Tea Parties, Violence, and Politics (And, Yes, This is a Serious Post)

Warner Todd Huston, RedState.com, 16 April 2009: "It may seem ominous, but violence is sometimes acceptable depending on the cause."

Well, it's been a lot of fun with the Tea Parties this week. The too-blatant manipulation, by certain political groups and media outlets, of a "revolution" was well-suited to parody, even beyond the unfortunate double entendre of the protest's chosen beverage.

Today, however, the fun gives way.

I had refrained from commenting on the supposed political agenda of the protests, largely because there was no coherence and no attention to the financial/economic crisis beyond "Cut Our Taxes". There was no recognition, for example, that the Obama Administration's stimulus package rests in part on tax cuts, let alone that any solution to the current economic mess has to go beyond simply slashing the tax bill further.

(As always, Jon Stewart and the Daily Show team rode the wave. First, Stewart declared,  "if there's one thing I know about American people, they love baseball, kicking ass, and paying taxes to the Government". Then, the Daily Show's next item was on the investment company Goldman Sachs and its $1.5 billion profit.)

At the same time, I did not want to comment on elements of the wider, visceral protest which went beyond hate-Government to hate-Obama and which were beyond-borderline racist and Red-baiting. It would be too easy to highlight the single poster who compared Obama's economic policy to Hitler's treatment of the Jews, ignoring the majority of demonstrators  who --- however much I may disagree with their politics, however much I believe they were expressing anger or fear rather than a constructive politics --- were there from genuine concern for the future.

In short, I was hoping that this whipped-up Tea Party would pass and that, in the aftermath, we could return to the serious, ongoing engagement with the state of the American and international economic systems.

Then, yesterday afternoon, I read this blog by "freelance writer" Warner Todd Huston on RedState.com:

A dispassionate review of where we are today would tend to say that tax day violence is not justified in any way. But are future tax protests as off limits to violence if government does not heed the warnings delivered now? Even more to the point does a flat refusal to ever employ violence encourage recalcitrant government to ignore protests safely assuming that no real consequences for their actions will ever be imposed on them?

RedState.com is stridently pro-Republican and stridently opposed to Obama's policies, but it is not an "extremist" website. So I was shaken by this far-from-implicit call to discuss the possibility of violent protest: "It may seem ominous, but violence is sometimes acceptable depending on the cause." Huston had crossed a line that had been tight-roped for weeks by demagogues such as Fox News's Glenn Beck and politicians such as Minnesota Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann as they tried to whip up "resistance".

Of course, the majority of yesterday's demonstrators are unlikely to be contemplating the violence that Huston discusses. At the same time, violence can occur and escalate not from the decision of a majority, but from a minority's stoking of the fear and anger that was too-clearly evident yesterday.

I am conscious as I write, though, that identifying that seed of violence is not enough. Otherwise, it risks the appearance of countering fear-mongering with fear, of point-scoring by tsk-tsking how the protests are destructive rather than productive.

Zephyr Teachout wrote in The Nation yesterday, "[The] tea parties represent a genuine, authentic civic anger." I'm not as sure that this is an "anger that the public has been largely shut out of the most important public decisions of our time" --- it seems more anger both from not understanding the complex economic mal-functions behind the current crisis and from following the easy "answers"/images of bad/evil/"left" Obama and the current Administration.

Yet the lesson remains: as fun as it was, the tea-bagging parody doesn't shoo away that anger and it certainly doesn't banish the polarising and manipulative groups behind the protests. Emotions will continue to be fraught, so politics must be fought through engagement rather than dismissal.

Text and Analysis of Obama Statement: 4 Torture Memos Released, No Prosecutions of Interrogators

Related Post: The Torture Memos - A Quick Response to George W. Bush’s Officials

UPDATE: Full Text of the 4 Torture Memos

We'll have full analysis of President Obama's statement tomorrow, but here's an immediate reading.

This is good politics. Very good. The Obama Administration pins blame for unacceptable practices on the Bush Administration while finally getting the hook of a criminal showdown for any of those officials. The absolution of "those who carried out their duties relying in good faith" is also the signal that Bush advisors who ordered those activities will not suffer a Truth Commission or judicial hearings.

It's also good for another troubling reason. There are a series of cases where the Obama Administration is not only holding onto its predecessor's executive powers but fighting to ensure there are no court hearings on whether those powers are legal. From warrantless surveillance to rendition to unlimited detention, Gitmo-style, at Camp Bagram in Afghanistan, the Administration is playing the political game of "Look at the other guys, don't fret about us."

