Originally Posted by K-I-A 67

Well, if that's the case, why are you advocating that we turn nukes into our primary weapons. You do realize, we would have to use one from time to time as well.

Would we? I would think that it is more likely to have conflicts escalate to nuclear war if you have intermediary steps by which to inch your way there. If you have to go there in one big step, peaceful resolutions become more likely.

Originally Posted by K-I-A 67

No, I was saying we would have to launch a nuke from time to time to keep segments of the world and its crazies in line. Plus, a nation without troops acting as buffers would also require a standing pre-emptive war type policey. We'd have to bsically nuke invasion forces before they attempted a large scale invasion. We don't want to nuke invasion forces on our own turf. Something tells me, Americans wouldn't like getting nuked by their own nukes. So, we'd have to nuke Russia before it invaded Alaska or Canada.

It's astounding how convention-bound you're being here. Armies just don't matter anymore. In your hypothetical scenario, we wouldn't have to nuke Russia's army -- we'd nuke their cities. The whole reason most people are willing to be soldiers is out of the perception (real or imagined) that they are protecting their friends and family back home. But, once nukes are in play, those friends and family members aren't being protected. That Russian army can march right into Washington and the folks back home are still going to be radioactive cinders. As a result, there's no point in sending the army (and likely, no one willing to join it in the first place). The invasion never happens because there's no possibility of success.

Nukes have changed warfare forever, but culturally many people continue to think about war as thousands of infantry marching across a field supported by artillery salvos. Nukes are not "bigger artillery" -- they're a fundamentally different category of weapon whose value stems not from their use, but the threat of their use.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Hm. The whole point of a noninterventionist foreign policy is that why should we care what 'crazies' in the rest of the world are doing. They leave us alone, we leave them alone. Nuking people not attacking you -- no matter how weird and smelly and noisy they are -- is sort of counter-the-point. Fortunately, the USA doesn't need to make any buffers of its own.

Why shouldn't we care? Why should you care? Are you part of the crazies or something?

Originally Posted by Justin '77

If you look to your left, and then to your right, you might notice a pair of large wet patches that go way, way off beyond the horizon. Unless you fear the Mexican or Canadian armies (not to diminsh the threat from the Great White North) of invasion, you've got nothing even remotely nearby to buffer from. The USA is in a pretty uniquely awesome position from that standpoint, and there's no reason not to make the most of the benefits nature has provided you.

At one time, an American Indian stood in my uniquely awesome position as well. Natures obstacles didn't do much to stop the European onslaught, invasions and excursions into his divine territories or defend his way of life. Believe it or not, oceans just aren't all that difficult to overcome in this day and age.

Originally Posted by Kurt Horner

I would think that it is more likely to have conflicts escalate to nuclear war if you have intermediary steps by which to inch your way there. If you have to go there in one big step, peaceful resolutions become more likely.

The sudden attack is a rarity. Usually war begins after diplomatic efforts have failed (often due to bad faith). Hitler's method (give reassurances that he wants peace and then strike an ill-prepared victim) was tried once -- by Saddam Hussein in Kuwait in 1990. The parallel caused almost universal disaffection because of the obvious analogy.

There will be threats made, and ultimatums will be delivered --- perhaps ultimatums that can't be met. There will be attempts to arrange support. News sites will show "inflammation" in rhetoric.

Armies just don't matter anymore. In your hypothetical scenario, we wouldn't have to nuke Russia's army -- we'd nuke their cities. The whole reason most people are willing to be soldiers is out of the perception (real or imagined) that they are protecting their friends and family back home. But, once nukes are in play, those friends and family members aren't being protected. That Russian army can march right into Washington and the folks back home are still going to be radioactive cinders. As a result, there's no point in sending the army (and likely, no one willing to join it in the first place). The invasion never happens because there's no possibility of success.

The United States had long feared a Soviet invasion of western Europe, connecting Marxist rhetoric, Stalinist behavior, and the memories of a powerful Soviet army advancing over astern Europe. Soviet troops might have believed as they were "liberating" places like Holland, Norway, or northern Italy from "capitalist oppression and exploitation" that they were serving the interests of their Soviet Union, but such would be contradicted if Soviet cities or Soviet troop concentrations in eastern Europe were being decimated with nukes. Likewise the opposite scenario applied -- that British troops believing that they were liberating Poland from Soviet rule would think otherwise as British cities and NATO troop concentrations were being vaporized. Add to that, the top military leaders might first balk -- and then stage a coup if the government insisted upon a course that the top military officials dread.

