Add to favorites Examiner Bio

The left’s war

                The War in Afghanistan may be a war that, for the most part, both the left and the right want, but the War in Iraq is decidedly the right’s war. But there is another war going on right now, and it is the left’s war. And it is a war waged on everybody else. 

                While the relationship between the left and the right has always been a quite volatile one, recently the fight has gotten downright dirty. While the republicans were running the White House, we spent a lot of time calling them playground style names. I know because I was one of them. Some called Bush a moron, some called him evil, and some even called him Hitler. I liked to watch a popular comedic show on the cable channel Comedy Central called “Little Bush” in which I could imagine President Bush and all his cronies as small children. But then I turned on CNN and realized I was the same show. One guy at an anti-Bush rally (while tea parties are not as some suspect as anti-Obama, there absolutely were anti-Bush rallies) dressed up as the devil with a Bush face. And everybody laughed when he said “nucular”.

                All of this dissent was considered very patriotic and American, because it was. The United States was formed by a pack of rebels- people who didn’t want to follow the rules of Spain, England, or France. Maybe they were rebellious in a political sense or maybe they were rebellious in a religious sense, but the point is that they were all rebels. We, as American children, were taught to be opinionated. Often in college, or even in high school, we are encouraged to participate in our government, either directly or through protest. One elementary school teacher in Northern Virginia brought her students to an anti-war protest. Keeping our government on its toes it not only what Americans do best, but a very healthy thing. 

                Fast-forward to 2009. Dissent, while popular a year ago when it was against the Bush White House, is now not only considered unpopular, but just downright forbidden. The same person who was perfectly in line when disagreeing with former President George W. Bush is not allowed to disagree with even a small part of an Obama White House. People are called unpatriotic, terrorist, racist, and the wholly unpopular Republican whenever they voice a minor concern or even a question.

                Jon Voight spoke at a conservative event and had this to say:

                “Everything that Obama has recommended has turned out to be disastrous. It saddens me greatly to think we were the great, powerful good in the World. We as Americans knew America to be strong and we were the liberators of the entire world. We are becoming a weak nation. Obama really thinks he is a soft-spoken Julius Ceaser. He thinks he is going to conquer the world with his soft-spoken sweet-talk and really thinks he’s going to bring all the enemies of the world into a little playground, where they’ll swing each other back and forth. We, and we alone, are the right frame of mind to free this nation from this Obama oppression.” 

He has also called the President a false prophet and accused him from bringing in socialism. All of these accusations, while many may disagree and that’s great, are mild in comparison to how Bush was treated while he was sitting as the president. But the Voight’s accusations were dissent and meant to incite conversation and not violence, some accused him of spouting “hate speech” that was a direct threat to President Obama. Voight denies this and says that, “those that speak out against the Obama administration are demonized and attacked,” and he is right. 

                Voight is not the only one that has been outright attacked over small discrepancies in agreement about the Obama administration and its policies. A news story about how much key leaders in the White House incited a question from one person. She asked why a “body man”, whatever that was, was making so much more than a secretary. Because she dared ask a question, she was called a Republican, an automaton, an Obama “hater”, and a host of other incendiary names. All of that for a question. One person commented that is was “interesting” that Democrats were always being called sheep when Republicans were so eager to follow Rush Limbaugh. I commented to my father about how it was wrong that they would assume that someone that asks a simple question would be an Obama “hater”, and if an Obama “hater” she would have to be a Republican, and if she is a Republican, she would have to be a follower of Rush Limbaugh (anyone who was not absolutely brainwashed would have to admit that this is a pretty big stretch to make because of a question). He stated that even if she was a follower of Rush Limbaugh, even if we hung on Limbaugh’s every word, at least being a follower of Rush Limbaugh not only costs us nothing, but doesn’t cost anyone else anything either, but following Obama does. 

                If Obama were not the President I would consider diagnosing him with a spending habit. Actually, maybe I should anyway. There has never been a President in history that has cost the American people more money, and we dealt with Bush. When politicians attempted to take out some of the earmarks in the economic stimulus bill, they had their arms twisted by the White House bulldog Rahm Emanuel until they not only stopped making requests, they stopped reading. 

