Dover: Guinta Stickers, Tea Bags, Machine Gun Cutouts

the most shocking thing (4.00 / 1)

about these people is how ill-informed they are.

Not a one of them was out on the streets complaining about the Patriot Act being jammed down their throats, or the war in Iraq, or the billions shoveled at unscrupulous military contractors, including NH's own BAE systems. They didn't utter a peep about illegal wiretapping, or the Bush admins "free speech zones" which placed any protestors far out of the reach of TV cameras. Where were they when the Bushistas were trying to force libraries and book stores to turn over the names of books people were reading? I don't remember them being upset when the Bushistas were using those supermarket discount card records to spy on people and to trace what kind of food they were buying. (Hint: Stay away from the Mid Eastern Rice Pilaf, you terrorist) When it was revealed that the Bush admin was illegally spying on peace groups and Quakers, these folks weren't in a lather.

Apparently Bill O's dog whistle wasn't tuned to a high enough pitch back in those days.

---

by: susanthe @ Sun Mar 21, 2010 at 20:39:29 PM CDT

I'd Echo (0.00 / 0)

your thoughts on how flat out dumb some of these people are.  Most, I think, are just showing their reliance on the Faux News denizens, but a number of them are racists who've been given a reason to express themselves.  

There's also that "Government by other than rich, conservative Republicans is per se illegitimate" line of thought.  You'd think these twerps had never been on the losing side of an election before.  Oh, that's right.  This time, the guy they lost to isn't white.

---

by: Ref @ Mon Mar 22, 2010 at 08:16:35 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Same ol stuff (0.00 / 0)

When in doubt, call them names. That's intelligent.  

---

by: tom.lamy @ Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 05:00:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sad! (0.00 / 0)

But maybe they can't help themselves.  The seven deadly sins have long been recognized:
wrath
envy
greed
gluttony
pride
lust
sloth

What makes them deadly is that they are essentially self-defeating--the behaviors of people who are lacking in self-control.  The absence of self-control is what makes them targets for manipulation.  

---

by: hannah @ Mon Mar 22, 2010 at 01:49:03 AM CDT

Sadder (0.00 / 0)

Sadder that all those seven deadly sins were just committed by the majority in congress and you didn't even notice. You instead noticed a small protest in Dover and apply all that to us? Shameful Hannah.  

---

by: tom.lamy @ Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 04:58:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Protesters (0.00 / 0)

I drove by that office this weekend and saw three protesters outside the door. They held signs that read "Hands Off My Health Care."  I wanted to stop & ask them who their insurance provider was if they are among the lucky to have insurance at all, and to remind them of all the people who have been dropped for being sick.  Or not accepted for preexisting conditions.  Or who lost insurance when they lost their jobs.  

But these folks don't seem to engage in logic or  compassion, I just smiled to myself and quietly thanked Carol Shea-Porter and her staff for the work they do.

Elections have consequences. We won.  Let's make sure we keep on winning!

Paula

PS: about 75 yards away from these folks were about 4-5 Peace Protesters.  I was proud that they had more people.

Paula M. DiNardo
Dover NH

A Blue Hampster since 2007!

---

by: pdinardo @ Mon Mar 22, 2010 at 08:58:50 AM CDT

Tea Party last Saturday (0.00 / 0)

Hi all,

I was the gentleman standing in front of Carol Shea-Porters office when Paula DiNardo drove by. I went early as did the two women I was standing with.

For the record, there was over 100 people who took their time to make their opinions known last Saturday. I am sorry Paula didn't stop to engage us in civil conversation.

Paula, I have health care benefits from two sources. I have these benefits because of responsible decisions I've made in my life. I am not opposed to common sense regulation from D.C. that will protect the people from the dirty tactics of insurance providers. My feeling is that protecting the people is what the federal government was designed to do.  

For the record, the TEA Party was not protesting reform, but unconstitutional legislation. If anyone can point to a clause in the Constitution that says the federal government has the power to enact laws that create and competes with private enterprise, please let me know.

The Constitution of the United States was ratified after each state had ratified their own state Constitutions. The framework of the federal Constitution contains much the language of the states Constitutions, but was explicitly designed and written to limit the power of the federal government and maximize states powers, hence the people.  These limited federal powers are in fact the principals we are governed by.

The facts are the facts. The Constitution of the United States is a document that limits federal power and no where does it mention a federal right to create a health care system. By doing so, the federal government has encroached on its defined powers. As one of the richest countries in the world, we can certainly solve the problem of health care with common sense legislation at the state level, not federal intrusion (power grab). And any government that mandates its people to purchase a good from a private business is clearly infringing on the rights of the individual.

I'm happy to discuss further if the conversation is civil. We are all Americans.

Tom Lamy

BTW, we didn't vandalize CSPs office. Vandalism is destruction of property. The protesters merely hung tea bags with tape and left some signs.

---

by: tom.lamy @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 19:03:41 PM CDT

Find your own country, Mac. (4.00 / 1)

"no where does it mention a federal right to create a health care system"

Thank you for spelling out your ideology so clearly. Medicare is unconstitutional by your lights.

I'm an American. I don't know where you belong.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 19:10:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm not American? (0.00 / 0)

My so called ideology is federalism. I am also not opposed to Medicare. Medicare provides coverage to people who are aged 65 and over or who meet other special criteria like disability. Have you noticed Medicare in the red? Our liabilities top 100 trillion right now. That's our bill MAC. Why not fix Medicare and the other social programs before we go bust which we surely will.  

---

by: tom.lamy @ Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 04:35:45 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I know what Medicare is - (4.00 / 1)

It is a federal health care system, as is the VA hospital network. Both of those are unconstitutional according to your own words.

You haven't thought through just what you mean. Come back when you have.