Soviet leadership might have been thugs, but that leadership always knew the consequences and backed off well short of any situation likely to result in nuclear warfare. It was never suicidal. American leadership might have seemed to have held less than admirable objectives to the Soviet Union (they would be tempted to give Soviet assets to American corporations for the service of the profit motive, but American tycoons and executives aren't suicidal, either). Maybe nukes have kept the peace.

Nukes have changed warfare forever, but culturally many people continue to think about war as thousands of infantry marching across a field supported by artillery salvos. Nukes are not "bigger artillery" -- they're a fundamentally different category of weapon whose value stems not from their use, but the threat of their use.

Nukes imply that even in the event of a victorious war with their use, they will have ensured that even the "winner" has won nothing and lost horribly. Much the same can be said of China. North Korean leadership? Now that's crazy.

The eminently-readable Gore Vidal weighs in on the Land of The Free

(only four pages - read the whole thing, lazybones!)

-excerpt-

One interesting fallout from the tragic business in Cambridge – and it is tragic, let me tell you – was that the president was forced to speak suddenly in his own voice, and at his very best, and not swathed in the authority of his great rank, but simply as a citizen making a sensible comment about a nobody policeman. Yes, I mean “nobody” literally – I know all human beings, if they are Americans, are highly valued and worshiped, indeed, for their wonderfulness and their helpfulness to fellow citizens. I state this ironically, as you might suspect. After all, why would the young man be armed unless he was a superior citizen, elected, as it were, by his fellows to ride herd on an unruly mob unless he was demonstrably special by virtue of being legally armed, which is how we are supposed to tell them from us?

But there the president was, saying, this is stupid. But he did not say, “How dare you go after a 58-year-old man who is one of the great scholars of the country and think you can get away with it?” Unfortunately, it never seemed to have crossed the president’s mind in this crisis that he is expected to do something about it. I know there is a great deal, as they say, on his plate, but after displays of this sort, he should call together a commission involving every section of the country. Every municipality is complaining about local police forces run wild. And no one does anything about it. And our masters are armed to the teeth and would seem more likely to fire at us instead of at the troublemakers. I can’t think of any civilized country that would allow this, from the look of these bulky guardians of the peace, to whom no right-minded person would allow even a slingshot to be given.


So, we are a weirdly militarized citizenry governed by the worst elements in the United States, and something is bound to blow up, as I have felt for some time now. In my wanderings around the U.S., I talk to people without money, without power, ordinary voters, as well as nowadays, people maimed by war, or time, or life or whatever, and I am convinced more and more that this is a vicious country in which the police are allowed to run amok, absolutely independent of anyone, and that is why from time to time they are allowed to get away with murder. One surprisingly knew that a wrinkle has been discovered in the seamless surface of our troubled state. Policemen are seldom tried for their crimes, or indeed, held responsible for what they do, which disturbs the peace and causes distress among the orderly.


...


Let us accept the facts staring us in the face—that demonstrably we are no longer a republic. We are no longer governed by laws, only by armed men and force. This is just like the days of Billy the Kid. You have an armed man going down a dusty street and that is authority. And it has come to this for us.

Freshman Democratic lawmaker ‘physically assaulted at a local event’ by activists.

I don't think the Democrats are helping matters all that much. I mean, Obama promised he would hear everyone out in terms of health care reform. Now it seems like all our side is bent on doing is bludgeoning it through and dismissing everyone who opposes us. Just look at this crap I got emailed to me.

Originally Posted by DNC

There's been a lot of media coverage about organized mobs intimidating lawmakers, disrupting town halls, and silencing real discussion about the need for real health insurance reform.

The truth is, it's a sham. These "grassroots protests" are being organized and largely paid for by Washington special interests and insurance companies who are desperate to block reform. They're trying to use lies and fear to break the President and his agenda for change.

