Washington Tea Party Protests: This Shouldn't Happen in America

by Karen Hatter | March 23, 2010 at 08:59 am

442 views | 26 Recommendations | 13 comments

When the health care reform bill was signed today by President Obama, it marked the beginning of a process intended to make changes to the current health care system, structured to transform the system over the next four years.

The historic moment recalls Republican Senator Jim DeMint July 2009 declaration to Republican activists that if President Obama and the Democratic Party could be stopped on health care reform, the defeat would be the President’s Waterloo, crippling the administration’s ability to succeed on any and all other efforts.

Tea Party Tactics March 20, 2010

Waterloo was averted but damage has been done. The health care reform Tea Party protest on Saturday, March 20, 2010 gave right wing pundits Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck an excuse to say health care reform was a form of reparation for Black people.

At the Tea Party protest Representative Emanuel Cleaver was spit upon and he and Representative John Lewis were taunted with calls of ni**er and Representative Barney Frank was called a fa**ot at the U.S. Capitol.

Tea Party Targets People of Colour, Gays

They said the same of legal immigrants and undocumented workers, or ‘illegal aliens,’ and prompted a call for a return of literacy tests, declared unconstitutional 45 years ago.

The Tea Party tried to muster support by launching a vigorous campaign against the gay community and activists deemed to be promoting a gay agenda, with the Right opposing an end to the U.S. military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy believed to destroy America and its values.

This Shouldn’t Happen in America, written August 2009, is not only the story of Americans who cannot access health care, it is what many observers can't help but say in response to such underhanded political strategies, win or no win.

12 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend This comment thread is now closed

Barbara McPherson

at 09:16 on March 23rd, 2010

As an outsider to the events leading up to the signing of the health care bill, I was astounded at the words and allusions used by the opponents to the health care bill. It looks to me as if the giant HMOs have spent a great deal of money to try to protect their profits. No one in a country as wealthy as yours should be bankrupted by a heart attack or a sick child. Everyone at some time needs a helping hand. It's what a just society does.

YankeeJim

at 11:12 on March 23rd, 2010

Republicans represent a party of big money and big business. Democrats too have been corrupted by big money, though they are more philosophically aligned with the working middle and poor Americans.

In the past 10-15 years, wealth skewed into the hands of fewer and fewer, and the Republicans still defended their position as Wall Street collapsed do to their negligent oversight; motivated by greed and the military industrial complex, they steered us into war in Iraq. Those things crippled the nation, and Republicans have no compassion for the crippled.

"Don't get sick, and if you do, die quickly," has been their philosophy hidden under the rug of right wing conservatives which is a shroud under which to hide bigots and other unsavory characters.

They must find their way from being "bad guys" to "good guys" to compete with the other good guys.

Mary Richard

at 14:33 on March 23rd, 2010

Congrats America!

"It is health that is real wealth and not pieces of gold and silver." Mohandas Gandhi

YankeeJim

at 14:53 on March 23rd, 2010

Yes, I stole that quote today. Mary, right on.

JustMyOpinion

at 16:46 on March 23rd, 2010

The socialist have passed an unconstitutional bill with a deaf ear to the 68% of Americans who oppose it and it WILL be defeated in the end along with the socialist who voted in favor of a bill which goes against the traditions and principles this great country was built on. So take it all in because the feeling of having done something will be short lived.

Karen Hatter

at 17:58 on March 23rd, 2010

Justmyopinion, the latest Republican attempts to thwart health care reform, which is now the law of the land, in the form of mostly Republican attorneys generals of more than a dozen states filing lawsuits claiming unconstitutionality, face what is viewed, by most, a losing battle for any possibility of winning.

In order to repeal the law in Congress, the Republicans would be required to gain over 110 seats in the House of Representatives in 2010 elections, an extremely unlikely occurrence.

