The American Spectator

BD57| 8.7.09 @ 11:03AM

Jim:

the distinction is easy - if you favor the message of the protesters, it is "grassroots"; if you don't, it's "astroturf."

Sorry - - - I know you're trying to be intellectually honest ...... :)

Tim| 8.7.09 @ 11:39AM

Kulaks!

Real American| 8.7.09 @ 12:26PM

the difference is that if it's a left-wing protest, it's grassroots (even if it is funded by George Soros and/or uses a community organizer) and if it's conservative/libertarian, then it's astroturf (even if there is no organization to it.) There. that's easy.

Ellen Z Lewis| 8.7.09 @ 12:51PM

When your 70-year-old neighbor starts going door-to-door talking up the problems with ObamaCare, it starts to feel like the real thing.

Caroline| 8.7.09 @ 12:56PM

ObamaCare's mandatory death counseling after 65 makes it a life and death matter for older folks--and they know it. Democrats are terrified of losing their vote.

Tim| 8.7.09 @ 2:08PM

"Last week’s Daily Show also featured a montage of the President refuting criticisms of his health care plan. After the string of presidential rebuttals Stewart concluded, “You know a sales pitch is in trouble when it starts with “Look, you’ve got to trust me. We’re not going to kill your grandparents.”

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/cstigall/2009/08/06/if-obama-loses-jon-stewart-hes-lost-america/

Bob| 8.7.09 @ 2:35PM

Nice try, Antle. If you've watched some of the news reports, you'd see that the bulk of the protesters are senior citizens. This was the only segment that supported McCain over Obama. In one group, the people were asked how many of them were on Medicare and whether they liked it or not.

If you listen to the points made, instead of being interested in discussion, they tried to block discussion. This is not the tactic of a grassroots movement, this is the tactic of anarchists and what they were encouraged to do by lobbyists like FreedomWorks.

We are a better country when we discuss issues on the merits rather than try to out shout people. This is not being encouraged. My guess is that the organizing groups have targeted seniors with scare tactics just like the Democrats have done in many elections. For example, there is no mandate for people to discuss end-of-life options (I've read the bill), but these uneducated seniors believe the right wing extremists.

Now I do not like a majority of the items in Obamacare because they will just cost too much and won't reduce overall cost. But this is a rational argument based on the merits, not scare tactics to old people.

As a strategist, the way Democrats fight this is to tell seniors that Republicans want to take away Medicare -- and this is just the first step. The way you fight scare tactics is with other scare tactics. If there were true discussion, this would not be necessary. However, when you tell people to shut down discussion, scare tactics are the only option.

There are lots of thing in the health care bill not to like. You don't need tactics like this to make a good case. Furthermore, tactics like this will inhibit the young and minorities from joining the Republican party. In the long run, this is not a good tactic.

Furthermore, as I've said several times, I expect the jobs picture to get better by the middle of 2010 and Obama's approval ratings are going to go through the roof when this happens. Remember that Reagan hit an approval rating of 40 during this same point in his recession recovery cycle.

Again, I believe this Republican strategy is a huge mistake in the long run. It is a strategy that wins a few skirmishes, but will lose the war.

Bob| 8.7.09 @ 2:37PM

Caroline, THERE IS NO MANDATORY DEATH COUNSELING. READ THE BILL. THERE IS A REIMBURSEMENT WHEN THIS IS DONE. THIS IS A LIE. WHY DO YOU ACCEPT IT?

JP| 8.7.09 @ 2:59PM

Bob,
You don't know how these bills work. Whether it is the EPA or the USDA, the laws are fairly vague. It is in the execution of these laws that scare so many people -in this case Seniors. All it takes is for the Health and Human Services Department to add concrete detail to a pertinent statute or "guideline". Counseling can mean many things to many people, and the federal government always take the most expansive role it can get away with. Eventually, much of the debate will end up in the courts, and then everything depends upon the judges. And as Justice Sottomayer said, it is the Appeal Courts where most policy matters are set. In the mean time, the nightmare scenarios that people around the nation worry about will become reality.

If you doubt me, just look at how the Clean Air Act has evolved over the last 38 years. Most recently, it was the Supreme Court and not Congress that ordered the EPA to classify CO2 as a pollutant that can be regulated. It doesn't take much imagination to imagine these mandatory counseling sessions evolving into de-facto death sentences.

