices to be heard; and that those who insist on disrupting could simply be removed just as they would be be removed from any other public forum. On the other hand I can't help seeing behavior such as this as an opportunity for progressives to demonstrate the depths of irrationality to which the Right has sunk. Good use was made of video from McCain-Palin events demonstrating all sorts of ugly behavior, and good use has been made of video showing similar behavior at teabagging events. As the long, hot month of August progresses I would only expect the wingnuts to get uglier and more brazen, and if they are going to insist on behaving this way we might as well make sure everyone sees the videos.
(See also: Huffington Post, Think Progress, TPM)
Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com
Eades - Several decades ago, in Little Rock, Arkansas, a little black girl, accompanied by National Guard troops, marched down a sidewalk thronged by crowds of white adults. The girl was afraid but determined. The adults were filled with venomous anger - the swore, they spit, and they shouted insult after insult in an attempt to disrupt this landmark moment in the desgregation of American schools.
Those shouts were seen and heard throughout America's living rooms. Along with a number of other dramatic moments in our racial drama, those shouts and insults helped seal the fate of school segregation as an official policy of any state or locality in the nation.
I was pleased to see the videos you linked to. They too will help us in our effort to promote healthcare reform that offers all Americans affordable quality care.
I recently had a similar experience. My congressional district is mostly affluent, white, and Republican - I would be surprised if many were deprived of health insurance. I attended a town hall meeting on health care organized by our Congressman, a conservative Republican, who regurgitated the standard talking points of reform opponents. When the floor was open to the audience, many stood up in turn to issue similar dogmatic pronouncements about the evils of a government takeover, rationing, taxes, and the like. Few facts were offered.
As it happened, I was the last to reach the microphone. I started with my credentials in the medical field (including cancer research), and I could tell the audience was warming up to me. I then mentioned that if one looked at all the other industrialized democracies, each surpassed us. I said, "Each covers more citizens. Each accomplishes this at far lower cost...". And then I said, "Each of these nations achieves better health outcomes..." Before I finished the statement, the hall exploded with a chorus of boos, jeers, and catcalls not unlike those in the videos. They continued for about 30 seconds, and only began to subside when the Congressman said, "Let him finish."
Once more, I said, "Each achieves better health outcomes" and the jeering erupted again. When it finally subsided, I made the point I tried to express earlier - "Each achieves better health outcomes as measured by the standard WHO criteria of life expectancy and infant mortality".
After a minute of additional explanation, I finished, and the meeting ended. At that point, several audience members came to thank me for the evidence I provided.
I was pleased that I had perhaps been able to offer evidence that might have been persuasive to any open-minded members of the audience, if they indeed existed. At the same moment, however, it struck me that if my point of view favorably affected anyone there, its most eloquent expression came not from me, but from the jeering audience. It has always been my impression that if one side says, "I have something to say that I think is important", and the other side says, "We're not going to let you say it", the side with something to say comes away the winner. In these debates facts matter, but sometimes the most convincing evidence that the facts are on your side in the attempt of others to keep you from revealing them.
August 3, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm certain thinking people appreciate what you said. Giving numerous factual examples of other countries with better healthcare services will reach those people. But the masses are reacting to the agitators who appears stronger. The tribal dynamic that the agitators stomped on you provokes fear in the weak and they prefer the security of the powerful agitators to the truth of your statements of fact. We need to reach the masses and open their eyes to the truth of what you said and the anti-democratic behavior of the agitators. They do not want freedom to speak, they want freedom to prevent your speech. You speak eloquently, honestly and rationally, which is how we know we are on the right path, but we need to have more then truth on our side. We need a display of strength to encourage the weak to see we can succeed. Right now, from the videos. it appears the mobs are running the show. Bush videos portrayed the Right running the show. Agitators were removed, or precluded.
August 4, 2009 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
These Town Halls Gone Wild are managed by the Brooks Brothers Rioters but acted on by the Pitchfork and Peroxide Crowd.
Scary...
August 3, 2009 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mark this is all over cable today. It is a vast right wing conspiracy. No kidding.
Funding is coming from Birchers, no taxers, gold standard nuts, secessionists.....
I have no answer to this. Maybe the townhall model is dead as far as national politics. w and dicky made you sign loyalty oaths to get in.
August 3, 2009 7:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, this may not be THE ANSWER, but check out this post from Daily Kos about how progressive organizers handled the tea-bag crowd at one townhall event, apparently with good results:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/8/4/761608/-Tea-Baggers-FAIL-to-disrupt-Health-Care-meeting,-lessons-shared.