Health insurance reform is about our lives, our jobs, and our families -- we can't let distortions and intimidation get in the way. We need to expose these outrageous tactics, and we're counting on you to help. Can you read these "5 facts about the anti-reform mobs," then pass them along to your friends and family?

• 5 facts about the anti-reform mobs
  
  1. These disruptions are being funded and organized by out-of-district special-interest groups and insurance companies who fear that health insurance reform could help Americans, but hurt their bottom line. A group run by the same folks who made the "Swiftboat" ads against John Kerry is compiling a list of congressional events in August to disrupt. An insurance company coalition has stationed employees in 30 states to track where local lawmakers hold town-hall meetings.
  
  2. People are scared because they are being fed frightening lies. These crowds are being riled up by anti-reform lies being spread by industry front groups that invent smears to tarnish the President's plan and scare voters. But as the President has repeatedly said, health insurance reform will create more health care choices for the American people, not reduce them. If you like your insurance or your doctor, you can keep them, and there is no "government takeover" in any part of any plan supported by the President or Congress.
  
  3. Their actions are getting more extreme.Texas protesters brought signs displaying a tombstone for Rep. Lloyd Doggett and using the "SS" symbol to compare President Obama's policies to Nazism. Maryland Rep. Frank Kratovil was hanged in effigy outside his district office.Rep. Tim Bishop of New York had to be escorted to his car by police after an angry few disrupted his town hall meeting -- and more examples like this come in every day. And they have gone beyond just trying to derail the President's health insurance reform plans, they are trying to "break" the President himself and ruin his Presidency.
  
  4. Their goal is to disrupt and shut down legitimate conversation. Protesters have routinely shouted down representatives trying to engage in constructive dialogue with voters, and done everything they can to intimidate and silence regular people who just want more information. One attack group has even published a manual instructing protesters to "stand up and shout" and try to "rattle" lawmakers to prevent them from talking peacefully with their constituents.
  
  5. Republican leadership is irresponsibly cheering on the thuggish crowds. Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner issued a statement applauding and promoting a video of the disruptions and looking forward to "a long, hot August for Democrats in Congress."
  

It's time to expose this charade, before it gets more dangerous. Please send these facts to everyone you know. You can also post them on your website, blog, or Facebook page.

Now, more than ever, we need to stand strong together and defend the truth.

This propaganda is so idiotically written that it made me a little sad inside. I mean, Democrats did all this and more to protest the Bush administration. Now we turn around and call other protesters a "mob."
Some people just need to grow the fuck up.

Originally Posted by writerGrrl

I don't think the Democrats are helping matters all that much. I mean, Obama promised he would hear everyone out in terms of health care reform. Now it seems like all our side is bent on doing is bludgeoning it through and dismissing everyone who opposes us. Just look at this crap I got emailed to me.

This propaganda is so idiotically written that it made me a little sad inside. I mean, Democrats did all this and more to protest the Bush administration. Now we turn around and call other protesters a "mob."
Some people just need to grow the fuck up.

Like minds think alike. See my post under 'Its time for a National Health Care Plan'.

Originally Posted by writerGrrl

This propaganda is so idiotically written that it made me a little sad inside. I mean, Democrats did all this and more to protest the Bush administration. Now we turn around and call other protesters a "mob."
Some people just need to grow the fuck up.

I think you give the teabagging crowd too much credit. Democrats protested Bush administration policies by telling the truth. The teabaggers are kooks and liars.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

I think you give the teabagging crowd too much credit. Democrats protested Bush administration policies by telling the truth. The teabaggers are kooks and liars.

And Astroturf to boot, fake "grass-roots" organizations funded by corporate-fascist interests.

Tampa Town Hall On Health Care Reform Disrupted By Violence

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_253478.html

Police officers were called to calm down an unruly crowd outside a health care reform town hall meeting in downtown Tampa, Florida on Thursday evening, according to local news reports.

Angry protesters screamed, yelled and banged on windows as officers hurried to guard the entrances to the facility, where U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor was trying to discuss the various health care reform proposals being debated in Congress. One photojournalist said that a fistfight broke out inside the building, reports WTSP.

Wasn't there some intelligence report(s) some months ago that warned of increasing violence from the far-right?

Some Congressman was hung in effigy by protestors this week as well.

