First Hour Bob Beauprez Guest Host with Joshua Sharf and Matt Dunn Second HourBob Beauprez Guest Host with Joshua Sharf and Matt Dunn
Third HourBob Beauprez Guest Host with Joshua Sharf and Matt Dunn
Public assemblies, American style
The Obama Administration has been the occasion for numerous Tea Parties and Town Hall Meetings, which are different species of the genus public assembly. How they are seen and understood depends a great deal on one’s point of view. As American government is based on the consent of the governed, it is perfectly appropriate and even necessary that public officials be chosen in periodic elections and that the people be free to express their views publicly. While the design of the Constitution is to avoid rule by the people in their collective capacity, relying rather on elected representatives, the First Amendment explicitly guarantees the right of the people to assemble peacefully for redress of grievances.
In our nation’s history, not a few of those public assemblies have been considerably less than peaceful, whether they were in opposition to taxes on whiskey, Jay’s treaty with Great Britain, the War of 1812, the Mexican War, abolition of slavery, the Civil War draft, industrial lockouts, World War I, racial segregation, the Vietnam War or the Iraq War.
Peaceful protest should always have the full protection of the law, and violent protests should be suppressed. The difficulty is that those rioting invariably see themselves as greater in authority than public officials, and the latter sometimes sympathize with the rioters’ goals, if not their means.
It is not surprising that the widespread Tea Parties that protested the record levels of taxing and spending by the Obama Administration should be viewed favorably by Republicans and unfavorably by Democrats. By the same token, the Town Hall Meetings called by the President and a number of Democratic Congresspersons and Senators are looked upon by Republicans as stage-managed affairs, lacking legitimacy.
So some Democrats supportive of Obama showed up to put a damper on the Tea Parties, and evidently more persons–of both parties–critical of the President, particularly his health care plan, have shown up at the Town Hall Meetings. Both parties clearly seek to establish their viewpoint as the authentic voice of the American people and the opposing view as merely a minority faction.
Although I welcomed the Tea Parties and look upon Democrat Town Hall Meetings with suspicion, I cannot say that I am pleased that more and more citizens are taking their grievances so noisily into public places and meeting halls. A major contributor to this development is the rise of Big Government, which treats opposition to its goals and methods as essentially illegitimate.
Fortunately, this year’s protests lack the violence that characterized the radical left’s opposition to the War in Vietnam, when both public officials and private citizens were targeted for bombs by the likes of the Weathermen, of which Obama friends Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dorn were members.
It is always a challenge for politicians to deal with tumultuous assemblies with a combination of good humor and firmness, granting the legality of the protest but seeking to defuse its passion and restore civil discourse. Politicians slandering citizens angry over the government’s less than candid explanation of its programs are pouring fuel on the fire.
This present situation is not unlike that of medieval Europe, ruled by monarchs and priests, in which ordinary people had no say and whose only form of protest was armed rebellion. It is only when citizens finally won the right to elect their leaders that the frequent resort to mob violence was no longer necessary.
But the longer that large, intrusive and costly bureaucratic structures dominate our lives, and render citizens powerless, the more those otherwise not inclined to angry outbursts will feel compelled to vent their spleen at the persons they chose to make their laws.
Far better, though, that we take advantage of constitutional structures that enable the people to vote for or against those persons they believe do–or do not–have the best interests of the nation at heart.
Democrats have long believed that, just as they have a monopoly on holding public office, they alone have reason to protest, even violently, if they feel strongly enough. Republicans more commonly look upon public office as a temporary calling and reluctantly take part in public protests.
And while leading Democrats have attributed base motives to Republican protestors (special interests, Ku Klux Klan members and even Nazis), the latter have not gone beyond labeling Democrats (accurately) as big taxers and spenders, socialists and petty tyrants.
We have an opportunity to restore government by the people in the 2010 Congressional elections and the 2012 Presidential election. That’s where the protests will really count.
Four-step rehab for DC dolts
Instructions for Congress: (1) STOP what you are doing. STOP destroying the country. Do NOT pass any more legislation. (2) Repeal ALL the legislation you have passed this year. (3) Use a "continuing resolution" from 2008 to cover the 2010 federal budget. I.e., freeze discretionary spending at the 2008 level, minus the 2008 "stimulus".