August 4, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
I've said as much before, but at this point, the most obnoxious amongst the naysayers have many deeper, darker complaints beyond those of a government supported health plan.
Speaking from experience, ignoring these types will simply not work as it relates to the perception of the court of public opinion that is ultimately communicated to the masses. We've got to get out there--in the media, in town halls and in the streets and strongly advocate our position. It doesn't mean we employ the same dubious tactics, but passively hoping the cream will surely rise to the top is no longer a practical approach towards the change that we seek.
August 3, 2009 9:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wingnuts are GOING to get more brazen and uglier?
GOING to get? How about 8 years of "brazen and ugly" and a dead guard at the Holocaust museum and a dead doctor gunned down in a church? GOING TO GET?
This is what you get when you ignore, as Obama is doing and all his Demmy buddies, the darkness and
crime of the past 8 years. For every day they decide to "move forward" and justice is not served, they empower these freaks more and more and more. We MUST tell Obama and our "representatives" ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Prosecute the crimes of the Bush years and stop the tacit empowering of the dangerous and radical right wing NOW by "moving forward." This is just utter and total bullshit.
It is THEIR RESPONSIBLITY TO ENFORCE THE LAW. SO DO IT. CALL THEM WRITE THEM AND TELL THEM TO DO IT AND DO IT NOW.
August 3, 2009 10:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Life is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" - (written by some English guy).
I think the sound and fury will die down when the media tire of it. I would be surprised if it has long term repercussions. On the other hand, expression of personal opinions by individual voters, not organized groups, will resonate with legislators - at town halls, and via fax, phone, or email. Even demonstrations may have some effect is they are non-disruptive.
August 3, 2009 11:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fred,
You seem to be a sensible person, but have you forgotten the hysterics and vitriol preceeding the Iraq war? It is the reason we invaded Iraq. No logical argument in opposition to the proposed war was allowed. Anyone voicing an opposing opinion was branded a traitor and shouted down by the mob. Remember? The media ate up the Bush propaganda and reported it as fact (much as they are doing with health care reform now). Back then, even I could see that they were spewing bullshit and I have no inside connections. Why wouldn't reporters engage in some much needed investigative journalism, I wondered. Beacuse they're all bought and paid for or else were demonized for even attempting truthfull reporting.
Hoping that reason will win out is hoping for far too much. The mob mentality will win this fight if we don't stop it in its tracks... and that means a bunch of us facing a bunch of them and keeping the peace at these town halls.
Did you notice all the sensible folk with their backs turned on the yahoos? Not one person turned around to tell the screeching baboons to shut the hell up. What happened? The nutbags kept it up and disrupted the entire town hall. And of course the media was there to document the spectacle - rarely see any media coverage for our side, do ya? Case in point: D.C. Single-Payer Rally - not one reporter in attendance.
And hoping that he media will tire of the theatrics is just plain dreaming... as long as there are Jerry Springer moments, the press will be there. And we're in for a lot more Jerry Springer moments.
Being sensible just doesn't cut it when you're dealing with lunatics.
August 4, 2009 5:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mob protests drowning out dissenters had nothing to do with the decision to invade Iraq. Rather, it was the WMD threat that the Bush Administration used as a weapon to intimidate Congress.
Although disruptive mass protests were inconsequential in the case of Iraq, they were strongly counterproductive during Vietnam, and earned Vietnam opponents the contempt of many moderate Americans who should have known better but were more preoccupied with the unpleasant antics of hippies than the manipulation of public opinion by the government. It was a combination of news reporting from Vietnam, casualties, some massive but well-behaved protests, and the drafting into the military of sons of middle class Americans that turned the tide in Vietnam. The disruptive protesters were a hindrance, not a help.
The significance of the current flap is being overhyped in the news, I believe, and the mob protests will eventually play only a minor role. In most cases, if exposed to broad public view, they are likely to backfire. However, I agree with others here that to ensure the disrupters hurt themselves rather than hurting reform, reform proponents must make themselves visible in disciplined and dignified ways, so as to offer the public a compelling contrast between those whose behavior attracts public sympathy, and those who alienate moderate viewers. Proponents can't afford to remain invisible, but neither can they afford to behave like their adversaries.
Consider a "thought experiment" in which you are an uncommitted voter observing two groups appealing for your support. One group attempts to provide factual evidence, but is constantly drowned out by the other, so that its facts can't be expressed. The disrupters shout slogans ("Just vote No"), but in response, the first group amasses its supporters with signs supporting its position, and refrains from exchanging insults. You know that ultimately, you will have to make up your mind on the basis of the facts, but you also know that interpreting the facts is hard, and you must rely on the credibility of others for input. Which group would you tend to believe has the facts on its side?