The latest poll re: health care reform:

By 49%-40% those surveyed say it was "a good thing" rather than a bad one that Congress passed the bill. Half describe their reaction in positive terms, as "enthusiastic" or "pleased," while about four in 10 describe it in negative ways, as "disappointed" or "angry."
The largest single group, 48%, calls the bill "a good first step" that should be followed by more action on health care. An additional 4% also have a favorable view, saying the bill makes the most important changes needed in the nation's health care system.

JustMyOpinion

at 07:37 on March 24th, 2010

I believe the socialist party put the last nail in their coffin with passing this unconstitutional law. So I dont think its any where near "extremely unlikely" the republicans can win EVERY seat that is up for grabs come November.

This socialist bill WILL be torn to threads going through the Supreme court and WILL look nothing like it does today once ALL the unconstitutional acts are pulled from the bill. You will end up with what we basically have today, well this past Sunday. So wave your arms and yell what a great thing has been done while you can, because it WILL be short lived.

Karen Hatter

at 14:44 on March 24th, 2010

    The National Government Possesses the Constitutional
    Authority to Undertake National Health Care Reform.

        The most fundamental constitutional challenge to national health care reform is that it lies beyond the power of Congress and the President to enact. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has long since rejected the crabbed view of national legislative authority that necessarily lies behind such a challenge.

        During the mid-1930s, when for a brief time the Court invalidated some aspects of the New Deal, a majority of the Justices accepted the argument that Congress lacks the power "to protect the general public interest and the health and comfort of the people. (1) That argument was predicated on an exceedingly narrow conception of the authority of the federal government to address problems of national dimension under the commerce clause of the Constitution. The Court quickly abandoned that attack on the New Deal as inconsistent with the text and structure of the Constitution and, indeed, with the Court's own precedents.(2) Noting that "there has long been recognition of the authority of Congress to obtain ... social, health or economic advantages from the exercise of constitutional powers, (3) the Court concluded that Congress's authority over "commerce among the several States" empowers the national government to address all activity, "whatever its nature ... if it exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce. (4)

t k kidwai

at 16:52 on March 23rd, 2010

Republicans and democrats both are with rich,the difference is that the former are open about it,the later surreptitious.We can say that there is difference in degrees,not in kind.

As far as corruption indulged in by politicians,all are sailing in the same boat.In Economics class I learnt that money is medium of exchange,political systems everywhere tell us that money is medium of instructions to politicians.

Imagine health and wealth in third world countries:health of the people is in jeopardy,and wealth stolen-both because of and by political class.

chang O'neil (not verified)

at 07:27 on March 24th, 2010

Isn't it interesting that the health care package is SO GOOD that the lawmakers are under a different health care system not the one they put everyone else under.

Rik (not verified)

at 10:48 on March 24th, 2010

Ihealthcare in the US for all. no one can be refused for pre-existing conditions.. insurers cannot drop you for making clains.. boy what a bad bill unconstitutional ? well, that means we must dump Medicare and Medicaid and hey, social security , wow, is that every a socialist program..get a brain fools, we already have large government run programs that benefit the populace , the gov. has not "taken over" everything, no death panels etc.I for one applaud the democrats and will certainly vote(for my local candidate ) and campaign AND contribute to those who were instrumental in passing the health-care hurray for the USA and god bless our elected officials with the power of their beliefs in true representation !!also, the for/against percentages are much closer that the poster above indicated, again using fallacious facts to prove a idiotic viewpoint

Victor Mike (not verified)

at 14:17 on March 24th, 2010

So now the "Tea Party" has officially come out as racists and homophobes? These people are going to eat themselves alive and destroy the direction of the Republican Party. Not sure how they think all of that is going to work to their advantage to take over the house and senate... And this from the Party that had such a good history of keeping their factions in step!

Karen Hatter

at 15:00 on March 24th, 2010

Unfortunately for the GOP, Victor Mike, a good number of the Tea Party advocates are loose cannons, mainly coalescing around what they hate and don't like, with few seeming to articulate precise goals.

Those members claiming affinity with the Tea Partiers who have a more developed political vision, desirous of creating a successful movement, must, as I've said elsewhere, rein in the elements of the Tea Party stuck on fringe and delusion.