# Domestic terrorists take aim at health care reform **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 24, 2010, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568 "2010-03-24T02:11:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2010, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/201 "2010-03-27T18:35:57Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > I’m sorry; what proof was that again? In other words, you have proof that it was a tea partier or GOP extremist, and not a Democrat trying to change the conversation away from the recently unpopular bill they just passed? You’re still one of those sane moderates we should all aspire to be, aren’t you **Mr Smashy**? This looks to me like you’ve got a bit of a stick in your craw that makes you willing to violate Occam’s razor. _Real_ moderates don’t do shit like that. ---
**Author:** ![Kolga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e56c9b/32.png) [@Kolga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolga)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2010, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/202 "2010-03-27T18:40:32Z")
Thanks for responding to my questions **Mr. Smashy**. However, I do have some follow-up questions. If, as you say, the bulk of the Republican-sponsored amendments weren’t substantive, then is your argument against the bill that the Republicans didn’t get to dictate the content enough? Is the Republican definition of bipartisan “we determine the content of the bills passed by Congress, and the Democrats don’t argue or propose any content of their own”? If the Democrats propose content that the Republicans don’t like, do the Republicans plan to not compromise at all until the content is completely to their liking? How is that bipartisan? Can you explain why this bill, which was pretty much the plan that the Republicans have been proposing for almost the past two decades, wasn’t supported by Republicans this time? Apparently, the Republicans proposed almost this exact plan at several points in the 1990s, and this plan is almost identical to the Massachusetts plan signed into law by Romney in 2006 and supported by Brown. Why, now, do the Republicans think the plan is a bad idea? ETA: Also, regarding those black churches burned that you claimed were burned by Democrats in order to be able to blame Republicans - your addressing of that issue seems to ignore your original statement. Can you clarify that statement, support it with actual cites and evidence, or retract that statement and apologize? ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2010, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/203 "2010-03-27T18:48:37Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > You’re still one of those sane moderates we should all aspire to be, aren’t you **Mr Smashy**? This looks to me like you’ve got a bit of a stick in your craw that makes you willing to violate Occam’s razor. _Real_ moderates don’t do shit like that. And before **Smashy** gets in here with his No True Scotsman accusation, I want to make this clear: real moderates, real realists, look at the facts presented to them and make their opinion based on those facts. Ideologues start with an opinion and twist the presented facts to fit that opinion, or ignore facts that can’t be twisted. Looking at a death threat made to a legislator because of HCR, or that a black church was set on fire, and deciding that it’s more probable that these are acts of left-wingers trying to make right-wingers look bad is twisting the facts to support your pre-established opinion. ---
**Author:** ![C3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/c3/32/3108_2.png) [@C3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C3)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2010, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/204 "2010-03-27T19:14:48Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > Y’all wanted to hear about arrests? > > [http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view\_all&address=389x8023193](http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8023193) > [http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/scottott/EPA-arrests-CNBCs-Rick-Santelli-40212122.html](http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/scottott/EPA-arrests-CNBCs-Rick-Santelli-40212122.html) > [UPDATE: Six arrests….Tea Party Patriots: Carnahan, St Louis: Constituents locked out of town hall while SEIU let in? | Moderate in the Middle](http://moderateinthemiddle.wordpress.com/2009/08/07/tea-party-patriots-carnahan-st-louis-constituents-locked-out-of-town-hall-while-seiu-let-in/) > I saved THE BEST for last > > ['Oath Keepers' Leader Arrested For Child Rape; Cops Find Stolen Grenade Launcher In His House | Crooks and Liars](http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/tea-party-leader-arrested-rape) > > That’s one hell of a guy right there. That’s your fucking Tea Party. > > Let your little war start. I’m betting none of your Tea Baggers have the balls to really DO it. Um, I may be misreading this, but I think that article on Santelli is meant to be a joke. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2010, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/205 "2010-03-27T19:42:18Z")
[el threado wrongo] ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2010, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/206 "2010-03-27T21:27:00Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > That’s one hell of a guy right there. That’s your fucking Tea Party. > > Let your little war start. I’m betting none of your Tea Baggers have the balls to really DO it. If they know what’s good for them (always a dubious proposition with that lot), [they’d better not.](http://christopher-calbat.newsvine.com/_news/2010/03/26/4073188-an-article-i-wish-i-would-never-have-to-write-to-those-calling-for-a-civil-war-this-marine-wants-you-to-stop-and-think) ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2010, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/207 "2010-03-27T22:08:44Z")