August 4, 2009 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry, but maybe you were on vacation in the Burmuda triangle during the run-up to the war in Iraq.
Without the squealing mob, Bush would not have had the public support to even contemplate going into Iraq. And it was because the screeching of "patriotic Americans" drowned out any and all attempts at debunking the WMD crap that he was successful in getting the larger public to go along.
Furthermore the republican party played on the public's emotions over 9/11 by suggesting that there was a link between Saddam and Bin Laden... again the screaming meemies shouted down any rebuttal of that particular lie. The rabid "patriotism" even had the media cowed to the extent that they refused to even bother reporting anything that sounded like the truth.
And anyone who dared question Bush'es motives or provided evidence contradicting him on his lies... was branded a traitor and dismissed from the realm of public discourse. Anyone who didn't go along was demonized... remember Freedom fries?
I actually witnessed college students shouting down a guest speaker who happened not to buy in to the Bush claptrap. The man left the auditorium and was never seen nor heard from again.
So don't tell me that this will just blow over and that the current tactics used by these idiots will have no effect in forming public opinion (or what will serve as an excuse for public opinion which the opposition will exploit in order not to do their jobs).
Keep this up and they'll win again.
August 4, 2009 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hi kfreed - I have to vigorously disagree with you for a number of reasons. First, I'm very familiar with both Iraq and Vietnam. I don't know what happened on every college campus, but the Iraq vote by Congress was due almost entirely to misinformation about WMD foisted on them by Bush et al. Extensive disruption of discussion groups by mobs who shouted down discussants was inconsequential if it happened at all. In contrast, attempts to turn public opinion against the Vietnam war were hampered by the counterproductive efforts of unruly antiwar demonstrators, who ended up making themselves more unpopular than the war.
I expect that the current disruptions by healthcare reform opponents will similarly backfire if they haven't already. However, I do agree that for that to happen, reform advocates must remain visible, united, strong, dignified, and civil. In that sense they should respond not with hysterical alarm, but with calm resolve. The disruptions are an opportunity for us that we shouldn't fail to exploit to our advantage.
I'll illustrate my point with one more example of what attracts public support vs what alienates open-minded members of the public. If you read the first comment in this thread, you'll find that I personally underwent the experience of being shouted down by hundreds of angry reform opponents, who tried to stop me from citing the better health statistics of other nations. At that town hall meeting run by a conservative Republican Congressman opposed to reform, I was the last audience member at the microphone, the mob was shouting me down (during two attempts to make the point), but I persisted, and was later thanked for doing so, when the meeting ended following my comments. Even later, in a supermarket parking lot, audience members from the meeting recognized me and came over to congratulate me. I'm still hoping there may have been members of the media present, but I'm not sure there were.
The shouting and jeers that drowned out my first attempts finally did come to an end, which was why I was able to finish. A major reason they subsided when they did was that when the Congressman saw they were continuing more than about 20-30 seconds, he took his microphone and said to the audience, "Let him finish!"
Here's my question, Kfreed. Why did he do that?
August 4, 2009 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dear Fred,
Bless your heart, but I'm going to have to vehemently disagree, again, that reasoning with lunatics just plain doesn't work. Nobody said anything about doing anything drastic. All that is required is a joint effort on our part to attend these meetings and to let these people know in no uncertain terms that such behavior will not be tolerated. Ignoring their behavior will not make it go away. If we don't put a stop to it, they'll take over the debate with their stupidity just as they did in the run-up to the war. Maybe you and I just don't travel in the same circles. We apparently experienced two different Americas. I know what I saw, read, and heard and no amount of wishful thinking will ever allow me to forget it.
Note: I was breathing and awake while the Vietnam war was going on. Not that I agreed with the way our soldiers were treated... my dad was one. Here is yet another example of the mob mentality at work... instead of advocating for an end to the war and leaving it at that, they demonized our soldiers in the bargain. Again... "popular opinion" i.e. unrestrained popular stupidity was allowed to let reign to the extent that common sense got thrown under the bus. This kind of crap needs to stop. Pussy-footing around it doesn't work and rather makes us look like a bunch of losers.
Much as I'm enjoying this back and forth with you... I'm gonna have to stop here.
August 4, 2009 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
It seems to me that all it would take to combat this would be for people who disagree with the blowhards to stand up while they give their "All freedom loving Americans think..." or "All of us in here know what you're doing..." and say, "Excuse me, but can you please not speak for me? I really don't agree with you. Speak for yourself and yourself only since you don't know what all of us think. Thanks."
If enough people started doing that perhaps they'd get a little short-circuited... or get even more crazy. Either way, win-win, right?
