Except for:A number of people in the news analysis business seem to be equating the role of liberal activists in making trouble for Republicans back in 2005, during the debate over Social Security privatization, with that of conservative activists in making trouble for Democrats over health care reform. [...] Seriously, I’ve been searching through news reports on the Social Security town halls, and I can’t find any examples of the kind of behavior we’re seeing now. Yes, there were noisy demonstrations — but they were outside the events. That was even true during the first month or two, when Republicans actually tried having open town halls. Congressmen were very upset by the reception they received, but not, at least according to any of the report I can find, because opponents were disruptive — crowds booed lines they didn’t like, but that was about it. [...]
So please, no false equivalences. The campaign against Social Security privatization was energetic and no doubt rude, but did not involve intimidation and disruption.
- NW Progressive Institute, March 2005: "a boisterous crowd which frequently interrupted the discussion with shouts and hard nosed questions. ... Democrats in the audience who were interrupting the panel.... the crowd erupted in anger... Democrats in the audience started shouting him down again."
- Savannah Morning News, March 2005: "By now, Jack Kingston is used to shouted questions, interruptions and boos. Republican congressmen expect such responses these days when they meet with constituents about President Bush's proposal to overhaul Social Security."
- USA Today, March 2005: "Shaken by raucous protests at open "town hall"-style meetings last month ... Santorum was among dozens of members of Congress who ran gantlets of demonstrators and shouted over hecklers at Social Security events last month. Many who showed up to protest were alerted by e-mails and bused in by anti-Bush organizations such as MoveOn.org and USAction, a liberal advocacy group. They came with prepared questions and instructions on how to confront lawmakers."
9 comments:
Welcome back, Justus!
Ah, democracy. You've got to love it and all of his wonderful, wonderful, awfulness...
Ahhh...mixed economy...representative republic:)
Does this really surprise anyone that Dr. Paul Krugman has given false information, knowing that giving truthful information may incriminate HIS party?
"Incriminate."
Don't you think that's a strong word, professor? I think you mean "implicate." (I KEED I KEED!)
Incriminate: To accuse or charge of a crime or any wrongful act.
Disrupting, intimidating, and even resorting to blows is definitely a wrongful act. I definitely meant incriminate.
Implicate: To involve or connect
intimately or incriminatingly.
I can see why you would choose this word. Both work, but I prefer the stronger statement. Obviously, I am not a big fan of Dr. Krugman's work.
Professor, my point was that this behavior doesn't constitute criminal behavior - nor did it in 2005.
I simply don't think it's criminal or wrongful to personally engage your elected representative, to shout your protest, to boo or heckle, to send broadcast emails (even though I hate email spam) or to assemble peacefully (even though boisterously). I would agree that when done in poor taste, such behavior is disrespectful. But its not a crime to dis someone. Of course, I would remind everyone on this board that when you dis Dre, you dis yourself.
Krugman's only crime is to commit his thoughts to writing.
There were actual fights in Tampa. Did you see the video? Fighting in public is illegal in Hillsborough County. And intimidating behavior in Miami will get you a shank in your liver. Just ask Lumbee.
Prof, I hadn't heard about the fights. Atlanta isn't really speaking to Florida these days, because y'all are stealing our water. (I'm kidding... kinda.)
In general, I'm adverse to shanks or shivs or any thing of the sort. I'm also adverse to being hit with blunt objects or falling pianos.
How about knuckle sandwiches?
Post a Comment