W. James Antle III| 8.7.09 @ 2:59PM

That has no bearing on whether the sentiment is grassroots or not.

This also has no bearing on whether the sentiment is grassroots or not. You clearly do not know what "grassroots" means. And the notion that there is a great lobbyist-seniors nexus here is absurd.

Whether the tactic works or not, groups like FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity are much smaller than AARP, AFSCME, or SEIU. However responsible conservative groups might be for coordination and talking points, they can't do much if the don't find angry people to mobilize.

JP| 8.7.09 @ 3:31PM

Bob,
One other thing. You're assuming that this recession will be like the one from 1981-1983. It is not. First of all, inflation in 1980 was at 14% and Volker allowed interest rates in 1980-1981 to soar to 19.5% to soak up all the excess liquidity. Gold in 1980 closed in at near $1000, but by the end of 1983 sank back below $300. Ditto for oil. In the mean time, the high interest rates killed off the consumer economy, and every sector of retail and the industrial markets took a beating.

This recession is quite different. The CPI now does not measure energy or food prices (Perhaps that is why the Fed was asleep at the helm from 2003-2007). Interest rates now do not take into account commodity prices (energy and food), and therefore continue to be set dangerously low. Unlike 1981, interest rates are at 0% and the Treasury has printed more than $2 trillion of new money. The Fed Chairman Bernecke has added all of this liquidty to the Feds accounts. In the meantime President Obama is running defecits of anywhere from $1 to $3 trillion (depending on how far you project his budgets). With so much credit and cash sloshing around the market, I would expect some activity for 2010. However, if you follow the market gyrations since March you will see a dangerous parallel of the Feds actions concerning the addition of so much cash to its balance sheets and the stock market. It appears that very little of the new credit is going to business and consumer markets. Most of it seems to be fueling speculation in both equities and commodities. Just during the last 10 days oil went from $61/barrel to $76 barrel, and the stock market has grown 3-5%. The dollar, however, is falling. There's inflation out there -big time, and new bubbles of speculation could be forming both in equities and commodites.

We could be seeing the worst of 2 scenarios: the first being the final run up of stock speculation engineered by Benjaman Strong circa 1928-29, and the second being the Authur Burns inflationary practices of 1977-1979.

Inflation is already out there. Since corn and soybeans are already tied to the price of oil, food prices will continue double digit increases. If the dollar continues to be sold off, interest on T-Bills could hit 4% again. If unemployment continues to rise, we will have the worst of both worlds. High inflation and a jobless recovery.

Bob| 8.7.09 @ 3:45PM

Antle, again, nice try. However, I encourage you to review the many newscasts. You'll see primarily senior citizens packing the halls and spewing out untruths regarding the legislation -- the primary one was death counseling. I hope I am wrong, but I believe this is hyped by this group being the most anti-black during the campaign. Just look at all of the Nazi comments on the signs they carry.

So, you can continue to fool yourself into believing this is a real grassroots efforts, but the logic indicates otherwise.

Again, I think Republicans would be better served arguing the bill on the merits rather than on scare tactics. You know that the talking points of these "grassroots" people did not come from them. I'm sure, the vast majority of them have not read the bill.

JP, you can always make the argument that it doesn't make any difference what you find in the legislation, but if Republicans were really serious about provisions like that, they would OVERTLY make that provision optional by putting in that language. They don't want to do that because then they wouldn't have ammunition for the seniors.

This is all a game to those people in Washington. That's why we need citizen legislators, the end of lobbying donations, and term limits. Perhaps then, both sides will work for us rather than special interests like FreedomWorks, AARP, SEIU, AIG, etc.

And Antle, with Rush manning the microphone and a black President, there will always be a small group of angry, old whites. All you need to do is give them a few talking points and tell them when the meetings occur. Then, they will go from meeting to meeting (which has been documented) and do their thing.

Bob| 8.7.09 @ 4:00PM

JP, virtually every economist says that we will not see inflation in the near to mid-term. The reason for that has to do with the fact that other world economies are seeing the same situation as us and this will be a slow recovery due to increases in productivity.