How long until someone starts shooting? Seriously? Why are we allowing this s**t?

Originally Posted by AlexMnWi

How long until someone starts shooting? Seriously? Why are we allowing this s**t?

I don't think there's anything you can do about the protests.
The violence is freaking me out a little bit. Compared to many of the things Obama brought up, Health Care sounds very trivial. I'm curious how the extreme right is going to react to his other proposals.
As I said before, I still don't think the Dems are helping matters.

Originally Posted by writerGrrl

I don't think there's anything you can do about the protests.
The violence is freaking me out a little bit. Compared to many of the things Obama brought up, Health Care sounds very trivial. I'm curious how the extreme right is going to react to his other proposals.

If this spiral of violence does continue to intensify every time the President proposes something constructive,...

As I said before, I still don't think the Dems are helping matters.

Unfortunately, 4Ts are not particularly a time for 'helping matters'. Not when all concerned - on both sides - feel that it's NOW OR NEVER for their desired agendas, and that this round is for ALL THE MARBLES.

Originally Posted by writerGrrl

Originally Posted by AlexMnWi

... How long until someone starts shooting? Seriously? Why are we allowing this s**t?

I don't think there's anything you can do about the protests.
The violence is freaking me out a little bit. Compared to many of the things Obama brought up, Health Care sounds very trivial. I'm curious how the extreme right is going to react to his other proposals.
As I said before, I still don't think the Dems are helping matters.

This is the photo-opposite of the anti-war protests in the late 60s and early 70s. I assume the results will be similar. When you scream, are disruptive, don't let others speak and even get violent, you merely anger those you wish to influence. The result is backlash.

How that will play is the question. Nixon used the protests to solidify power, but the religious right used it as a launching pad for social activism. Everyone on the right claimed to be speaking for the Silent Majority. This time, it seems the progressives are getting their voices and rising up against the right. That may prove to be more important than the Obama election.

Originally Posted by writerGrrl

... Compared to many of the things Obama brought up, Health Care sounds very trivial...

You're young and healthy. Health care seems trivial at the moment. It won't be 20 years from now. In fact, your first pregnancy (assuming you go that route) may be your wake-up call ... assuming this is still an open issue by then.

Originally Posted by writerGrrl

I don't think there's anything you can do about the protests.
The violence is freaking me out a little bit. Compared to many of the things Obama brought up, Health Care sounds very trivial. I'm curious how the extreme right is going to react to his other proposals.
As I said before, I still don't think the Dems are helping matters.

I'd be curious to know what you believe would help matters.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

You're young and healthy. Health care seems trivial at the moment. It won't be 20 years from now. In fact, your first pregnancy (assuming you go that route) may be your wake-up call ... assuming this is still an open issue by then.

I think I still have copies of both hospital bills from when my kids were born (and those were from the early 90's), not to mention a statement from when my husband had his knee repaired three years ago.

I have been very lucky.

Originally Posted by writerGrrl

I don't think the Democrats are helping matters all that much. I mean, Obama promised he would hear everyone out in terms of health care reform. Now it seems like all our side is bent on doing is bludgeoning it through and dismissing everyone who opposes us. Just look at this crap I got emailed to me.

This propaganda is so idiotically written that it made me a little sad inside. I mean, Democrats did all this and more to protest the Bush administration. Now we turn around and call other protesters a "mob."
Some people just need to grow the fuck up.

Two questions, Writergirl:

1. What specifically are you referring to you when you say Democrats did "all this and more" during the Bush Administration? They certainly didn't do anything like this at presidential appearances, which the Secret Service kept them out of. I honestly don't recall any video of mobs of Democrats chanting at Republican office holders. I do on the other hand remember seeing an out-of-town Republican mob, led by John Bolton, helping to intimidate Miami-Dade officials into stopping their recount in 2000.

2. What exactly do you disagree with, factually, in the email that you received?

A site, Conservatives for Patients' Rights, which is agitating against any health care reform (and which is run by a guy who used to run for-profit health clinics), actually has a page of various disrupted town hall meetings. I looked at a number of them yesterday. (You can see them at http://www.cprights.org/townhallvideos.php .)