                I have been writing on the current political and economic climate for over half a year now. While much of the response that I get is positive, people who disagree with me like to do it on a personal level, and sometimes people’s defense of President Obama’s feelings are so intense that one would think that I had boiled the President’s bunny, not made a legitimate critique of his political ideology. I wrote an article about how one theory on the economic situation was being ignored- that of the national debt’s part in scaring people out of making purchases. I was called “nuts”, “dangerous”, and told that the if we had not had the Fed (meaning the Federal Reserve) we would be in much dire straits than we are now, despite the fact that I never mentioned anything about the Federal Reserve in that article at all (who’s nuts now?). When I disagreed with the G.I.V.E. Bill I was told I was going to be reported to nanci pelosie who was very good friends with the commenter (yes, this is exactly how it was spelled in the exchange). When I suggested that I thought most of Obama’s healthcare reform plans were essentially good and should pass, but that I did not feel that health insurance mandates would be a positive thing for anybody, I was called “selfish” and told that I “had a place in Iranian politics.” Ouch! This same person attempted to write me no less than seven times. But all this ignores the hundreds of times I have been called stupid, moronic, un-American, un-Patriotic, Republican, a right-winger, conservative, and many, many more names from people who don’t know me. 

                But none of these comments can stand up to the fact that because of my political beliefs, I am probably on the Department of Homeland Security’s watch lists. Recently, a whole host of groups will now be considered potential homegrown terrorists, and many of them were people that visit a tea party, are conservative, are Ron Paul supporters (I proudly am, thank you very much!), are supporters of third party candidates, or just about anybody that identifies with the quality of dissent. But I am not so upset that I may be a target of DHS, but that my father and sister may be. Their crime? They are veterans of the United States Armed Forces. Thanks for your service to this country, indeed!

                Recently, on a popular forum site focused on politics, a user called Barack Obama “the messiah”. While I will decline to compare anyone to a deity, many have called President Obama a messiah, both satirically and seriously. Last month, Evan Thomas, editor of Newsweek, visited MSNBC and said, “Obama’s standing above the country, above the world, he’s sort of G-d.” Unfortunately, another user on the site did not see that this was a common occurrence and reported the other user to the moderators to effectively get the user’s comments removed. The fact that a year ago someone compared President Bush to the devil, the antithesis of the messiah, and was considered a patriot and not an abusive or threatening person was lost on the owners of the site and on the user himself.

                So powerful is the need to control the perceived thought crime that is the disliking of any Obama’s policies that the White House has begun to censor the questions being asked at town hall meetings. The Obama administration does not want any negative images of the president to creep into our heads, and therefore carefully chooses those that may attend the town hall meetings, those that may ask questions, and which questions they may ask. You better believe no hard questions that may embarrass the president were allowed in. This upset, not only the public who has a vested interest in this country and the plans that the Obama administration has for it, but the White House press corps as well. Chip Reid and Helen Thomas, both hardly right-wing conspirators, voiced their concern for the new policy. Helen Thomas, who has been a White House correspondent for quite a while even said, “The point is the control- we have never had that in the White House. We have had some control, but not this. I’m amazed. I’m amazed that you people who call for openness and transparency, and you have control… You’re formal engagements are pre-packaged.” When Robert Gibbs suggested they have the transparency related talk after the town hall meeting had commenced, the gutsy woman said, “No, no, no, we’re having it now!... Of course you would because you don’t have any answers. I don’t have to e-mail  [the question she as a member of the public wants to ask President Obama at the town hall meeting], I can tell you right now what I want to say.” The Obama administration wants to pass laws without the public, or even fellow politicians, knowing what is going on. This is bad for democracy and therefore, bad for America.

                Despite what many may think I did not write this article to persuade people to become a libertarian. I did not want it to be an argument of whether the Republicans are better or the Democrats, as both are quite flawed. Though I hope that all people (or at least most people) would share in the desire for freedom that I do, I don’t want to force anyone to do that which I do just because I think it is right. I am not always right, and I don’t want anyone to think that I am. All I want is a seat at the table for everyone. I want the discussion to take place and be allowed. I want to be able to take a stand on an issue and be told by someone that they do not agree, and here’s why, but not be told that I should not believe that which I believe at all. We need everyone to be able to make intelligent critiques of every president, with the realization that this one is not somehow special, untouchable, infallible. As Glenn Beck says, if you believe that you are right, you do not have to silence those that do not agree with you, because the truth will eventually shine through. We need to be able to open the doors to debate and stop going into attack mode in an attempt to “protect” a man that is determining our future. He has a highly paid secret service staff for that.