Busing In Support And Dissent: The Democracy Of Illusion

When former NH congressman Charles F. Bass first ran for the US House of Representatives, I followed him on Election Day, 1994, from the moment he awoke to the very end of his busy day. As a staff photographer for the local paper, I approached my editor with the idea; the goal would be to create a picture story of the aspiring congressman, the hometown boy who had done well in state politics.

While traveling in the Bass campaign RV through the southern and central sections of NH (2nd Cong. Dist.) visiting polling places, I learned what was then -- for me -- an astonishing fact. At that time in my life, I was entirely indifferent to politics; despite a couple of social issues on which I took a vague political stand, I actually hated ALL THINGS political until the 2000 election and 9/11 (and I probably still hate politics). I think many Americans who had been rather indifferent to politics suddenly took notice of what was happening in America during the Bush v. Gore showdown and, of course, after 9/11. Prior to those two events, I was steeped in a cynicism that led to indifference: in 1988, I did not vote for George H. W. Bush or Mike Dukakis. I wrote in Mother Teresa.

What I learned while traveling with Charles Bass only reinforced my cynicism, particularly regarding the Democratic Party, though I was not lacking cynicism toward ANY party or politician. But this one thing stood out.

You see, wherever we traveled we would find lots of supporters of Mr. Bass's opponent, the Democratic incumbent Dick Swett (absurd name, I know). At various intersections along our route, or at the polling places we'd visit, Dick Swett supporters would be doing their level best to influence the vote. Because he is an affable chap, Mr. Bass would jump right into the midst of the Swett supporters, greeting them cheerily, shaking hands, wishing them luck. Of course, as he did this sort of thing, I would be shooting away like mad, looking for decent juxtapositions between the candidate and his opposition.

When each photo-op was over, I would quickly ask the people I had photographed with Mr. Bass for their names and addresses. EVERY supporter of Mr. Bass would immediately and enthusiastically comply. But when I would ask those who were holding Swett signs, or other signs for Democratic Party candidates, I found that they mostly were resistant to giving me either their names or where they were from. Sometimes they'd tell me their names but, no matter how much I pleaded and pried, they would not give me their addresses (this stuff is kind of vital for a photojournalist for a number of reasons). One stubborn guy did finally tell me his name and his address; he was from Massachusetts, he said, but he did not really want his name in the paper.

After several frustrating hours of futility in gathering names and addresses of Dick Swett supporters, at least those gathered along the state's highways, I uttered my frustration aloud to Mr. Bass and his campaign manager. The two looked at me like I had fallen from the sky.

"Don't you know the vast majority of the people holding signs, particularly along the highway, are union workers?" said Mr. Bass. "They're shipped in from Massachusetts and Rhode Island and paid by their unions to support Democrats in seriously contested elections. They don't want to let on that they're not NH residents. Most of these folks don't even know who is running for what office. They just hold signs. Besides, most of them probably called in sick today and don't want to get busted by their bosses."

Now, it takes no degrees in political science to know one thing about American politics: Unions are almost solely the possession of the Democratic Party. These big corporations of labor are indeed big business. I at least knew this much when I heard what Mr. Bass and his manager were saying to me. But I never expected that the supporters lining the highways of southern NH were not New Hampshire residents.

So, when you hear that "Republicans" and special interest groups are "busing in" mad mobs of naysayers to town hall meetings around the country to dispense "disinformation" about Mr. Obama's allegedly just and pellucid health care plans, just remember who also buses folks in to sow "dissent" and "spread disinformation": The unions of the Democratic Party (or is that the Democratic Party of the unions?).

Those of us who witnessed the thousands of non-state "supporters" of Barack Obama descend upon NH during the last election cycle have seen first hand what bused-in mobs actually look like.

Really, it is all a big, sick joke.

©2009/Contratimes. All rights reserved.

No, We Aren't

(Inauguration Day, 2009)

It is ironic that Jamie Foxx, one of many pop-culture icons on hand Sunday at the Lincoln Memorial lauding America's first pop-culture president, Barack Obama, would quote the late Thurgood Marshall during early inaugural festivities:

“Each of you as an individual must pick your own goals. Listen to others but do not become a blind follower. Do not wait for others to move out. Move out yourself. Where you see wrong or inequality, speak out, because this is your country, this is your democracy. Make it. Protect it. Pass it on.”