Two things struck me. For one, the vast majority of the protesters are old. Among other things this means that they already depend on government-run health care, that is, Medicaid. They are filled with anger and hatred and utterly uninterested in any serious discussion. Don't take my word for it, following the link.

And all that reminded me of. . .meetings between students and university administrators forty years ago. Yup. The protesters, many from the same generation, had exactly the same certainty, rudeness, and totally destructive agenda.

The Obama Administration and the Democratic Party are behind the curve here. They can easily (and need to) create some positive media events, some Marches for Health Care filled with young people. You simply can't count on rationality alone in a 4T.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

A site, Conservatives for Patients' Rights, which is agitating against any health care reform (and which is run by a guy who used to run for-profit health clinics), actually has a page of various disrupted town hall meetings. I looked at a number of them yesterday. (You can see them at http://www.cprights.org/townhallvideos.php .)

Two things struck me. For one, the vast majority of the protesters are old. Among other things this means that they already depend on government-run health care, that is, Medicaid. They are filled with anger and hatred and utterly uninterested in any serious discussion. Don't take my word for it, following the link.

And all that reminded me of. . .meetings between students and university administrators forty years ago. Yup. The protesters, many from the same generation, had exactly the same certainty, rudeness, and totally destructive agenda.

The Obama Administration and the Democratic Party are behind the curve here. They can easily (and need to) create some positive media events, some Marches for Health Care filled with young people. You simply can't count on rationality alone in a 4T.

... and the Boomer Right is using much the same techniques as the Boomer Left of forty years ago.

Differences:

1. The new protesters dress better.

2. The new ones are getting paid well for what they do.

3. The new ones don't use the words "peace" and "love".

.... As usual, having little to offer except for fear, they are able to scare people -- likely through viral e-mails that well-meaning but deluded people forward (of course we know how common those are!) -- that a government takeover of healthcare means that there will be less money for Medicare. Such might explain the old people (never mind that Boomers as defined by Howe and Strauss are themselves getting "old". meaning 65+) falling for the technique. Add to that that the organizers of these protesters might be offering a break from some boredom.

Originally Posted by K-I-A 67

No, I was saying we would have to launch a nuke from time to time to keep segments of the world and its crazies in line. Plus, a nation without troops acting as buffers would also require a standing pre-emptive war type policey. We'd have to bsically nuke invasion forces before they attempted a large scale invasion. We don't want to nuke invasion forces on our own turf. Something tells me, Americans wouldn't like getting nuked by their own nukes. So, we'd have to nuke Russia before it invaded Alaska or Canada.

Nukes kill innocent people, too. That's why they must be absolutely-final choices after every other option is eliminated.

If it's a choice between national survival and using a nuke, then I can understand that. By that time pre-emption is likely no option for the simple reason that there already is a war on. Otherwise, pre-emptive war is usually a war crime: aggressive warfare. Some German generals got ropes around their necks for such warfare at the end of the last 4T.

By the way -- anyone who thinks of using nukes as a first resort is himself a "crazy".

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

A site, Conservatives for Patients' Rights, which is agitating against any health care reform (and which is run by a guy who used to run for-profit health clinics), actually has a page of various disrupted town hall meetings. I looked at a number of them yesterday. (You can see them at http://www.cprights.org/townhallvideos.php .)

Two things struck me. For one, the vast majority of the protesters are old. Among other things this means that they already depend on government-run health care, that is, Medicaid. They are filled with anger and hatred and utterly uninterested in any serious discussion. Don't take my word for it, following the link.

And all that reminded me of. . .meetings between students and university administrators forty years ago. Yup. The protesters, many from the same generation, had exactly the same certainty, rudeness, and totally destructive agenda.

The Obama Administration and the Democratic Party are behind the curve here. They can easily (and need to) create some positive media events, some Marches for Health Care filled with young people. You simply can't count on rationality alone in a 4T.

Well, atleast they aren't smashing windows, destroying property or calling my mother a fascist pig like the young scuz buckets your side sends to disrupt Republicans rallies.

Originally Posted by K-I-A 67

Well, atleast they aren't smashing windows, destroying property or calling my mother a fascist pig like the young scuz buckets your side sends to disrupt Republicans rallies.