August 3, 2009 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've been watching this on the news. We had our rep have his local meeting disrupted by the thugs. It was on Rachel last night (Syracuse NY).
This reminds me of the Bush Social Security bamboozle. The clear intent is to prevent an honest presentation and examination of the issues at hand.
You can bet this is another piece of the plan to manipulate this entire process and derail healthcare reform just as much as was the congressional delay. The disruptions will be falsely represented by the media who are part of the corporate oligharchy.
Even more though, this is an intentional derailing of democracy, just as we experienced for eight years under Bush. The real goal is to preserve the structural framework that supports the unbelieveable theft of the wealth of this country. We are witnessing an unprecedented criminal conspiracy fomented by the corporate oligharchy. No doubt about it. Most citizens have no idea of this larger picture. And as usual every bit of this is easily identifiable as lie upon lie.
August 4, 2009 3:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
They aren't just at the town halls. They are posting fake health care reform events on the organizing for America website (MyBo) and have appeared at legitimate health care reform organizing functions. One man, clearly a paid stooge, showed up to one such event and spouted every Republican talking point he could remember throught the 2 1/2 hour meeting with the clear intention of disrupting the session. Moreover, he couldn't pronounce the word "rationing" ... pronounced it with a long 'a'... though he was as American as apple pie. Obviously had been coached. It would have been funny, except that the entire room was preoccupied with refuting his idiotic claims. Needless to say, no organizing got done and so had to run around collecting email adresses after the meeting had convened. Next time, I won't sit by and let it happen.
The problem is that sensible people don't appear to know how to respond. The meeting chairpersons could use our help in getting these clowns to sit down and wait their turn or get out. But where is there a schedule of up-coming town hall meetings? Apparently, the Repubs have such a list. Does anyone have any idea? I've searched everywhere, gov and PAC sites included, but can find nothing.
August 4, 2009 5:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I was afraid to go my local organizing effort. I would end up in jail for running across the room and bashing the shit out of these liars. I have no patience anymore for these traitors to my country. That may not be sensible, but it feels sensible to me in light of the corporate oligarchy having so corrupted everything and stolen us blind. They are getting away with unspeakably criminal actions that need to be challenged. Congress is so corrupt they'll never even try and fix this. Maybe they would have given some slack to an old fart senior citizen. Probably not though.
August 4, 2009 7:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
As I asked elsewhere, isn't this how the Nazis got started in their rise to power in the late 1920's ??
August 4, 2009 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
As a matter of fact, it was. Remind Fred of that, would ya?
August 4, 2009 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Up above, I've already addressed the counterproductive nature of attempts to drown out debate. I pointed out that they require a calm response on our part rather than overreactions that are themselves counterproductive.
In my view, invoking the rise of Nazism is the kind of distraction that would be counterproductive to our cause, and forfeit credibility in our attempt to discredit reform opponents. In the 75 years since then, there have been many thousands of examples of political conflicts characterized by uncivilized and disruptive behavior by demonstrators trying to shout down opponents. In most of those thousands of instances, the demonstrators ended up alienating members of the public not already sympathetic to them. It is why mass protests in recent American history from the civil rights movement to the Vietnam war have been most successful when they least intruded on the rights of their adversaries to speak. In fact, to cite a movement that I happen to disagree with - the Right To Life movement - it has been singularly successful in attracting support in many circumstances because it learned the lesson that respectful or even silent protest works far better than the noisy kind.
I hope you'll go back and read my earlier responses, including the two detailing my own recent personal experience with anti-reform protestors who tried to shout me down.
August 4, 2009 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay Fred, I said I was done but found one more comment from you... you're completely serious with this(?):
"In fact, to cite a movement that I happen to disagree with - the Right To Life movement - it has been singularly successful in attracting support in many circumstances because it learned the lesson that respectful or even silent protest works far better than the noisy kind."
A bullet works wonders too - been paying attention to the news at all... or to history for that matter? You have got to be kidding me!
Though MLK advocated peaceful dissent... the civil rights movement was a bloody mess... mostly because being nice to racists didn't produce the desired result.
And the right to life "movement" being respectful?????????????? Yep, sweetness, we live on two different planets.
August 4, 2009 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kfreed - We're talking past each other. You claim that strong protests can work. I agree. What I have observed to be counterproductive are not protests per se, but rather protestors who try to silence those who disagree with them.
That almost always turns off audiences who are not yet committed to a point of view.
August 4, 2009 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a thought.
Right after the national anthem, why don't they
run the video of last night's Keith Olbermann
special comment..............
August 4, 2009 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink