Get FREE BuzzFlash News Alerts

Email:  

Will Ignorance and Deceit Carry The Day?

FINDING A VOICE by Ann Davidow

How can right-wing extremists retain even the smallest shred of credibility when they characterize pre-arranged disruptions of town-hall meetings as legitimate forms of protest? How did hysteria become the norm at a time when only prudent deliberation can make sense of matters that affect the lives and fortunes of main-street Americans? And when did imbecilic rhetoric based on misinformation and deceitful political maneuvering become the standards by which ordinary folks are encouraged to decide their futures?

We had eight years of contrived presidential press conferences and town halls where audiences were pre-selected and dissenters ejected just for wearing opposition political buttons or articles of clothing. But suddenly, we are told it's the Democrats who trample on the first amendment, not the people creating disorder and threatening violence at meetings. Members of the White House staff are accused of trying to stifle free speech by raising questions about comments made by media pundits who say the president is a fascist, un-American or, silliest of all, stupid.

It's bad enough that questions about the president's birth certificate continue to percolate. And Rush Limbaugh's outburst comparing the health-care logo to the Nazi emblem is a deranged talking point that must have taken shape after a long, sleepless night.  For the vast Limbaugh-Hannity-Beck audiences, however, acceptance of far-fetched claptrap is buttressed by an alarmingly limited grasp of history and political movements. If listeners were at all knowledgeable, they would be insulted by the expectation that they could swallow such nonsense. On the subject of fascism, they would realize that the fulminations of their heroes actually bear far greater resemblance to Goebbels' "big lie" propaganda in Hitler's time, than anything that informs the President's philosophy or behavior. But accusing Obama of being stupid, that's the last straw - - best not to project one's own failings onto others.

Meanwhile, political opportunists continue to maintain that their shout-outs are acceptable forms of protest. Attempts to take control of meetings are excused by organizers as justifiable because, gosh darn it, people are upset and free speech shouldn't be denied, a right that doesn't seem to apply when those who have called the meeting try to speak. Why it's probably even a really good idea for attendees to take weapons with them just in case someone needs killing. A lot of these folks are a bit long in the tooth for the call to arms by which they have been summoned, but the vitriol they express is ferocious and, if they can stave off cardiac arrest, they could conceivably continue to succeed in preventing serious discussions from taking place.

Disruptions and mindless assertions have consumed the air in much of the debate about health-care reform, and it isn't easy to combat the torrent of false information that rains down on a frightened and confused public. Sarah Palin says the president's plan is a prelude to euthanizing Down-syndrome babies like hers and others claim he would assemble a death tribunal to make end-of-life decisions; the alarm engendered by such false claims often overwhelms truth and reason.

Families that have had to deal with the suffering of a loved one in their last days have always discussed that person's care with physicians. There is nothing unusual about that process; health-care legislation would just make a physician's time spent in conversation with family and patient reimbursable.  Some patients elect to have every conceivable effort made to prolong their lives, others refuse further treatment, issue orders not to resuscitate, decide not to be hospitalized or opt for care in a hospice. It's all about choice, not government intrusion. Suggesting otherwise is just political hogwash.

It does seem, however, that the proposed legislation is overly complicated, that it attempts to cover too much and should be pared down and made more easily understood. As it stands now, its length and scope allows opponents to zero in on minor elements, turning smaller issues into major talking points and allowing orchestrated protests to assume far greater importance than is warranted. Whatever the reason, whether it is a political ploy or simply reflects a vast reservoir of ignorance, there is no excuse for striking fear into the hearts of susceptible people. Bill Maher may be on to something when he says "we should forget town halls and replace them with study halls."

 

Please respond to Ann Davidow's commentary by leaving comments below and sharing them with the BuzzFlash community.

FINDING A VOICE by Ann Davidow


Town Hall Ignoramouses

First, Obama has NEVER clearly stated what he wants in a Health Care Plan - no wonder it's confusing (and now, apparently, he's struck a backroom deal with the drug industry to take lowering drug prices out of the healthplan)!!! Second - just like shouting "Fire" in a theatre trumps First Amendment rights - aren't these "protestors" doing the same thing, only publicly? Third - why aren't the protesters taken away and arrested just like the folks who spoke out about the absence of a Public Option at the televised committee meeting headed by traitorous Max Baucus? Lastely, as long as the right wing and the corporations OWN the media, lies can be purpatrated and there will be NO answering voice, save, perhaps Olberman, Maher and Rachael Maddow, and they are only on cable. Let's have some Democratic billionaire buy a media outlet (like Fox) and broadcase a rebuttel to this nonsense. Until then, don't look for help from Obama. Just like Gitmo, the Wall Street bailout, DOMA, Don't Ask, Don't tell, transparency (he won't even release his visitor's list!) he seems to go back on EVERY campagne promise. Just another Pol!!

How can right-wing extremists...

John Dean (of Watergate fame) wrote a book, Conservatives Without Conscience, that explained how right-wing extremists can so often act with what seems to many as irrationality. There is in our country (for that matter in any country) about 30% of the population who are authoritarians. The word is a bit misleading in that most of this group are followers of authority who may have no inclination toward being the authority.

An authoritarian does not generally think for himself or herself, but defers to authority (e.g., FOX News, Limbaugh). Once an authoritarian has accepted someone as an authority there is no turning back, the authoritarian believes everything the authority says, no matter how absurd or irrational. Interestingly, authoritarians seem to all be conservatives (maybe not so surprisingly if you think of the liberal tradition being one of thinking for yourself).

There's a ranking system

Repubs are authoritarian to those they see as at least one notch below them, and submissive to those they see as at least a notch above.

All in the Definition

VintageV12: What you said is in complete agreement with what I said, provided you carefully read what I explained as the meaning of the word, authoritarian.

BUSH HAD CLOSED DOOR TOWN HALL MEETINGS

I agree with this writer. When Bush had town hall meetings, people were pulled out of the line if they were wearing a political button or tee-sheet? How's that for being fascist? If you didn't agree with Bushe et al, you didn't get in. Now that the Democratic Party is holding open forums, they are accused of trying to be one sided? These outbreaks in town halls are orchestrated, all you have to do is follow the conservative web sites to find out that they planned this. EVERYONE should be there, yes, but to ask questions, not to be roudy. How can you find out information if you are all yelling?? They are the brown shirts - discussion is not an option with them obviously.

You Have To Ask?

In a word, yes.