These are the times that fry men’s souls with white-hot anger

October 31, 7:56 PMPolitical Buzz ExaminerJames Hyde

Previous Next

3 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Political Buzz Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

These are the times that fry men’s souls with white-hot anger; could they trigger widespread violence? It would certainly appear so.

Twice during the modern era, backlash votes have got us in hot water as a nation. Those weary of Watergate, Richard Nixon and the irremovable stain it and he left on the national fabric ignored Jerry Ford and, to assuage their outrage, pulled the lever for Jimmy Carter.

He became without doubt one of the least effective and most impotent and incapable of any of his predecessors or successors. His one accomplishment was helping to ink a peace agreement between Israel and Egypt. When he left office, the prime rate was in high double digits. The Iranians were still holding hostage our ambassadors and their staffs. The single rescue mission that took Carter plan  was an unmitigated disaster, and there was nothing that he did that gave the nation hope.

The same happened again in 2008. People unhappy about, enraged at or downright hateful of the Bush administration embraced the change Barak Obama promised.

Rebelliously, they with bitterness of heart and mind punched the chads by Obama’s name, then looked forward to the fruits of the “change” he promised. They obviously hadn’t learned their lesson from Carter, for the change that Obama’s forced upon us, like a gargoyle unleashed, has sparked a rage not seen in this country since the Civil War.

Vietnam, civil rights, the Flower-Child Generation and corrosion of morality rankled the Silent Majority, but little did that group react beyond the occasional “pity party” cocktail gatherings, but there was no action taken other than the occasional op/ed articles in local papers.

Not until we got a hefty dose of Obama’s idea of change—which is the foul antithesis of the transformation of Washington he promised during the campaign—was the Silent Majority not only invigorated, but stung to fury and action in the form of the Tea Party movement. But it was too late.

They could find but one major news outlet and scant mention in local papers giving them a stage from which to voice their displeasure. The rest of the press just couldn't take off the rose-colored glasses. Those of us who joined were castigated by the likes of Nancy Pelosi, who as Speaker of the House, comports herself as some righteous avenger shocked that anyone would even consider disagreeing with her.

Promised by candidate Obama were bipartisanship and C-Span coverage of the healthcare and other debates about issues critical to us all. Instead, he followed the teachings of Alinsky, which advocate surprise and speed in facilitating change before opponents can stop it.

Tarp 2, the stimulus package—unread by most in Congress— and an outrageously expensive budget measure were shoved through with stealth, surprise and speed. The plan had been to push healthcare reform through just as quickly, but it hit a snag, and Obama had no Plan B.

The back and forth and atrociously ill-conceived 1,990-page bill in the House is one of the most dangerous bills ever conceived by Congress.

Not only were C-Span cameras not present during what has become metastasizing malice, but the locks were changed on the doors to the room where Rahm Emmanuel held court with cowed Democrats who conspired against the will of the majority of the people to literally lock Republicans out.

This is the stuff of the Soviet Union. As a result, seeping evermore into the forums of the debate about the Obama agenda—especially discussion of healthcare reform—is talk of violence as the ultimate outcome of the change so eagerly hoped for.

It used to be that discussion of highly controversial issues could get heated and sometimes, but rarely, a fist was thrown in exasperation. But that was as far as it went. Increasingly, there’s talk of violence now, talk so serious it puts us on the cusp of actual plans for Civil War, or a second American Revolution. It’s language unthinkable just a year ago.

Today, however, people nurturing unfathomable rage—not simple dissatisfaction with the status quo, nor the stuff of the “Ain’t it Awful” game—have raced well past civility, shot past rancor and are now rushing onward to a nexus marking the spot of the beginnings of violent conflict.

Never in my 58 years have I seen hatred seethe so white hot as it does today. In fact, so hot is the fire within that the result will dwarf the fires of despair and protest emanating from riots in the inner cities during the 1960s.

It is from such sentiments that wars, revolts, revolutions and social upheaval arise. Psychiatrists theorize that violence erupts when issues become so contentious that however potent and right the points of a debate, when one side is shut out, shut down, ignored, it feels helpless and without recourse.