Not so long ago "Your Side" (meaning the Rove/Cheney/Bush Administration) established so-called "Free Speech Zones" wherever Dubya spoke. Protesters would be kept away from his speeches so that they couldn't call attention to the bungled War in Iraq. When "Free Speech" means the freedom to express the official line and nothing else except where it is beyond the attention of the media, freedom of speech no longer exists -- as in Iran, China, Cuba, Zimbabwe...

Who needs to disrupt GOP rallies? When the mainstream of a political party makes horses' derrieres out of themselves, nobody needs to disrupt its rallies.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

I think I still have copies of both hospital bills from when my kids were born (and those were from the early 90's)...

Yeah, that's been something we've brought up a lot in terms of the cost of living difference. Garret in particular was a no-fuss delivery in a basic US facility, and the portion of the hospital costs that got billed us after insurance was in the thousands of dollars. Lucius had a much tougher time, and spent his first two weeks under heavy care in the most prestigious place in the region; plus we plunked down the extra money to set Andi and he up with the 'deluxe' accommodations. As non-residents, non-insured, we paid full cost out-of-pocket for four days of NICU care and another six days of regular live-in-pediatrics care. And that, (plus, by the way, all Andi's prenatal and follow-up appointments) came to right around two grand.

The problem isn't one of insurance or access -- it's simply one of absolutely absurd pricing. Which is what you would expect from a federally-protected cartel on the supply hand and a near-total lack of pricing-mechanism feedback on the demand hand. How strengthening the cartel while simultaneously weakening the already-tenuous feedback mechanism is supposed to do anything good at all is beyond me...

But then again, I've never been one to see the sense in throwing gasoline on a housefire.

Does anyone need evidence that the struggle against the 3T Hard Right is anything but over? Here it is from the New York Times:

Originally Posted by By IAN URBINA (New York Times)

Published: August 7, 2009

The bitter divisions over an overhaul of the health care system have exploded at town-hall-style meetings over the last few days as members of Congress have been shouted down, hanged in effigy and taunted by crowds. In several cities, noisy demonstrations have led to fistfights, arrests and hospitalizations.

Democrats have said the protesters are being organized by conservative lobbying groups like FreedomWorks. Republicans respond that the protests are an organic response to the Obama administration’s health care restructuring proposals.

There is no dispute, however, that most of the shouting and mocking is from opponents of those plans. Many of those opponents have been encouraged to attend by conservative commentators and Web sites.

“Become a part of the mob!” said a banner posted Friday on the Web site of the talk show host Sean Hannity. “Attend an Obama Care Townhall near you!” The exhortations do not advocate violence, but some urge opponents to be disruptive.

Right. Disrupt the political process that people have freely and fairly elected on behalf of a 3T model of business and political ideologues defeated decisively in 2006 and 2008. Thus Sean Hannity of FoX Propaganda Channel.

Didn't conservatives of the 1960s tell us that mob rule wasn't democracy but instead what went on on places like Nazi Germany and Mao's China? Mobs controlled, of course, by devious figures.

Originally Posted by NYT

(continued)

A volatile mix has resulted. In Mehlville, Mo., St. Louis County police officers arrested six people on Thursday evening, some on assault charges, outside a health care and aging forum organized by Representative Russ Carnahan, a Democrat. Opponents of the proposed changes, organized by the St. Louis Tea Party, apparently clashed with supporters organized by the Service Employees International Union outside a school gym.

That same day in Romulus, Mich., Representative John D. Dingell, a long-serving Democrat, was shouted down at a health care meeting by a rowdy crowd of foes of health care overhaul, many crying, “Shame on you!” A similar scene unfolded in Denver on Thursday when Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California visited a clinic for the homeless there.

In a statement Friday, Mr. Dingell, 83, deplored those trying to “demagogue the discussion,” but said he would not be deterred. “As long as I have a vote, I will not let shouting, intimidation or misinformation deter me from fighting for this cause,” he said.

The tenor of some of the debates has become extreme. Ms. Pelosi has accused people at recent protests of carrying signs associating the Democratic plan with Nazi swastikas and SS symbols, and some photographs showing such signs have been posted on the Web.

On Thursday, the talk show host Rush Limbaugh said the administration’s health care logo was itself similar to a Nazi symbol.

