A First Hand View of a Raucous Town Hall Meeting

Congressman Fleming's public petititon for us to sign as approval of 'House resolution 615' asking that Congress agree to enrol in the public option:
http://www.fleming.house.gov/index.html

How Congress feels about being included in the public option of healthcare:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/aug/10/newt-gingrich/most-democrats-are-opposed-giving-their-health-car/

=======================
Obama, The Great DIVIDER
=======================
Obama was sold to us as the Great Uniter. His push for his ideology is causing the worse division in this country in decades. The man could not even bring unity between Crawley and Gates.

"These people have been called mobs because of their behavior."

These 'mobs' dare to speak truth to power. They dare to cling bitterly to traditions of American freedom. They dare to engage in democratic action. that is what upsets the Obama kool-aid drinkers so. How DARE people question authority, now that all power is in the hands of the socialist dopes Pelosi, Reid and Obama?

Uhh, Steve.

There was a meeting in Rock Hall Maryland on Friday. Where were you? It was civil.

Oops, "civil" ain't ABCnews.com's thing.

Lina how is that different from the republicans doing exactly the same thing to the people who want to hear the congressmen. The people who want to be able to ask questions, the people who want order.

Having the RNC call all of those people nothing more then hired union thugs is just as dismissive, marginalizing, and threatening those individuals right to express themselves. These people have been called mobs because of their behavior.

Again let me ask if your having an arguement with your husband, wife, etc. do you scream and shout at them every time they try to speak to you, try to answer one of your questions. Do you go about hanging effigies of them, or leaving a death threat against them. Their behavior has led to them being labeled a mob.

Also at the same time while not all are outsiders meant only to cause dissent the reality is that those types of people are there. Fox news has actually come across people that they have found told them they had no connection to the RNC and never had a connection to the RNC, but where leading republican campaigns against some of these congressmen and were not from the local area. While not all people are "bused" in the fact is that there are those people that in places that are and they are overshadowing those people who have legitimate concerns.

The extremists define the image now a days unfortunately. Broad generalizations with very little realization of the complexity in all situations is the name of the game.

People are getting involved. They are upset and dissillusioned. They are worried and scared. They feel that their way of life, including the right to dissent and free speech is threatened. It doesn't help that the media, Congress and Pres. Obama are calling them terrorists, an angry mob, and other names for expressing their concerns. I am worried and scared about how this situation is escalating. You can not suppress the people. They are going to revolt and it is a sad day indeed when it is being done by my beloved democratic party. What happened to us?

James I could not agree with your additions more! Maybe we need some tweeks to laws to help address the 'too big to fail' issue (but what's up with forcing them to merge so they're even bigger, how does THAT make any sense?!!)... and something to give shareholders more say so there is some control over inbred boards and executives and compensation levels - but it needs to be internal. Like health care, for the most part we need to get government OUT of things, not insert them further.

What I wouldn't give to see a real leader emerge who is classy, mature, shows some judgment and restraint, and who really admires and believes in America, her people, and the principals we were founded on. Someone who wants not only individuals to succeed but also businesses because when businesses succeed that means individuals do also and that means America does! Ultimately, the more America succeeds, the more we are able to help the rest of the world also - in other words, we ALL win that way.

And Atlas Shrugs Yet Again, just expanding on your comment: The entrepreneurial spirit and the American Dream inspired by Individual Freedom, Capitalism and the Free Market, have also been intregal components in creating our great nation. It tears my heart out to see the demonization of Capitalism and the Free Market through class warfare; and the limitations that will be placed on Individual Freedom by punishing success and rewarding mediocrity through wealth redistribution.

This Administration was elected on "Hope" but their punishing success will only cause the less fortunate to give up their dreams of success. Why shed blood, sweat and tears for success if the federal government is just going to take it all away. Instead they will give up their dreams and become enslaven to the federal government.

Oops! Sorry, its been a long day. "and is very deal with" Should have been "and is very easy to deal with"

At this point Id say we can pretty much say that we have a basic agreement. The primary difference being (and I apologize if you take exception to the wording) how paranoid each of us are of government. You tend to assume the worst of them to start, where I generally provide them the benefit of the doubt to start with.

Its been a pleasure. You have reaffirmed that not everyone has succumb to the general simple and closed mindedness of most of america now a days.

Posted by: Good/Bad | Aug 7, 2009 11:56:14 PM
---------------------

Thanks so much Good/Bad! No offense taken, I can see how it might seem that way. Its funny tho, because I'm actually very trusting and think very highly of people in general and certainly of our nation. Its been a tremendous number of incredible people both in the private sector and the government who have made America the great nation that it is.