Has there ever been in the history of the American people a more blind, conformist, passive and incurious mass than those who have deified Barack Obama? Have you met a single Barack Obama supporter who has an original thought in his or her head about the man? Have you met anyone informed about who this parvenu actually is, what he stands for politically, and what he has actually ever accomplished? This is a president without a resúmé, and yet "change has come!" This is a president who has neither a record of success nor one of failure, and yet "hope is here!" Granted, a case can be made that the election of George W. Bush to the office of president is incontrovertible proof that one needs no qualifications to serve in the Oval Office, but at least Bush had been something, even if that something was a failure. He may have only been a governor of a large state; he may have only been a poor businessman. But at least he had a record, a provenance; even if his life was replete with failure and mediocrity, we could map those failings for ourselves. But Barack Obama, whose only notable qualification is that he has been perpetually running for president, is surrounded by millions of folks who adore him, blindly, mindlessly (and even cynically); he is revered for doing nothing more than, as Hillary Clinton said during her campaign, giving a speech (or two). Jamie Foxx urges the very people who have acted like a common, disinterested and mindless herd not to "become blind followers." The irony is too great not to note.

Inauguration Day. This is NOT a great day for America, though I will say it is an exciting and important day for Americans who have been under the impression that America has been such a bastion of racism that the election of a person with darker skin than white could never be elected to the presidency. I am happy for those who find some message of potential and possibility in his election. But today is a bad day for those who disagree with the over-arching theme of the inauguration -- that "We Are One" -- for the simple reason that America is not one. Over 56 million people voted against Barack Obama: 46% of those who bothered to go to the polls believed he was not fit to be president. And there is no evidence -- NONE! -- that those who opposed him, and STILL oppose him, harbor ANY racial ill-will against him simply because his skin is dark. There are millions of disenfranchised voters not applauding this day -- for reasons having everything to do with ideology, with policies -- and nothing to do with race. Those who voted against Barack Obama do not see "change"; instead they see 1992 and corruption, scandal, in-fighting, smoke-and-mirrors promises, and deception.

We are not one.

I am grateful to a Boston radio talk show host for reminding me yesterday of one of the political left's mantras repeated during the bulk of the Bush presidency. That mantra was shouted even by Hillary Clinton in the wake of Bush's (and her) decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq: We heard "Dissent is not unpatriotic!" from all sectors of our nation's disenchanted. But if dissent was patriotic under the Bush regime, it is surely as glorious under the Obama regime. I admit I do not hold much in common with the host who reminded me of my right to dissent, but I do accept his commentary that the double-standards inherent, not only in the press but in the Democratic Party itself, are so despicable that dissent is not only the only option, it is the noblest option.

For this citizen to be in good standing with his own conscience and convictions, dissent is my only choice. And no, I am not afraid of the ridiculous rejoinder that I must therefore be a person who supports inequality, injustice, racism, oppression, torture, war and "the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer." Moral rectitude is not, even by a long shot, the banner flying over the Democratic Party and its new president. I dissent against deception. I dissent against idolatry, of worshiping a mere man. I dissent against the claim that "America's standing in the world" as defined by pop-culture has been elevated by the new imperialists moving into the White House, led by a pop-idol president. I dissent against the obvious socialistic plans of the new regime; I dissent against the fear-mongering used by Mr. Obama to push down the throats of the American people a "stimulus package" that we need "urgently," and I do so noting that such dire and frightful forecasts coming from Mr. Obama's lips are religious in nature and not one whit factual: he claims to know outcomes he cannot know, telling us we "must" do X and Y before it is "too late," that we are in "imminent danger" and we MUST act with a "preemptive" strike against this mother-of-all recessions. (The economic alarm rung by Mr. Obama sounds exactly like the "non causa pro causa" global warming fallacies used by the likes of Mr. Al Gore.)

I dissent against the idea that America looks to a president, some guy in Washington, for inspiration. For guidance. For direction and hope and a moral compass. I dissent against the day we have become so pathetic we must be reminded by a president and a Congress that we need "national days of service," as if America heretofore had been struggling to find volunteers: that until we all saw Barack Obama roll paint on a wall yesterday, Americans had no idea that helping others was a good thing. I dissent against the idea that kindness is to be a matter of law, and not a matter of grace.

And not only do I dissent against the welfare state, I dissent against those who believe the state -- the collective unified as one -- and not the individual acting in freedom, is the basis of the American constitution. I dissent against the new master/plantation mentality already evident in the new regime -- that the master will provide jobs, stimulus, safety, ease -- if we all just comply, if we all just pick our cotton and stop our partisan bickering -- and give the fruits of our slavish labors back to the master to redistribute fairly among those who are "less fortunate." I dissent against a state that seeks to enslave and indebt its citizens to itself. And I dissent against the Ponzi scheme that is the Obama regime's economic plan.