While you are certainly correct that the fundamentals of this recession are far different than Reagan's, the net effect on the public is the same, i.e., that jobs are a lagging indicator and that the signs of the recession being over is strong.

Since you are wrong about the inflation threat, it undermines your argument. If the inflation threat were real, I'd agree with you totally. On the economic front, I'd bet on a "W" type recovery and a much slower recovery than we saw in the 80's (which again will hold inflation down).

If you take a look at corporate profits, you'll see a dramatic improvement this quarter. Even AIG achieved a huge profit. We also have a situation where inventories are now below demand. With the increased profitability of financial institutions and demand now outpacing supply, you will see increased production and loans made to viable companies. In addition, this unexpected profitability will have a positive impact on federal revenues.

Bernanke knows what he has done and I look for Fed rates to rise during the first half of 2010 as GDP increases. While this will slow the recovery, it will also tamp down inflation. If we do see the current trend continue, I would not be surprised to see him act even during the first quarter of next year.

W. James Antle III| 8.7.09 @ 4:14PM

Bob, I urge you to go to any town hall meeting anywhere in the country on any topic, where you will see senior citizens "packing" them.

Nobama| 8.7.09 @ 4:48PM

Once again, faux RINO Bob is defending his master, Obama and ObamaCare. Now, he's even defending Union thugs and goons who are beating up on his fellow Americans.

He's a tough guy, you know, considering he grew up in the 'hood and all. Even Harvard couldn't knock that toughness out of him.

Sounds like he'd be a good candidate for ACORN, good old 'RINO' Bob.

Bob| 8.7.09 @ 5:02PM

Antle, you are absolutely right about senior citizens always packing meetings. That's why the FreedomWorks strategy of scaring them false claims works. I would rather see middle of the road Americans talking about fiscal responsibility and entering an adult dialogue with their elected representatives instead of old, angry, white people shutting down any discussion. Have you seen all of the pictures of people carrying Nazi signs to those meetings?

This strategy will backfire and hurt the Republican party once the economy turns around next year.

Campy| 8.7.09 @ 5:32PM

Bob,
Well, here's a middle of the road American and idea for you. HR 3200 proponent leaders should be trying to persuade; not prevent discourse.

I am shocked and appalled at the dismissive and even menacing tone escalating toward ordinary citizens voicing disagreement and frustration. Instead, they/we are labeled extremists. In particular, I find the White House 'fishy' email address chilling and outrageous, and smacks of something akin to Soviet elitists or Nazi Germany. I don't know how you can call it anything else.

On this bill, the process is being rushed and crammed down American throats, especially without adequate time to READ, study and debate. Even before buying a washing machine, I research options and read beforehand! Oh yeah, you said you read it...I'm still trying to wade through the legalese, mumbo-jumbo, double-speak. But from what I can see, while not 'death counseling' per se, the end-of-life counseling IS mandatory and you yourself yelled in caps at Caroline (oops! looks like an intimidating scare tactic to me) that there is a reimbursement. Like $ is supposed to make it allowable? If I want end-of-life counseling, I will seek it out myself, thankyouverymuch when the time comes and if I choose to even be bothered at that stage by some anemic, gov't pencil pusher.

The take away from all this, is that as long as constituents parrot what liberals want them to, it's acceptable to gather. Any dissension, however, is 'a disgrace' per Senator Shaheen. The thuggery I've seen on those clips comes from liberal haters, complete with their ACORN intimidators, and the only Nazi sign I saw, had a slash through it as in NO.

For the record, I am NOT a senior (yet—don't rush me), Washington insider, lover of insurance companies, nor part of any well-financed, conservative special-interest group or mob. With a nod to Barbara Boxer, who also objects to protesters (unless they've been cleared with the fashion police), I can be very well dressed and not 'fake' to attend a tea party or any other event. I am a recently-unemployed (thanks to that efficient stimulus package that's working so great), middle-aged American who loves this country and has worked hard all my life and paid my taxes. I am not a religious-right wing freak, nor a rich white man, nor rich at all...the common presumption of liberals when one doesn't agree with the party line. But I am an ordinary American outraged by the Democrats’ health care and climate change proposals.