Here’s a link to a recent On The Media segment regarding polling and just how inaccurate it can be. [OTM](http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/2010/03/26/04) But we all know that, right? Answers to polls highly depend on the wording of the questions and (if multiple choice) the options given. Two very good reasons why ALL polls should be judged critically and taken with grains of salt. According to that segment, most of the polls where people state they disagree with HCR if asked a reason say t_hat is it because the current reforms don’t go far enough_. And to not mention that salient fact is not only disingenuous of the GOP and Fox et al, but downright false. On another note, I especially love those over age 65 screaming about the government funding health care, as they cling to their Medicare. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Lok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e8c25b/32.png) [@Lok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lok)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2010, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/208 "2010-03-27T23:26:31Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > Hey, call me a fool a few more times, instead of, you know, making substantive arguments. > > Those examples you cited were budget-oriented, which was what reconciliation was built for. This is not primarily a budget bill. You should know this. Perhaps I give too much credit to the peopple on this board. > > You might actually reading your own cites before calling names. I am not jumping into most of what has been said here, because others have done a much better job of handling it than I could. But I was wondering, do you have COBRA where you work **Mr Smashy**? Silly question I know, everybody has it because it is a federal law. That was put into effect in the **C** onsolidated **O** mnibus **B** udget **R** econciliation **A** ct of 1985. IOW, a major change in health insurance laws, passed using reconciliation, because it had an effect on the budget. Which is what the reconciliation bill that Obama will sign this week does. It makes changes to an already passed bill that will **save the federal government money** , by removing some of the “back room deals” that the Republicans were so upset about. Of course, every Republican in both houses voted against removing those deals. Wouldn’t want to pass up the chance to score some political points by trying to save the government some money. :dubious: And that horrible individual mandate that the AGs are filing suit over and the Republicans hate so much? That is one of the most bi-partisan parts of the entire bill, since it is a Republican idea they have been pushing since 1994. I can see why you don’t think there are any substantive Republican ideas in the bill. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2010, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/209 "2010-03-28T01:40:29Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > If they know what’s good for them (always a dubious proposition with that lot), [they’d better not.](http://christopher-calbat.newsvine.com/_news/2010/03/26/4073188-an-article-i-wish-i-would-never-have-to-write-to-those-calling-for-a-civil-war-this-marine-wants-you-to-stop-and-think) “This article was deleted by the author.” ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2010, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/210 "2010-03-28T01:42:23Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > “This article was deleted by the author.” Bummer. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2010, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/211 "2010-03-28T15:30:30Z")
> [@C3](#): > > Um, I may be misreading this, but I think that article on Santelli is meant to be a joke. It’s possible, but the others were not. ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2010, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/212 "2010-03-28T17:48:55Z")
