Grass Roots Movements: From Tea Party to Torture Protest
April 21, 2009 at 3:25 pm
by: Jeff Lewis
This past week we witnessed the “Tea Bag” Tax Protest. It was an orchestrated event that was co-opted, or hijacked by rightwing extremists and Republican conservatives from Ron Paul’s vocal, but normally civilized followers. The purpose for the protest was designed to draw attention, ostensibly, to multiple contemporary evils: excessive taxation, excessive government spending, and excessive insensitivity from our national political leadership.
The “Protest” allowed participants the chance to use inflammatory rhetoric that often characterizes such gatherings. One of the unique aspects of this cause celeb was the contradictory outcries of “Socialism” and “Fascism”, plus numerous Obama hate messages. It reminded me of the conundrum one of my innovative professors in college once posed in a political theory lecture that began with the rhetorical question, “Can any one succinctly explain the difference between communism and capitalism?” After several seconds of deafening silence, he answered by saying, “In Communism, man exploits man. In Capitalism, it’s just the opposite.”
The national network television news media in general acknowledged that the protest was grass roots, in nature. This aspect was driven home repeatedly by the Republican Party leadership and the Fox television news personalities, two entities often in political lockstep, prior to and after the event. House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), called the event “Astroturf” because of the overt push it received from fat cat donors and Fox network talking heads.
While the President participated in a gathering of Western Hemisphere political leaders on the island of Trinidad, the release of the DOJ “torture memos” started a firestorm that, I believe, has the potential to sprout a genuine grass roots movement. Obama’s progressive supporters on the Democratic side of the aisle, or his own political family, are aggressively circulating a petition on the internet calling for the prosecution of all those governmental agents in the previous administration who participated in the policy that created the alleged tortuous acts. The petition’s import is in direct opposition to Obama and the Attorney General’s promise not to prosecute any CIA operatives that may have direct involvement in carrying out these acts, as described in graphic detail in the previously classified DOJ documents. Obama and Eric Holder have promised those CIA participants taxpayer supported legal defense, because the perpetrators were acting on advice from the DOJ, or, just carrying out orders from higher-ups. The Nuremburg trials, immediately following WWII, featured prosecutions of Nazi’s, “Just following orders.”
One of the most compelling aspects of Obama’s campaign was his representation that among the “change” he would bring about was his vow to restore America’s moral authority in such matters. As he positioned himself against unjust prosecution of a misguided war, he promised transparency in his leadership in direct contradiction to Hillary and later McCain. On Wednesday night, progressive stalwart, Keith Olberman of MSNBC, vehemently editorialized on Obama’s decision in this area and unequivocally stated, “Mr. President, you are wrong!” Ooops! Up jumped the first “family feud” in the Obama bunkhouse. Among the graying and balding heads of Obama progressives are veterans of “real grass movement” protests from the 60’s. Millions of these folks were on the front lines on behalf of civil rights and anti-war (Vietnam) conflagrations that occurred throughout the Republic with intensity and, on many occasions, with ferocity. It is important to remember that Obama was born in 1961, therefore his memory of these cataclysmic struggles are not indelibly etched in his memory tapes.
At the present moment, Obama has opened a significant rift with conservatives that are outraged at his approved revelation of the previously top secret classified memos, and the bedrock of his political support, by saying he was turning a blind eye toward the perpetrators of these deeds. Deeds, which are specifically prohibited by international treaties, of which our country is signator. The president’s position is on a collision course. The potential problems of this controversy are not inherited like the economic hand of cards he walked into upon his election. Obama has chosen this present course entirely of his own volition.
In my judgment, President Obama is about to get a “real education” in presidential decision making and “grass roots movements.”
April 21st, 2009 at 10:11 pm
Well put. If Americans turn away from holding accountable those who instigated and cynically defended torture, we no longer have a free and just nation. Accountability on this matter is pretty much the line between liberty and tyranny.
[Reply]
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Disappointed you did not cite Andy Cobb’s contribution, but well done.
I am not sure that I do not see some slippage on the President’s part as he is reminded that the call is really for others to make. And Dick Cheney, with his call for release of classified reports may be helping the process along . . . “be careful what you wish for,” the old saying goes.
[Reply]
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:40 pm
The Bush administration has a lot to answer for, as too the Republican party. I think the President will appoint a special commission to investigate it thoroughly. I suspect we’ll be seeing lots of special commissions. And good old fashioned FBI work. Let the wheels of Justice grind. Dick Cheney & gang are in some very deep shit. When that’s finally settled, we can move on — but not until then. And ditto Mr. Marohl.
[Reply]
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Eric Holder on the interrogation of unlawful combatants in 2002:
–Eric Holder, CNN interview, January 2002
He had it right.
[Reply]
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:46 pm
You’ve taken the ethical high ground and doing so is proper in building expectations of a President. However, there is a practical rule at work. This President also needs the support of the intelligence community. As a once high ranking member of the Intelligence Oversight Comm. told me, “Some times we must make decisions that don’t look good in the light of day.” Obama’s action was a practical call, politically framed. It will look better in the light of day, if those who granted approval for torture are prosecuted. This practice is not new. But public perception of it is new. And also more recent is the bone headed DOJ “approval” process, part of the idiot wind of the last 8 years. The blade should fall on those players, at that level while the implementing thugs are punished administratively, but not prosecuted.
Ultimately, even if self serving, we must ask-who was tortured? If an American citizen was tortured then all responsible must be prosecuted, but then that is not what we are talking about in this frightening age of new low level warfare.
[Reply]
April 23rd, 2009 at 7:09 am
We (the United States) have a history of telescoping our agendas, our secrets and our security problems to our enemies – Obama seems intent upon continuing this deadly game at our expense. You and another man of equal strength and abilities (countries) stand toe to toe but one has a huge hammer and it isn’t you. Who has the advantage? Will you think long and hard about starting up with him? We must always be the one (country) with the huge hammer and common decency if we want to be heard, emulated and respected. People bent on our destruction must be ferreted out and their life-threatening plans made public – water boarding or otherwise the future of our virtuous society complete with it flaws and challenges requires it. Transparency is not always beneficial nor required. There is no reality of transparency in a socialist mandated society and there is no need for a shamus Oz-like personality who is intent on taking his country to the whipping post daily to feed a false sense of importance. We need a President who loves America, faults and all and who is dedicated to bringing us up as a people and not a movement.
[Reply]
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:07 am
To Mssrs. Munson and Cochrun. Your view is short sighted. Each of you made the distinction about “who” was being tortured.i.e. Not protected by the Geneva Convention and not American citizens. This logic has lead to the rationalization of the most haneous crimes in our nation’s darkest historical chapters: The treatment of Native Americans and slavery. Tortuning another person is inherently “Inhumane” whether they are an American citizen, protected by the Genezva Convention, “Gooks” (Vietnam reference) or “Filthy Arabs” or “Queers”using some contemporary vernacular. In 1898 American soldiers were court martialed for waterboarding Phillipine prisoners. Following WWII, Japaneese officers were executed for the same offense, in addition to the moral stallion that was mounted by the Allies in the Nuremburg trials as sentences were meted out to offending Nazi’s. The release of the torture memos from the President’s Office of Council represent a systematic approval from the top for permitting these practices. This issue must be dealt with, even if it slows down other Obama administrative initiatives.
[Reply]