Our elected Congress and Senate are not listening to the majority of those who elected them. Even on opencongress.org—that "free, open-source, not-for-profit, and non-partisan web resource with a mission to make Congress more transparent and to encourage civic engagement" (did you get that last part, Bob?)—only 12% support the bill. 12%.

Congress is supposed to work for us, HEAR us, and represent us fairly. Maybe, just maybe, people are getting fed up with being treated like peasants by elitist lawmakers who presume that only they know what's best for the people and cram through UNREAD legislation. Seems like the reasonable thing to do would be to pay attention. This is their job, the one they were elected to by the people who, uh, pay their salaries, by the way.

To 'shame' and de-legitimize protesters or dismiss them as fringe, or 'bussed-in' senior citizens is a personal affront to me, wise patriots of this country—and indicative of Administration denial and hubris.

Bob| 8.7.09 @ 6:35PM

Campy, no elected official will listen to ordinary citizens as long as they are allowed to become professional politicians and as long as lobbyists are allowed to finance their campaigns. This is not just a Democrat problem, but a Republican problem as well.

I don't de-legitimize the protesters as long as they allow discussion. If they don't allow discourse, then they are not interested in solving any problems and have de-legitimized themselves. I'm probably more sensitive to this because when I came back from serving in Vietnam, and proudly wore my uniform, people would spit and give me their middle fingers. I feel the same way about the senior citizen mobs who won't allow people to speak and argue.

Since you have the time, I suggest you actually read the bill. I don't happen to like it because I think it will cost too much -- and we cannot afford to have more debt in this country. But I don't hear the "protesters" make this argument. You should attend one of those meetings and see for yourself.

I would be careful about taking polling information from internet sites -- they represent primarily activists and not the country as a whole. They are open to "stuffing the ballot box" -- and I think you know that.

So, Campy, besides the talking points, what is it about the bill you don't like? I thought you said you hadn't read it....

ConservativeWanderer| 8.7.09 @ 6:38PM

Bob:

And I bet all those SEIU folks in, say, St. Louis just happened to show up at the same town hall wearing the same SEIU shirt on their own, without any organization at all?

Your glaring double-standard is showing, you know.

Ken (Old Texican)| 8.7.09 @ 6:44PM

Antle
Bob is a dope. We ignore him.

Just for Your info....we ARE now organizing.
Wait for it. TOGETHER EACH ACHIEVES MORE

We are mobilizing. You guys keep informing.
Thanks

STOP OBAMACARE NOW| 8.7.09 @ 7:44PM

Bob is lying again. ONLY ONE Nazi swastika sign was carried by an ObamaCare protester and it had a red slash through it. It was a small handmade sign carried by a young woman wearing cutoff shorts who was protesting the Fascistic details of ObamaCare.

Nancy Pelosi made the charge that protesters were carrying Nazi signs and such and Bob (the faux RINO) is passing her lie along.

Bob lied again by saying there was no mandatory death counseling for those over 65; but Section 1233 of one legislative proposal in the house deals with a government requirement, "For an Advance Care Planning Consultation." This 'consultation' is no more or less than an attempt to convince seniors to die. What is even more shocking is located on page 425 of the bill that "Mandates absolutely that every five years after 65 people in Medicare have a required counseling session." These sessions will recommend only palliative and hospice care for the elderly.

Fight this evil bill; save your parents and grandparents!

You are a slug, Bob. You are beneath contempt.

ConservativeWanderer| 8.7.09 @ 8:14PM

Stop Obamacare Now, you really have to forgive Bob. He only knows what his programmers in the DNC tell him.

Campy| 8.7.09 @ 8:14PM

Bob,
First of all, I am glad to not be one, even as a punk teen, flipping you the finger. My father, brothers and sister, all served in the military and I honor them and those who serve(d), regardless of which party sacrificed our brave.

Your first paragraph is the very argument for term limits; it's all about getting re-elected rather than the job at hand. About polls, you are so right... but opencongress.org is a pro site for HR 3200, regardless of the cloak it wears, so I would not be so quick to dismiss it. However, you said you wanted to see discussion from a middle-of-the-road citizen. BTW, a conservative black man got roughed up in St. Louis by liberals... he was only trying to sell t-shirts that said: Don't tread on me. (Thanks, Gadsden and Ben.)