> [@eleanorigby](#): > > Here’s a link to a recent On The Media segment regarding polling and just how inaccurate it can be. > > [OTM](http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/2010/03/26/04) > > But we all know that, right? Answers to polls highly depend on the wording of the questions and (if multiple choice) the options given. Two very good reasons why ALL polls should be judged critically and taken with grains of salt. > According to that segment, most of the polls where people state they disagree with HCR if asked a reason say t_hat is it because the current reforms don’t go far enough_. And to not mention that salient fact is not only disingenuous of the GOP and Fox et al, but downright false. This. I was one of those people who opposed RomneyCare 2.Obama. If I had been asked about it in a telephone poll, I’d have said so, because I want a single payer system. If I’d been asked the day after it was signed which word came closest to expressing how I felt about it, I might well have gone with “disappointed.” I wouldn’t mind telling a pollster that, because I trust that the people I elected would not govern by opinion poll, and would settle on the best plan they could pass, with a little help from Naked Rahm Emmanuel. OPinion polls are generally meaningless. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2010, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/213 "2010-03-28T21:53:50Z")
> [@Kolga](#): > > Thanks for responding to my questions **Mr. Smashy**. > > However, I do have some follow-up questions. > > If, as you say, the bulk of the Republican-sponsored amendments weren’t substantive, then is your argument against the bill that the Republicans didn’t get to dictate the content enough? Is the Republican definition of bipartisan “we determine the content of the bills passed by Congress, and the Democrats don’t argue or propose any content of their own”? If the Democrats propose content that the Republicans don’t like, do the Republicans plan to not compromise at all until the content is completely to their liking? How is that bipartisan? > > Can you explain why this bill, which was pretty much the plan that the Republicans have been proposing for almost the past two decades, wasn’t supported by Republicans this time? Apparently, the Republicans proposed almost this exact plan at several points in the 1990s, and this plan is almost identical to the Massachusetts plan signed into law by Romney in 2006 and supported by Brown. Why, now, do the Republicans think the plan is a bad idea? > > ETA: Also, regarding those black churches burned that you claimed were burned by Democrats in order to be able to blame Republicans - your addressing of that issue seems to ignore your original statement. Can you clarify that statement, support it with actual cites and evidence, or retract that statement and apologize? **Kolga** , your attitude and language is far too reasonable for the SDMB, don’t make me have to report you… I agree that this plan looks like Mass’s plan. I have no problem with Mass’s plan, or if every one of the 50 states want to pass Mass’s plan. I _do_ have a problem when the Federal government tries to do this, because a) it’s unconstitutional IMHO, due to the ridiculous reading of the commerce clause, the 10th amendment, and probably the capitation-nature of the tax, b) it will clobber the [deficit](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/25/AR2010032502406.html) in all liklihood > [@](#): > > We are now $8 trillion in debt. The Congressional Budget Office projects that $12 trillion will be added over the next decade. Obamacare, when stripped of its budgetary gimmicks – the unfunded $200 billion-plus “doctor fix,” the double counting of Medicare cuts, the 10-6 sleight-of-hand (counting 10 years of revenue and only six years of outflows) – is at minimum a $2 trillion new entitlement. > > It will vastly increase the debt. But even if it were revenue-neutral, Obamacare preempts and appropriates for itself the best and easiest means of reducing the existing deficit. Obamacare’s $500 billion of cuts in Medicare and $600 billion in tax hikes are no longer available for deficit reduction. They are siphoned off for the new entitlement of insuring the uninsured. > > (snip) > > Obamacare was sold on the premise that, as Nancy Pelosi put it, “health-care reform is entitlement reform. Our budget cannot take this upward spiral of cost.” But the bill enacted on Tuesday accelerates the spiral: It radically expands Medicaid (adding 15 million recipients/dependents) and shamelessly raids Medicare by spending on a new entitlement the $500 billion in cuts and the yield from the Medicare tax hikes. and c) I think the law of unintended consequences will wreak havoc in this case. We’ve already discussed in other threads how many doctors will now consider retirement, as per an admitted less-than-scientific poll (it may not be the 45% quoted, but it certainly isn’t zero). Another example: AT&T just [announced](http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-03-26/at-t-to-take-1-billion-charge-on-health-care-reform-update1-.html) that they are going to take a $1b hit to earnings to account for these added healthcare costs. Will that come out of shareholder equity? Out of employee benefits or salaries? Out of finally fixing their woefully oversubscribed network… :eek: No doubt the Dems are in charge so they get to do stuff like this. But the public has [repeatedly said](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_032810.html?hpid=topnews) that they are against this; there is still more against than for, even after the emotional burst of passage. In situations like that, I think it’s incumbent on the party in power (Dems or GOPers, it doesn’t matter) to take that into account and make it bipartisan, or don’t pass it. Unlike the other