---

by: elwood @ Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 05:19:45 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

When the Constituion (4.00 / 2)

was written, medical technology consisted of leeches and barber-surgeons.

The argument that  because health care wasn't in the Constitution it should not be a right is illogical.

---

by: Jennifer Daler @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 20:57:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

When the Constituion was written (0.00 / 0)

Regardless of technology, I'm sure the framers of the Constitution still had medical needs Jennifer. If they thought it was a right, they would have made it a right. Again, I am not opposed to helping people. I am opposed to bureaucrats in D.C. centralizing power. It's against our governmental principals. We can do much better than that.  

---

by: tom.lamy @ Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 04:42:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Take your self-righteous ignorance somewhere else. (0.00 / 0)

The framers needed roads too but didn't include highway construction in the Constitution. Ask your stooges in Congress to retroactively impeach Dwight Eisenhower.

---

by: elwood @ Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 05:33:43 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

highway construction is in there (0.00 / 0)

The Constitution does give the federal government power over "post roads"--- i.e., highways.

Article I Section 8 of the constitution covers healthcare reform.

The teabagger types--- and yes I am using the nickname "teabagger"--- are pretty inconsistent when it comes to the Constitution.  There is an uproar over the Census which is in fact mandated by Article I Section 2.

Then there is the famous Second Amendment, which does give the feds jurisdiction over firearms.

By the way: We had a strange bill in the NH House this session, HB1285, which would have allowed NH-based gunsmiths to make special guns & ammo stamped "Made in New Hampshire."  These would supposedly be exempt from federal regulation because they could not lawfully be taken across state lines.  The sponsors, to their credit, did recognize that the Constitution consists of more than just the 2nd, 9th & 10th Amendments.  They cited Article I Section 8--- but they forgot that there is much  more to that section than the "interstate commerce clause."

A clause down near the bottom of Article I Section 8 just happens to state that:

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

If you use "militia" in the same sense as the Second Amendment, then that clearly gives the feds power over firearms, even those stamped as being made in a particular state.

---

by: TimothyHorrigan @ Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 07:55:32 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

bootstrap meme alert (4.00 / 2)

Paula, I have health care benefits from two sources. I have these benefits because of responsible decisions I've made in my life.

The implication, being that those who don't have health care are irresponsible twits, who made bad decisions.

Tom - I didn't decide to lose my health care benefits. My husband had good insurance, and I was on his plan. He was working 2 jobs. I was working one. My job ended. He had terminal cancer, and got too sick to work. He couldn't afford to pay for my part of the plan, so I jumped off. I couldn't find a job, and ultimately I couldn't even look for one, because I was his primary caregiver. He died in August. I'm still unemployed, and I still don't have health insurance.

I don't understand people like you, who are smugly looking down at those of us who lack insurance, and speaking about responsible decision making. You were lucky, that's all. Lucky.

And if that's not civil enough for you, tough shit.  

---

by: susanthe @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 20:05:43 PM CDT

Apologies (0.00 / 0)

I apologize Susan. I did not mean to imply those who don't have health care are irresponsible twits who made bad decisions. I was speaking for myself and I'm sorry for your loss. I have been without health care myself at times. That does suck as does being unemployed. Let me ask you though. If Obama had spent the last year revving up the economy for which you could have gotten back to work, would you have taken that as opposed to this health care bill - most of which doesn't kick in until 2014? What about having a government bureaucrat punching in numbers and saying sorry, we can't cover that for you because you're too old? It's being reported that the administration will now focus on illegal immigration and cap & trade. What about the economy?  

---

by: tom.lamy @ Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 04:55:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

What about the economy? (0.00 / 0)

The recovery act saved thousands of jobs and gave middle-class Americans a much more significant federal tax cut than Bush's tilted-to-the-rich tax cuts.

Unemployment is still horrible, but since the passage of that act has been steadily getting less and less bad, to where now we are hovering around net job creation.

That was the first item on the Obama Admin's agenda.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 05:31:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

'Government bureaucrat" (0.00 / 0)

What about having a government bureaucrat punching in numbers and saying sorry, we can't cover that for you because you're too old?

Let me fix that for you...

What about having a for profit insurance company bureaucrat punching in numbers and saying sorry, we can't cover that for you because we don't want to lower our profit margin?

After all, that's what's happening now, at least for those of us lucky enough to have private insurance. Government programs may not be perfect, but they are far better than the status quo.

---

by: Karen @ Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 10:16:29 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

thank you (0.00 / 0)

As for this:

What about having a government bureaucrat punching in numbers and saying sorry, we can't cover that for you because you're too old?

Are you suggesting that in dealing with private, for-profit, insurance cartels something like that would never happen?

My husband had multiple myeloma; a cancer of the blood plasma and bone marrow. The cancer caused tumors in his bones. The bones were weakened, and sometimes broke. All of his ribs broke numerous times. His hip bones were riddled with tumors. One responded to radiation. The other did not. Eventually the tumors turned to cracks, and finally, that hip broke, and required hip replacement surgery. Fortunately he recovered beautifully from the surgery, and went back to working 2 jobs.

His insurance company tried to avoid paying for the surgery, claiming it was "elective" surgery. I had numerous unpleasant phone conversations with people at the private, for-profit, insurance cartel, where I informed them that my husband certainly could have elected to lay on the floor screaming for the rest of  his life. Eventually they did cover the surgery. Unfortunately, I had to have unpleasant conversations with the cartel on a regular basis for 3 years.  

So, Tom, my suggestion is this. That's a bogus, right wing talking point designed to scare people. That won't work here. We're smarter than that.  Anyone who has ever dealt with one of the cartels knows better.

---

by: susanthe @ Thu Mar 25, 2010 at 11:14:40 AM CDT

[ Parent ]