The seniors I know DON'T get out unless it's vital... and I honor their wisdom and perspective. They are not inclined to be puppets and to presume they are easily manipulated is a snub. They are not (necessarily) senile, but at this point in their lives have nothing to lose and years of experience as a lens.

What I said is, that I am still wading through 1,017 pages. While I, indeed, have some time (temporarily) to do so, my job is to be out LOOKING for one, and entrusted that this country's interest was in good hands with representatives. How naive of me.

Not avoiding your question, but will have to get back to you on specifics once I complete the monumental task. (And to think, will go through it again with the cap & trade bill pending!... an even scarier scenario.)

Besides the cost factor (being downplayed except by the CBO, and btw, gotta love that visit by BO), successful government-run programs are oxymoronic. But it is NOT all about the money; it's about freedom of choice. Nowhere in the constitution is this mandated. Indeed, the constitution is relatively hands-off, and if you were willing to put your life on the line to abide by it, why is this any different? Where does it say that we, as a people, are to provide everything for everyone? I respect the right of those who want something that I do not; let them pay for it...no problem. But why isn't my right to NOT choose the same and not pay for it, equally respected?

May I suggest that you read the constitution; the one that the President is, to the best of his/her Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?

Patriot| 8.7.09 @ 9:34PM

Campy, you sound dear; but if you knew the troll, Bob, like we know him--you'd flip him off with both middle finders. The guy's a major azz.

Bob| 8.8.09 @ 1:13PM

Conservative -- I condemn BOTH sides for stifling debate. They are BOTH being used by lobbyists and are lemmings. A Democracy works best when you have public debate -- not shutting people up. As I've said before, I am against this bill because of the cost because it is the cost of health care that is the real problem. Because of the activity of these far right radicals, I think this legislation will eventually be passed since middle America will not read this bill and vote against the crazies who won't let people talk.

StopObamaMan -- You are a liar concerning MANDATORY counseling. You are also probably a birther, right? This is just a provision for PAYING doctors for this service.

If Antle, Klein, Tyrrell had any integrity, they would set you straight regarding this lie just as Tyrrell had the integrity to say the birther claims were false.

The point is that Republicans should fight this issue on the merits -- not on lies. If fought on the merits, they would win. Fighting it on lies like this may make you feel good, but it will backfire. Ramesh Ponnuru had a brilliant commentary in the latest issue of Time on the real issues of why this effort should fail. I wish there was someone at AmSpec who could make such a rational argument.

STOP OBAMA'S DEATH PANEL| 8.8.09 @ 1:46PM

StopObamaMan? You're getting senile, old man.

I cited the ObamaCare statute as proof of my MANDATORY DEATH COUNSELING charge; you cited nothing. Liar troll.

Old folks have got to know that ObamaCare will include a DEATH PANEL--as sure as the sun rises in the east. There has to be health care rationing; there aren't enough doctors, nurses or money to go around--and the fascist liberals know it.

That's why government workers want nothing to do with ObamaCare.

STOP OBAMACARE NOW! SAY NO TO OBAMA'S DEATH PANEL!!

Bob| 8.8.09 @ 1:57PM

ObamaMan -- you need to go back to school to learn how to read. I also referred to the same passage. There is NOTHING in the passage that refers to mandatory counseling. You are simply a liar. It PAYS for counseling just like your insurance plans PAYS for any other medical service.

You have a choice -- you can either admit you are a liar or you can admit you have a comprehension problem. Which is it?

Again, if Antle or Klein showed some integrity here, they would back up my claim.

No ObamaCare Death Panels!| 8.8.09 @ 2:43PM

You wouldn't recognize integrity if it hit you in the face, moron. Also, old men like you should admit the fact that ObamaCare has put you in their fascist liberal cross-hairs.

Rationed care for you.

NOBAMACARE DEATH PANELS| 8.8.09 @ 2:46PM

Big Bad Bobby has his tidy whiteys in a twist. lol!

C4P| 8.8.09 @ 4:36PM

Look at Bob; self-righteous king of half-truths, flat out lies and misinformation bleat, yip and bray about the ObamaCare information promulgated on this AmSpec thread.

Little troll hates to lose. Waaaah, waaaah, waaaah!