That only fuels the fury and gives all of us who passionately feel as we do a very short fuse. And given today’s sociopolitical climate, it’s not at all unlikely that violence will increase.

Increase? Yes. It’s already started, although pre-dating the reign of the current president. Consider the acts of Eric Rudolph and others like him who felt so helpless about abortion that their only way of registering their protest was to bomb abortion clinics. That, in turn, led to the shootings of two prominent abortion doctors, one, Dr. Barnett Slepian, while standing in his kitchen, and the other, Dr. George Tiller, who was in a church pew.

These incidents were the work of members of the extreme Right whose feelings of powerlessness.

But the tide has turned, and attacks are now coming from the extreme Left, and given the intensity of rage this country now cultivates, it’s hardly surprising that one of the targets is a noted and respected journalist at CNN.

Prior to that incident, a few months ago, James Pouillon arrived in his wheel chair at his usual perch near school grounds in Owosso, Michigan, as he did every morning. With him was his posterboard banner decrying the ills of abortion. A man filled by hatred of two men he sought to kill was driving by Mr. Pouillon on his route to murder when he pulled out his gun and fired on the abortion protestor, killing him for expressing his opinion.

The violence had escalated from killing those engaged in acts considered by some outrageous, to those who exercised their right to free speech.

And then, only days ago, Lou Dobbs, a conservative commentator on CNN had his home fired upon, his wife a mere fifteen feet from the bullet’s path. Bill O’Reilly and Glen Beck of Fox News have spoken openly of the police cars that guard their homes 24/7/365. It can only be assumed that one sits outside Sean Hannity’s home, and that of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and countless other conservative commentators who employ security contingents to keep them safe.

This all begs the question, what kind of people have we become? E Pluribus Unum—the Latin pledge of unity—is eroding at an unfathomable rate that will fade to obscurity at some point as violent events begin to occur on a far wider scale. Engineering the hatred on the left are such hateful immigrants as George Soros, who funds MoveOn.org.

It’s understandable to me that violence will grow. Obama lied to us during the campaign. He painted the word “change” in shiny red, white and blue, but red is bleeding over the other colors as his true beliefs emerge.

Presenting himself as a moderate during the campaign, he’s been unmasked as a devout socialist. But the foul, radical stain is not all Obama’s doing.

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and other tyrannical Democrats who change locks on Capitol doors to keep Republicans out have no place in government. Nor does the congresswoman who held no town meetings because she was so certain the discourse would be negative she saw it as being, “beneath the dignity of her office.” How dare she?

Are we now subjects of royalty? Have Obama, Pelosi and Reid, et al become monarchs to whom we must bow and scrape?

Are we now to march in goosestep at the demand this bunch, who like demons, have possessed and putrefied Democracy? I think not.

Illegitimate charlatans, they outrageously call us “Un-American” for expressing opposing views, or worse, Pelosi’s “Astroturf” and “Brown Shirts,” a contention immediately proven false by the demeanor of the vast majority of those of us in the Tea Party movement when we descended in large numbers on Washington.

Given this attitude of our government, it’s difficult to contemplate anything but violence. But before we clean our guns, consider that we do have recourse, a way out so powerful it can displace Reid, who is well behind his Republican challengers in Nevada, and reduce Pelosi to nothing more than just another thorny, ornery member of the House.

Our opportunity to restore the country to what it should be, as well as the Constitution that defines it, comes in November of 2010. If we are to avoid violence, a Civil War or second Revolution, then those of us shut out by the powers that be must show up in record numbers to vote them out of office and put this country back on the right course—not the Bush or Obama course, not the Republican’s nor Democrat’s course, but the course envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

Once that’s achieved, we must work to restore civility, mutual respect and true Democracy so that never again can one party turn its back on, lock out or try to silence the voices protected by the First Amendment.

Only if we purge the scourge can violence be avoided by stopping the Obama agenda with a veto-proof majority in the House and the replacement of as many radical senators as we can of the one-third of that body up for re-election.

Let us vote for those candidates dedicated to the Constitution. If we fail to get them elected and the country focused on its grand roots, then violence, I fear, will be the only recourse. Let us pray it does not come to that.