I dissent against the blindness of people like Bono -- who has made himself into a god, perhaps a lesser god. He seeks to eradicate poverty, and yet can countenance -- and participate in -- an inauguration costing more than $105 million. Recall the OUTRAGE over President Bush's intent in 2004 of spending a mere $40 million for his inauguration -- and Bush's party was during the heights of a sterling and thriving economy. Today home foreclosures are at an all time high; Barack Obama has warned us of how dire things are in this recession. And yet things are not so dire that he and his minions would consider refraining from blowing hundreds of millions of dollars on pop-idols and party favors. (Barack Obama believes Americans will overlook these huge expenditures, or so it is reported.)

We are not one. And no we can't.

In honor of the words of Thurgood Marshall, I shall indeed pick my own goals. I will NOT be a blind follower. I will fight injustice and evil and idolatry everywhere I see it. I will NOT be like the common herd that has gathered at the beck-and-call of pop-culture, baptized by the zeigeist, at the National Mall.

Peace through dissent.

BG

IN ORDER

THE HOME OF THE BRAVE

In the United States of America, it is dangerous to protest the Bush regime. Heinous repercussions abound. One hears every day of dissenters being called 'unpatriotic,' or even 'enablers' of the enemy. Such brutality! The repression shocks even the most politically obdurate heart. I can hear God now: The wounded pride of these martyrs cries out to me from the ground!

Last week, James Taranto discussed the heroic acts of a few dissenters of the Ahmadinejad regime in Tehran. Though these protesters have much to fear, their fears pale in comparison to those experienced by American dissidents who speak truth to the 'real' power, George Bush. So perhaps Taranto's trenchant remarks will fall on deafened ears, ears bludgeoned and tortured by American expansionism and tyranny:

[The Iranian protest is] a reminder, too, of just what phonies and blowhards our American 'dissenters' are. They know it takes no courage to oppose a democratic government that holds freedom of speech sacrosanct. So they spin lurid fantasies of authoritarianism in order to convince themselves of their own bravery. [emphasis added]

One cannot find a more incisive statement ever penned about American anti-Bush protestations.

LIKE A BRIDGE OVER TROUBLED WATERS

I don't know about you, but I thought compassionate people care about children, especially children who do not have health insurance. David Limbaugh quotes the singular Paul Simon who recently spoke in favor the SCHIP legislation vetoed by President Bush:

The president's veto of the reauthorization of SCHIP appears to be a heartless act. I'm here today to ask those of you who supported the veto to reexamine your conscience, to find compassion in your heart for our most vulnerable and sweetest citizens, our children.

Heartless indeed. At least apparently. But I'm certain that Simon's statement proves that George W. Bush is not, nor was he ever, a compassionate conservative. After all, the ever-cerebral Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi put the whole thing in perspective yesterday:

And so my colleagues, we have a decision today to override the President's veto, which would be in my view the right thing to do for our children and for our country. It's not about compassion, it's about fairness…

And so I urge my colleagues to think about the children, to think about Bethany and the other children.…

The President is isolated in this. Don't join him in his isolation. Come forward on behalf of the children…

Let's give a vote for the children and against the President's veto. [emphasis added]

Since Ms. Pelosi is the supposed leader of the Democratic House, we can conclude from her remarks that her house is not about compassion, but fairness. That sounds fair to me. Compassion be damned, and so too compassionate liberalism.

Isn't it good to know that the household of the United States is in the hands of a person so capable of simplifying things?

GOOD NEWS FOR THAT 2006 MANDATE: It is SO last year!

Remember that mandate given to the Democrats after last year's mid-term elections? You remember -- when the Democrats gained control of both the Senate and the House? It's amazing how time flies when you lead so effectively. I mean, Congress currently has the lowest approval rating in the history of polling. Put another way, this is the worst Congress in history. Talk about squandering goodwill. But the best part of it all is knowing that Americans prefer ANY previous Congress -- even the "rubber stamping" Congress of 2005-06 -- to the Congress we now have in session. Stunning, isn't it?

And we thought Newt Gingrich was disliked.

But there is a bright side: My guess is that Europe loves this Congress. At least that is something in which we can take pride.

Peace.


©Bill Gnade/Contratimes. All Rights Reserved.