OBAMA STATEMENT

The Department of Justice will today release certain memos issued by the Office of Legal Counsel between 2002 and 2005 as part of an ongoing court case. These memos speak to techniques that were used in the interrogation of terrorism suspects during that period, and their release is required by the rule of law.

My judgment on the content of these memos is a matter of record. In one of my very first acts as President, I prohibited the use of these interrogation techniques by the United States because they undermine our moral authority and do not make us safer. Enlisting our values in the protection of our people makes us stronger and more secure. A democracy as resilient as ours must reject the false choice between our security and our ideals, and that is why these methods of interrogation are already a thing of the past.

But that is not what compelled the release of these legal documents today. While I believe strongly in transparency and accountability, I also believe that in a dangerous world, the United States must sometimes carry out intelligence operations and protect information that is classified for purposes of national security. I have already fought for that principle in court and will do so again in the future. However, after consulting with the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, and others, I believe that exceptional circumstances surround these memos and require their release.

First, the interrogation techniques described in these memos have already been widely reported. Second, the previous Administration publicly acknowledged portions of the program - and some of the practices - associated with these memos. Third, I have already ended the techniques described in the memos through an Executive Order. Therefore, withholding these memos would only serve to deny facts that have been in the public domain for some time. This could contribute to an inaccurate accounting of the past, and fuel erroneous and inflammatory assumptions about actions taken by the United States.

In releasing these memos, it is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution. The men and women of our intelligence community serve courageously on the front lines of a dangerous world. Their accomplishments are unsung and their names unknown, but because of their sacrifices, every single American is safer. We must protect their identities as vigilantly as they protect our security, and we must provide them with the confidence that they can do their jobs.

Going forward, it is my strong belief that the United States has a solemn duty to vigorously maintain the classified nature of certain activities and information related to national security. This is an extraordinarily important responsibility of the presidency, and it is one that I will carry out assertively irrespective of any political concern. Consequently, the exceptional circumstances surrounding these memos should not be viewed as an erosion of the strong legal basis for maintaining the classified nature of secret activities. I will always do whatever is necessary to protect the national security of the United States.

This is a time for reflection, not retribution. I respect the strong views and emotions that these issues evoke. We have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history. But at a time of great challenges and disturbing disunity, nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past. Our national greatness is embedded in America's ability to right its course in concert with our core values, and to move forward with confidence. That is why we must resist the forces that divide us, and instead come together on behalf of our common future.

The United States is a nation of laws. My Administration will always act in accordance with those laws, and with an unshakeable commitment to our ideals. That is why we have released these memos, and that is why we have taken steps to ensure that the actions described within them never take place again.

Bush-Cheney Official Armitage on Torture: "Maybe I Should Have Quit"

Richard Armitage is neither a lefty nor a softie. He has served in the CIA, military special forces, and Department of Defense, and in the Bush White House, he was Deputy Secretary of State to Colin Powell. On the day after 9-11, he personally laid out the seven-point ultimatum to the head of the Pakistani intelligence services: comply with our campaign or the US is coming after your country.

So when Armitage tells Al Jazeera that he should have resigned over the Bush Administration's treatment of prisoners of war, this is not the regret of an official who was opposed to the campaign against Al Qa'eda and international terrorism. And when he says for the record that, yes, detainees were tortured by waterboarding, this is a statement for the record rather than party-politics criticism.

This short clip is another sad far-from-footnote in the record of how a US Government tore up international law such as the Geneva Conventions and any meaningful ethical standards in the name of a "War on Terror". Armitage and Powell were out-manoeuvred by a Vice President's office and Department of Defense intent on claiming an unchallenged Executive authority beyond law or public accountability. (What Armitage does not mention in this clip is the awful irony that those same officials would walk away from the battle with Al Qa'eda to pursue war in Iraq.)

Yet, lest anyone make out Richard Armitage to be a valiant hero in a sordid saga, it should be noted that he is eager to avoid any culpability in torture --- as he did not know about waterboarding --- and equally happy to throw blame on members of Congress.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hEvvUBkYDk[/youtube]

A Grand Republican Teabagging: The Day After

Latest Post: Tea Parties, Violence, and Politics (And, Yes, This is a Serious Post)

Related Post: Enduring America - Your #1 Site for Republican Teabagging (with Updates!)

Enduring America, your #5 site for Republican Teabagging Parties, thinks it can now be proclaimed loud and proud:

Teabagging is here to stay.

Even a few weeks ago, this might have been surprising. For most people, Teabagging is a new and dramatic pastime. Yesterday it might have been far easier to take the safe road, like watching TV --- especially if The Price is Right is on --- or knitting.