Its the people who have worked together, the rule of law we've created and ,and the organizations that we use to maintain our civil society that all have contributed to our becoming that superpower - and that created the government that has such power over its citizens too.

That means also that the government must be that much more careful in protecting the rights of the citizens. We've managed all of this and we're probably the most generous nation in the world to boot. Its those very things that also make me want to protect it.

So, when something has very little real value, and is very deal with... but taking that small action has a large potential upside in terms of possibly avoiding what could be a major problem even if the chance of that problem occurring is small... well, then, I'm all for taking that up front small action. In this case that's the White House not asking citizens to report on each other, in order to ensure that we don't wind up with a scandal down the road.

That simple precaution protects all of us, shoot, it even protects the potential 'bad apple' (be it a person or group or agency) should there be one, and we protect our nation in the the process. So it seems a simple choice to me.

Atlas, you wrote:

Alyson, I DID go back to the posts! I wrote my replies directly off of them, and I even copied parts of your posts in order from your post. I addressed exactly what you were talking about, you being upset with feeling that the blogs twisted things, but I also pointed out that my posts had addressed far more than just that... and that where I HAD addressed the blog issue, I'd done so directly from your own post and what you said about them. I don't see how I could possibly address your post and issues more.

Posted by: And Atlas Shrugs Yet Again | Aug 7, 2009 8:56:08 PM

***

Okay note the time I posted the comment you were responding to:

Posted by: Alyson | Aug 7, 2009 7:28:35 PM

And note the time you left your long post that you reference to me:

Aug 7, 2009 7:33:50 PM

You posted your post AFTER I left my post, and went out to dinner. (shrugs shoulders).

Anyway, I did concede to a couple other people who argued the case against tagging the misinformation via forwarded emails and such purely from the Right to Privacy and Freedom of Speech standpoints that I agreed with them-- I tend to like the simple beauty of a good argument without embellishment, at least when it's an argument designed to help me see the other side. It's VERY hard for me to get past loaded words and misrepresentation of intent. I have a conservative right wing in my own family that drives me bonkers. So, full disclosure, I'm biased, and partisan. Not extreme, but I think the left makes more sense than the right. Obviously-- otherwise why would I be a progressive.

Yes, before anyone points this out, I'll admit I've used some loaded words myself. But in my view, they described what happened. I am who I am and see things the way I see them. I can't stand Cornryn. I don't trust him, and while I don't want to demonize him, you know, arguments on his behalf are heard by me in the same spirit an argument by me on behalf of Pelosi would be heard by those who can't stand her. And don't even get me started on Boehner or Cantor. We all likely have politicians we don't trust.

Anyway, that's that. Again, have a good weekend.

At this point Id say we can pretty much say that we have a basic agreement. The primary difference being (and I apologize if you take exception to the wording) how paranoid each of us are of government. You tend to assume the worst of them to start, where I generally provide them the benefit of the doubt to start with.

Its been a pleasure. You have reaffirmed that not everyone has succumb to the general simple and closed mindedness of most of america now a days.

p.s., and of course you are right re the voting numbers -- but they'll blame it on the Republicans anyhow, I mean, look, they already are even in the mere threat!

p.s., and of course you are right re the voting numbers -- but they'll blame it on the Republicans anyhow, I mean, look, they already are even in the mere threat!

Wishing you, and all of the other commentors (yes, including the Obama faithful) a fantastic weekend!

Posted by: James Danley | Aug 7, 2009 10:15:43 PM
----------------------

Thanks so much James. I always enjoy your posts too. Wishing you a great weekend also!

And Atlas Shrugs Yet Again wrote: "... he has said that they might have to resort to reconciliation in the Senate if they can't get the Republicans to agree?"

Actually he is wrong. It's if they can't get all 58 Democrats and the 2 Independents to go along with the plan that they might have to resort to reconciliation. He forgets that the Republicans only have 40 votes. NOTE: For those who aren't aware, reconciliation is a procedure that prohibits a filibuster and therefore only requires 51 votes for passage. The Republicans used reconciliation to pass the 2001 tax cuts.

Now then, I have truly enjoyed your various comments. As always you are spot on! It is just so frustrating that the Obama faithful just can't see the forest through the trees. Or if they can, they choose to ignore the forest. My prayer is that the "forest" never comes to fruition. But at the same time, unless the "forest" does come to fruition the faithful will never feel the pain that it will cause. And unless they feel the pain, they will never truly understand the concerns that you, myself and many others (including those who are standing up for their 1st Amendment Rights in the townhall meetings) have been expressing.

