Rabbi Guttman declares he is offended by a health care reform protester carrying a sign that equated the proposal with National Socialism. But a federal takeover of our health care system — 8 percent of the U.S. economy, according to Guttman — would be both national and socialistic. So, the protester has a point.This is a clever parsing of words. However, what would happen if we used a similar parsing to examine the political philosophy of the reform opponents?
First, despite their mob tactics and their insistence on bringing guns to protests, the opponents do claim to be on the side of democracy.
Second, the protestors appear to be people, as far as I can tell.
Third, most appear to be Republicans. In fact, some of the protests have paused to pledge allegiance to a republic.
When you put these elements together, it's abundantly clear that the opponents are expressing support for a Democratic People's Republic, possibly along the lines of North Korea.
Not convinced? Have you asked an opponent of insurance reform his or her opinion of the U.N.? Isn't it uncanny how they mindlessly ditto the expressions of their self-obsessed and paranoid leader? By opposing reform, don't they want many of us to be Il?
8 comments:
This is somewhat related, but I saw somewhere that the section of the health care bill that mentions end of life counseling ("death panels") was in fact inserted by Senator Johnny Isakson, a Georgia Republican. If this is true, wouldn't it mean that Republicans are, by their own arguments, Nazis?
Wasn't it the labor thugs from SIEU that beat up a peaceful black anti health care reform proster n Missouri ?
Ken Gladney
Dave,
Your erroneous attempt to equate opponents of Obamacare with Nazis is sadly hypocritical. The one and only sign that showed up at a town hall ( Barney Frank ) was held by a supporter of Lyndon LaRouche and had the Rouchie logo on it. The questions/statements made by the person holding this sign were straight out of the LaRouche playbook. ( They are demanding a single payer ) Please stop with the sweeping generalizations.
Were you sleeping under a coconut tree for 8 years while Bush was vilified as
HITLER
As for carrying guns to protests. it happened once in Arizona , where BTW it is legal. I think, however, that was a bit on the provative side, but you carlessly or perhaps deliberately attempt to paint all opponents with the same broad brush. Shame on you.
And, OMG, some recited the Pledge of Allegiance. Shocking. That's almost as bad as a school kid being given an anassignment to write a letter about how "I can help Obama "
And WTH does the UN have to do with any of this debate except as your red herring ?
Fred Gregory
This is bizzarre. The SEIU thug who was injured while beating up Ken Gladney ( see above link ) has asked for workmans comp.
Perfect... Injured Thug Who Beat Ken Gladney Asks For Workman's Comp From the SEIU For His "Work" Injury
If he was on the clock while doing his intimidation bullying then I guess he should get it, huh , Dave ?
Fred Gregory
Town Hall, Tea Party protests have long history in America
"Complacency, it turns out, can't be counted on. When liberties are threatened, Americans will still "rise up almost as a natural force, much as night follows day," and that's a very good thing. At least, for those outside the political class."
Fred Gregory
When it comes to health care reform, Obama doesn't believe reasonable people can disagree
"When Obama, the man of hope, tells this story, it sounds like a failure of the democratic process, corrupted by special interests who somehow forced all those people to holler at town meetings and forced me to write this article. Again, though, without the actual writing of checks. But someone of a non-cynical nature might equally see this story as a great success of participatory democracy, with representatives accountable to the people."
Fred Gregory
Fred, don't forget that the standard tactic we see used in this very blog thread is that those who protest the currently proposed health care legislation are "opponents of health care reform".
As we well know, that's just another canard used to marginalize the real and substantive opposition to the obnoxious provisions of health care reform.
There are very few people who would argue that no health reform is needed. However, the great majority of our people have the common good sense to be outraged at the over-the-top abuse of health care reform contained in current government proposals.
It's too bad the rest have chosen to ignore that in their quest to fulfill a worldview agenda item that only serves to make health care more expensive and to lower the quality of care of everyone who isn't on the elite program enjoyed by the upper echelon of federal bureaucrats who pose as legislators and executive branch operatives.
Post a Comment