(4) Go to Hawaii on vacation and have fun. Go exploring. If you're lucky, maybe you'll stumble onto Obama's birth certificate.
America's spiritual core awakens
The secular progressive movement has been effective in limiting the spiritual component of issues from being more significant in popular discourse. In fact, spiritual aspects of issues have been ignored completely by the mainstream news and most political office holders. But the passion of the crowds and the grassroots nature of the opposition to President Obama’s health care overhaul is I believe derived from our nation's spiritual core as much as it is from intellectual evaluation. The spiritual question we face as a nation is simple and comprehensive, it is: “Is there enough?”
Enough what? Many will ask and then attempt to throw the question away, unwilling to consider the deeper meaning. “Is there enough, of anything?” Is there enough food? Is there enough wealth? Are there enough votes? A portion of the population answers this basic question in the negative. There is not enough, of anything. Therefore we must take from one group that has and transfer it to those without. Democrats in general fall into that mindset and President Obama has organized his entire administration around the premise that redistribution of all things including power is not only possible but mandatory for survival.
Nowhere in the policy and discussion of this administration do you find reliance upon or confidence in the proposition that humans create their world and that the universe is abundant. Many in the world experience starvation, but food is limited by choices of those in power, more than by material limits. North Korea suffers shortages because of Kim, not because there are limited resources.
Some in this country suffer financial hardship. I include myself in that group. But it is my experience of lack, not the imperative of lack that is at work. I know I can create a new business and recover my life. I need not take anything from another in order to have some of it.
President Obama believes that health, not health care, is limited and so he proposes equalizing the amount of health mandates by taking from some and redistributing to others. President Obama is willing to sacrifice the health of some to change the experience of illness of a few. Wellness is abundant in the universe but free people sometimes experience lack and suffering. Reducing the wellness of some will never increase the wellness of others.
Across the country thousands are seeing the debate about health care and financial recovery and are reacting in a truly spiritual manner. They know something is wrong with the core belief of lack and redistribution. Americans want solutions that recognize creative genius and American excellence. Obama promises a future of failure and works from the basis that there is never enough of anything. So he takes what others have.
Go ahead, report us
Slated on Backbone Radio, Aug. 9 Listen every Sunday, 5-8pm on 710 KNUS, Denver... 1460 KZNT, Colorado Springs... and streaming live at 710knus.com.
Guilty plea. Can't deny it. Caught redhanded. We at Backbone Radio, BackboneAmerica.net, Centennial Institute, and the '76 Blog don't like Obama's plan for government health care one bit. We think it's dishonest, dysfunctional, disgusting, dangerous, and deadly. We don't see how a policy that is anti-life for the youngest and oldest among us can possibly be "healthy" for everyone else. We think it's socialized medicine, a bankruptcy prescription, a poison pill. We don't see how a plan that is anti-freedom, and wildly expensive besides, can seriously be foisted on the public as "free."
So on the basis of that, we've been studying that horrible House bill and passing along the ugly realities of what's in it, line by line. We've been running down details on Democrats' townhall meetings in Colorado (not always easy) and urging folks to show up with a civil tone and hard questions.
According to the President's enforcers, this makes us purveyors of "fishy stuff," surveillance targets, undesirables who must be reported to Flag@WhiteHouse.gov. Busted!
The absurdity and creepiness of it all was beautifully captured today by columnist David Harsanyi (see DenverPost.com, opinion section). But since confession is good for the soul, we are fessing up here and now. Go ahead, report us. I understand Guantanamo is nice this time of year.
Actually it's California, not Cuba, that is our family's destination this weekend. Backbone Radio in my absence will be ably hosted by former congressman Bob Beauprez -- an expert on Nancy Pelosi and her Democrats -- with Matt Dunn and Joshua Sharf helping out.
They'll have a great show for you. Please tune in. This can't really be happening in America, can it? Yup, it's happening. But people are starting to wake up. The turn is coming. Thanks for doing your part.
Yours for self-government, JOHN ANDREWS