ignorant poster who suggested that Obama’s election was a mandate for UHC, it’s clear that that was nowhere [near](http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/) the case: as always, “it’s the economy, stupid”. Finally, I would have much preferred to see a bipartisan solution like the [Wyden-Bennett](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/04/AR2009080402523.html) bill, which Obama could have had back in August. (Note that this still had the unconstitutional mandate, but still, bipartisan is better than not when doing something this massive). Obama said he wanted a [bipartisan bill](http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/06/10/1959072.aspx). I doubt that. I think he just wanted a victory on his sig issue so he would have some kind of legacy. Unfortunately, his legacy will be one of exploding the debt and sending our kids to the poor house due to an entitlement we cannot afford. PS Since I can’t put my hand on the cites I’ll retract that black churches stuff… the stuff i heard a few years ago, either radio or TV I forget which, wasn’t Dems doing it though, just other black folks. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2010, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/214 "2010-03-28T22:00:45Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > You’re still one of those sane moderates we should all aspire to be, aren’t you **Mr Smashy**? This looks to me like you’ve got a bit of a stick in your craw that makes you willing to violate Occam’s razor. _Real_ moderates don’t do shit like that. Hey, I wasn’t using the word ‘proof’, others were. All I’m saying, don’t make any assumptions until we catch the dudes. And yes, I’m most definitely a moderate. In fact I have more liberal positions than conservative ones. ---
**Author:** ![WarmNPrickly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/d78d45/32.png) [@WarmNPrickly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WarmNPrickly)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/215 "2010-03-29T02:26:34Z")
There are no moderate Republicans in office. With well over 50% of registered Republican primary voters being complete nutjobs, any and all Republicans must toe the crazy line or lose their primary, even when the obvious result is a Democrat winning the general. That is the real reason no Republican even wanted to be seen negotiating with the Democrats to get a bipartisan plan passed. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/216 "2010-03-29T02:47:30Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > Hey, I wasn’t using the word ‘proof’, others were. All I’m saying, don’t make any assumptions until we catch the dudes. Yes, I understand: Saddam’s mobile bioweapons production facilities may yet turn up in Syria. It wouldn’t be properly circumspect of anyone to **jump to conclusions** about that, would it now? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/217 "2010-03-29T02:52:49Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > In fact I have more liberal positions than conservative ones. Cite? ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/218 "2010-03-29T14:09:56Z")
> [@WarmNPrickly](#): > > With well over 50% of registered Republican primary voters being complete nutjobs [channeling my inner **Frank**] cite? [/ **Frank**] ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/219 "2010-03-29T16:00:37Z")
> [@](#): > > [New Rule: You Can't Use "There Will Be No Cooperation for the Rest of the Year" as a Threat If There Was No Cooperation in the First Half of the Year | HuffPost Entertainment](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/new-rule-you-cant-use-the_b_515354.html) > Bill Maher > > \New Rule: You Can’t Use “There Will Be No Cooperation for the Rest of the Year” as a Threat If There Was No Cooperation in the First Half of the Year > New Rule: You can’t use the statement “there will be no cooperation for the rest of the year” as a threat if there was no cooperation in the first half of the year. Here’s a word the president should take out of his teleprompter: bipartisanship. People only care about that in theory, not in practice. … Democrats should not listen to the people who are now saying they shouldn’t attempt anything else big for a while because health care was such a bruising battle. Wrong – because I learned something watching the lying bullies of the Right lose this one: when they’re losing, they squeal like a pig. They kept saying things like, the bill was being “shoved down our throats” or the Democrats were “ramming it through.” The bill was so big they couldn’t take it all at once! … A few months ago, Sarah Palin mockingly asked them, “How’s that hopey-changey thing working out for ya?” Great, actually. Last administration, the “ruling party” liked to talk about their “mandate” and how they were gonna do what they were gonna do, and if we didn’t like that, tough. This administration, many of these same people are screaming that everything is being rammed down their throats. The real reason is politics and power. It has nothing to do with the goodness or badness of the bill. It’s about power, being in charge. The Tea party is just a group of selfish, ignorant, stupid people who not qualified or fit to speak on policies or bills they haven’t even bothered to read, and