Such, I believe, is the cornerstone of the efforts of the Hard Right to return to power in America. Should it succeed, then many of us may look fondly upon the Rove/Cheney/Bush time when at the least violence against political opponents was not yet the norm.

Originally Posted by NYT

(continued)

Earlier this week, Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, compared the scenes at health care forums to the “Brooks Brothers brigade” in 2000, a reference to the protests that disrupted the vote count in Miami during the presidential election battle between George W. Bush and Al Gore. Portrayed at the time as local protesters, many were actually Republican staff members flown in from Washington.

For Representative Steve Kagen, Democrat of Wisconsin, Mr. Gibbs’s criticism rang true.

After he faced heckling during a heated discussion about health care at a forum on Thursday, Mr. Kagen was confronted by a vocal opponent named Heather Blish, who identified herself as “just a mom from a few blocks away” and “not affiliated with any political party.”

When interviewed by the local NBC affiliate, Ms. Blish insisted she was not a member of the Republican Party. But her page on the networking Web site Linked In said she was the vice chairwoman of the Republican Party of Kewaunee County until last year and worked on the campaign of John Gard, a Republican who ran unsuccessfully against Mr. Kagen last year.

Ms. Blish’s boss, Scott Detweiler, owner of IdealCampaign.com, which develops political candidate and campaign Web sites, confirmed that she had been active in local Republican politics. But Mr. Detweiler said she was sincere when she said she was not involved in any party, because she ended her activities with the Republican Party a year and a half ago.

One of the week’s most raucous encounters occurred Thursday in Tampa, Fla., where roughly 1,500 people attended a forum held by Democratic lawmakers, including Representative Kathy Castor. When the auditorium at the Children’s Board of Hillsborough County reached capacity and organizers had to close the doors, the scene descended into violence.

As Ms. Castor began to speak, scuffles broke out as people tried to push their way in. Parts of her remarks were drowned out by chants of “read the bill, read the bill” and “tyranny,” as a video recording of the meeting showed. Outside the meeting, there were competing chants of “Yes we can” and “Just say no.”

We now know the political organization. We now know the purpose. "Plausible denial" fails.

Originally Posted by New York Times

(continued)

Some of the protesters told local reporters they had been urged to come by a local activist group promoted by the conservative radio and television host Glenn Beck. Others said they had received e-mail messages from the Hillsborough County Republican Party that urged people to speak out against the plan and offered talking points.

Elsewhere, there was similar discontent. On Sunday in Morrisville, Pa., Representative Patrick J. Murphy, a Democrat, was forced to scrap plans for a one-on-one, meet-the-congressman session when people in the crowd started shouting, so he agreed to discuss the issue with the entire audience.

At an appearance at a grocery store in Austin, Tex., on Aug. 1, Representative Lloyd Doggett, a Democrat, was drowned out as he tried to speak on health care change. One opponent had a mock tombstone with Mr. Doggett’s name on it.

Last week, a protester hanged an effigy of Representative Frank Kratovil Jr., Democrat of Maryland, at a rally opposing health care change. This week, Representative Brad Miller, Democrat of North Carolina, said he had received a death threat about his support.

(Bolding and coloring is mine, and deliberate).

Shouting down opponents. Effigies. Death threats. Such is not democracy. Limbaugh, Beck, and Hannity are revolutionaries -- not conservatives.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

... and the Boomer Right is using much the same techniques as the Boomer Left of forty years ago.

Differences:

1. The new protesters dress better.

2. The new ones are getting paid well for what they do.

3. The new ones don't use the words "peace" and "love".

.... As usual, having little to offer except for fear, they are able to scare people -- likely through viral e-mails that well-meaning but deluded people forward (of course we know how common those are!) -- that a government takeover of healthcare means that there will be less money for Medicare. Such might explain the old people (never mind that Boomers as defined by Howe and Strauss are themselves getting "old". meaning 65+) falling for the technique. Add to that that the organizers of these protesters might be offering a break from some boredom.

The words "peace" and "love" were not much heard in many of the meetings I am remembering. "Smash the state," "Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh, NLF is going to win," and "Hey, Hey LBJ, How many kids did you kill today?" were generally the background noise.