Wishing you, and all of the other commentors (yes, including the Obama faithful) a fantastic weekend!

Uh atlas if he was doing that as freely as people are saying, the Senate bill would be dead at this point. ...

Will he do it for all things, no but he also hasn't shut out ideas that are different from his. Honestly the House of Representative Democrats are doing that, he however as a figurehead is taking the blame for their bad behavior.

Posted by: Good/Bad | Aug 7, 2009 8:37:06 PM
------------------

Had you heard that in the last few days he has said that they might have to resort to reconciliation in the Senate if they can't get the Republicans to agree?

The statements that I'd attributed to him, were from him. The House situation doesn't help, but for that issue I primarily blame him for delegating the writing to them to begin with rather than providing some sort of reasonably fleshed out plan himself. I don't blame him directly for shutting the Repubs out, although I DO think that he could do a lot more to rein Pelosi in and help fix the situation, and he's shown zero interest in doing that. As to the Senate, I don't see that he has helped with that situation? On the contrary, he's now threatening the Repubs. with the nuclear option.

Sooooooo.... I just don't see where he has behaved in a bipartisan fashion much of anywhere. Or where he has actually been open to really incorporating ideas that come from outside his own ideology/party, or anything along those lines. Do you? On the other hand, I see a lot of examples where he's blocked or shut down anyone who actually tries to offer up suggestions or other ideas.

Don't know if Alyson will catch this, but hope you have a good weekend too!

----------

Oh ya I know I wasn't saying that the IP isn't there. ...

Also I wouldn't count the IP as being private information ...is tracking your IP address. ... online shops actually store specific IP addresses to prevent fraud.

While they do cooperate at times in this case I would find it a stretch that a service provider would open themselves up to that much risk without a subpeona. Consider what would happen to their business in this case if they did do that. Easy death knell for business if freely released in this situation.

Posted by: Good/Bad | Aug 7, 2009 8:33:53 PM

---------

Oh, ok, re IP being there. On the privacy aspect -- G/B, the difference here is that the IP address is tied to your email addy AND your free speech about a political topic. That makes it vastly different than a simple site statistics hit that isn't tied to anything else about you. So, in this situation, it really is an issue.

Oh, for the online shops -- in those cases, the only way it would be tied to any other info about you would be if you voluntarily decided to make a purchase there. (cookies, do we have to get into cookies? sigh Mine are off with very few exceptions). So, for shops its voluntary. If someone sends email to the gov. forwarding someone else's email - not voluntary for that forwarded person's information.

Again, on your last paragraph you are relying on reasonable behavior, logical thought, good decisions, good behavior. Isn't it far smarter for everyone, including the gov. to just not collect the data to begin with and then there's no question of anyone making a mistake, doing something stupid, doing something bad, whatever.

Its like signing a contract that doesn't specify a lot of things, and instead you just go on whatever the other person tells you they intend to do. Far smarter to put the details in the contract.

Besides, the elephant in the room is the Privacy Act. How do you get around that?

At the same time your right it would have been infinitely better if they had worded it differently.

Instead of saying forward the e-mails to us, it would have been better to say. Send us an e-mail with the information you have heard that does not seem accurate.

Posted by: Good/Bad | Aug 7, 2009 7:24:49 PM

--------------------

Yes, that would be better. It would still be problematic, tho, because there would be a lot of people who would still just forward emails -- and I'd bet the majority of them have NO idea that each email automatically includes 'envelope' data like IP address and so on.

Far far better for the White House to collect its own data, and NOT ask individuals to send in 'fishy' information that could wind up being all sorts of various things.

Atlas, I think perhaps you ought to take your own advice, and go back to the posts. It's really not my responsibility to explain the problem with this conversation to you--I objected to one thing you called me out on and you didn't respond to it and went off on something entirely missing the point-- I'm tired of it. I'm just not in the mood. Have a great weekend.

Posted by: Alyson | Aug 7, 2009 7:28:35 PM
------------------------

Alyson, I DID go back to the posts! I wrote my replies directly off of them, and I even copied parts of your posts in order from your post. I addressed exactly what you were talking about, you being upset with feeling that the blogs twisted things, but I also pointed out that my posts had addressed far more than just that... and that where I HAD addressed the blog issue, I'd done so directly from your own post and what you said about them. I don't see how I could possibly address your post and issues more.