who get their cue from the likes of Limbaugh and Beck. The Dems took the House. The Dems took the Senate. The Dems took the White House. In short, the people have spoken. They rejected the Reps this time. So, what’s this mean? The people spoke with their votes. The Dems (for now) have the mandate. Back to the Tea party: > [@](#): > > [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/opinion/28rich.html?hp](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/opinion/28rich.html?hp) > As no less a conservative authority than The Wall Street Journal editorial page observed last week, the bill’s prototype is the health care legislation Mitt Romney signed into law in Massachusetts. It contains what used to be considered Republican ideas. > Yet it’s this bill that inspired G.O.P. congressmen on the House floor to egg on disruptive protesters even as they were being evicted from the gallery by the Capitol Police last Sunday. It’s this bill that prompted a congressman to shout “baby killer” at Bart Stupak, a staunch anti-abortion Democrat. It’s this bill that drove a demonstrator to spit on Emanuel Cleaver, a black representative from Missouri. And it’s this “middle-of-the-road” bill, as Obama accurately calls it, that has incited an unglued firestorm of homicidal rhetoric, from “Kill the bill!” to Sarah Palin’s cry for her followers to “reload.” At least four of the House members hit with death threats or vandalism are among the 20 political targets Palin marks with rifle crosshairs on a map on her Facebook page. … To find a prototype for the overheated reaction to the health care bill, you have to look a year before Medicare, to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Both laws passed by similar majorities in Congress; the Civil Rights Act received even more votes in the Senate (73) than Medicare (70). But it was only the civil rights bill that made some Americans run off the rails. … The conjunction of a black president and a female speaker of the House — topped off by a wise Latina on the Supreme Court and a powerful gay Congressional committee chairman — would sow fears of disenfranchisement among a dwindling and threatened minority in the country no matter what policies were in play. … When you hear demonstrators chant the slogan “Take our country back!,” these are the people they want to take the country back from. … The Tea Party movement is virtually all white. In another thread, Knorf posted this: > [@](#): > > The Democrat’s healthcare reform bill included a lot of originally conservative, GOP ideas. The argument that Obama is somehow a socialist doesn’t hold water for two seconds. > > This wild hatred for him and his policies makes no sense without the explanation of racism. All that idiocy the tea baggers want to believe about him: Muslim, socialist, not really an American, maybe the anti-Christ: at it’s root, it’s because many of these people cannot stand a man with dark skin being in charge. > > There are reasonable objections to Obama’s policies. I’ve heard a number of them on the SDMB, cogently stated by people who are clearly not racist. The tea baggers are a very, very different story. That apoplectic rage is impossible to understand on its face, until you realize how much it makes sense if the enraged tea baggers are really just basically racist. Occam’s razor. So who are they wanting to take the country back from? Anyone who isn’t “their kind”. Occam’s Razor. They are also hypocrites: > [@](#): > > [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/us/politics/28teaparty.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/us/politics/28teaparty.html) > SOUTH BEND, Ind. — When Tom Grimes lost his job as a financial consultant 15 months ago, he called his congressman, a Democrat, for help getting government health care. > Then he found a new full-time occupation: Tea Party activist. > In the last year, he has organized a local group and a statewide coalition, and even started a “bus czar” Web site to marshal protesters to Washington on short notice. This month, he mobilized 200 other Tea Party activists to go to the local office of the same congressman to protest what he sees as the government’s takeover of health care. … Mr. Grimes, who receives Social Security, has filled the back seat of his Mercury Grand Marquis with the literature of the movement, including Glenn Beck’s “Arguing With Idiots” and Frederic Bastiat’s “The Law,” which denounces public benefits as “false philanthropy.” > “If you quit giving people that stuff, they would figure out how to do it on their own,” Mr. Grimes said. Grimes is a fucking hypocrite. Basically, by his own actions, he is really saying “I want it handed to me, but not anyone else”. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2010, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568/220 "2010-04-06T23:32:59Z")
Well here is a nutbar who had been charged with threatening to kill a Senator. It seems his threats can be directly tied to his dislike of health care reform: [Wash. man charged with threatening Sen. Murray](http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/04/06/general-us-murray-threats_7493119.html?boxes=financechannelAP) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/domestic-terrorists-take-aim-at-health-care-reform/533568.md?page=12)