Thousands, however, took the leap of the faithful and Tea-bagged in Boston, Philadelphia, Washington DC, and even Batesville, Arkansas, a newcomer to the Tea-bagging phenomenon.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Enduring America: Your #1 Site for Republican Teabagging (with Updates!)

Latest Post: Tea Parties, Violence, and Politics (And, Yes, This is a Serious Post)

Related Post: A Grand Republican Teabagging - The Day After
Related Post: Republican Teabagging - What It REALLY Means
Related Post: Republican Teabagging Revolution Begins

LIBERAL TEABAGGING SABOTAGE UPDATE (10 p.m. British Teabag Time): Enduring America regrets to confirm that liberal saboteurs have out-Teabagged our Republican friends, forcing the end of the Washington DC protest:

Secret Service officers were scurrying to close the North Lawn of the White House Wednesday afternoon because of a suspicious package and it appeared that trouble was brewing.

But it turned out that nothing more was brewing than an innocent little box of, yes, tea bags.

Journalists were quickly banned from moving outside of the press briefing room, and hundreds of protesters gathered for a "Tax Day Tea Party" were quickly shooed out of Lafayette Park as a security robot inspected the package closely.

After about a half hour of high alert, a Secret Service official told CNN the "suspicious package" was merely some tea bags. So the threat was over, and so was the anti-Obama protest.

We fear that we may have may have misunderestimated our liberal/radical/taxifying opponents' expertise and experience with Teabagging. Next time we must ensure that we, and not they, are the ones who "Teabag Obama".

TERRORIST TEABAGGER UPDATE (7:20 p.m.): Police have cleared Lafayette Park after a liberal/radical/taxifying agent provocateur threw teabags over the White House fence.

It is clear that the Terrorist Teabagger is an infiltrator, since Republicans would never try Teabagging through wire mesh.


NOT A DOUBLE-ENTENDRE UPDATE (6:30 p.m. British Teabag Time): "Joe the Plumber" Wurzelbacher, reporting for Pajamas TV, gets a scoop: a protestor asks if "he would like to waterboard Obama".

We do hope that this is a genuine Teabagger advocating torture of the President, and not a devious liberal trying to slip in a sexual allusion.


MEGA-URGENT UPDATE (6:05 p.m. British Teabag Time): And we're off! More than 300 Teabagging Parties have begun across the United States. The biggest mass Teabagging is in Lafayette Square in Washington, D.C. with a million teabags involved.

But we assure you that sutiable Teabagging precautions are being taken: "Organisers promised to put the bags on tarps and clean up afterward so as not to make a mess."

SUPER-URGENT UPDATE (15 April in Teabagging Britain): We're #2! Enduring America has vanquished the villainous Rachel Maddow, despatching her to Google limbo. Now to topple "The Young Turks" to claim our rightful status as Top Republican Teabagging Party Site....

URGENT UPDATE (7:25 p.m. British Teabag Time): For you first-time Teabaggers, Republican National Committee Michael Steele is ready to help. Half-politician, all-man, Steele has not two but four virtual teabags you can lay on your Teabag-ee of choice: President Obama, Vice President Biden, Senate Leader Harry Reid, or Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

Actually we're #3 on Google for "Republican teabagging" behind the YouTube videos of "The Young Turks" and MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, but we're hoping to become the #1 legitimate site by the time of the Teabagging Parties on Tax Day tomorrow. This is because:

1. We do not think the Young Turk and Ms Maddow are Republicans.
2. We are certain that the Young Turk is not from America, which of course is where Teabagging protest was established.
3. There is a possibility that Ms Maddow is a lesbian, which should disqualify her from any comment on the morality and good sense behind Teabagging.

Indeed, the latest video from Ms Maddow is a shameful slur on Teabagging Parties:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNXuSJwDwco[/youtube]

We are horrified by Ms Maddow's claim that Teabagging is a creation of FreedomWorks, funded by right-wing billionaires and led by the former Republican Senator Dick Armey, when our protest is that Teabagging is for everyone.

And Ms Maddow is clearly trying to tarnish us when she (and her guest Anamarie Cox, who we also think might be suspect) implies that we have naively claimed Teabagging --- in contrast to the non-Teabag legitimacy of the libertarians behind Representative Ron Paul --- as a shallow political swipe at President Obama.

We dissent. There is nothing naive about Enduring America's promotion of Teabagging. We do not believe it should be shallow: our Teabagging protest is full-throated.

This is our battle cry: when you Teabag tomorrow, do it for and with Enduring America.