Why were there no protesters at Obama’s New Hampshire town hall meeting?
As United States representatives and senators face angry protesters all across the country at their town hall meeting New Hampshire took center stage last week when the president held a Town Hall meeting in Portsmouth. The question on everyones mind was “will the president face the same type of protesters when he speaks?”
I think that we all knew the answer to that question was going to be no. But that didn’t stop some of the news outlets from asking the question, why? The answer that most people in the news gave was that New Hampshirites were showing the president the respect that he should receive. That may be part of the reason but the biggest reason is that, not surprisingly, the audience was screened beforehand.
I know that the president specifically asked for a skeptic to step up and ask a question and nobody did. That is not what I mean by pre-screening; the questions might not have been pre-screened but the audience was. In order to attend this event you had to apply for a ticket, who do you think ended up getting these tickets?
There were plenty of protesters at the event, but they were outside, not inside. That was by design.
It seems funny that all of these people were outside and yet there was nobody inside who would stand up and ask the president a question that was critical of his plan. This was done intentionally to make it seem as if the president has wide support for his plan and to try to marginalize the protesters who have shown up at many of the town hall meetings across the country.
But then today, in a confirmation that perhaps the questions were also pre-screened the New Hampshire Union Leader had the news that the very first question asked of the president came from a New Hampshire state representative. How convenient was that?
Peter Schmidt, the Democrat state senator from Dover, insists that it was just luck that he happened to be called upon. It also must have been dumb luck that he just happened to be seated next to the biggest names in New Hampshire politics also.
He was in the bleachers beside Democratic Party chairman Ray Buckley, just two rows behind U.S. Reps. Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter, and slightly to the left of U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, Gov. John Lynch and Lynch’s wife, Susan, filmmaker Ken Burns, and lobbyist Jim Demers, Obama’s former state campaign co-chair.
I wonder why when it came time for Obama to ask questions he looked in the direction of the governor, Senator, and both US Representatives, (along with a lobbyist who happened to be Obama’s New Hampshire co-chair during the campaign), to ask his question.
This was a set up but then again every event that Obama holds is well constructed and planned out. He does nothing off the cuff, the one time he did was in the Gates/Crowley fiasco and we saw how ignorant the president really is, he won’t be doing that again any time soon. From his press conferences to his town hall meetings there is nothing that this president does that is spontaneous, everything is planned out in advance.
And the New Hampshire town hall meeting was no different, that is why the president didn’t face the type of protesters inside his New Hampshire town hall meeting. It was well guarded against. At least inside.
America's Watchtower 
Right, as if Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr. , hell any modern president never had pre-screened audiences. And what’s this about ” This was done intentionally to make it seem as if the president has wide support for his plan”? Do you really think that most of america is fooled by the republican demagogues who bus in people to these town hall meetings? The ones I’ve been to had only a very loud minority “opposing” healthcare reform, and all they did were scream talking points, then chant mantras so no one else could talk or even answer their questions. So what the republicans are doing is stifling debate in order to make it appear like they have the majority in opposition to health care reform. And they’re doing this at a time when you have events like this going on : http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=111676259. Thousands of people flocking to free health services like this was a 3rd world country. And so that a few very privileged people can make money off of the health and well being of our nation.
LikeLike
Can you defend Obama without mentioning Bush? Bush is gone, live in the now. As for support for healthcare reform, look at the polls.
LikeLike
It’s kind of hard not to bring up Bush when defending Obama, since Obama IS being blamed for Bush and the 8 years of GOP screwups.
LikeLike
Live in the now? So if I go into your house, steal whatever I want for my friends, write a lot of bad checks on your accounts, and maybe torture a few members of your family, you will forget about it in a few months and live in the now? Obama is doing his best to undo what Bush did. We can’t just forget about it. It makes sense for the audience to be screened. Every modern president has done so. Now, if I may, I would like to partake in a little ad hominem attack at you, Mr Pink Eyes. That is a fine phallic symbol you are sucking on there in your avatar.
LikeLike
Why should I when the republicans dragged Clinton’s name through the mud to defend Bush. You seem to think that you can play the high ground when people use your tactics against you.
As far as polls go, most of them are done poorly. Worded in was such as the latest gallup poll: Do you feel there is a need for health care reform and agree with Obama’s handling of it? The problem with that is it pushes the “No” side way up with those that want health care reform, but do not agree with Obama’s handling of it. Hell I don’t agree with how he’s handling it. He should just go ahead and pass a public option without bothering with the republican demagogues, and blue dogs, who all have personal stakes in a private system. He playing into the hands of those that actually want this country to be a fascist by allowing them to speak.
Sooner or later the left will get tire of actually trying to be “bipartisan” with the right (whose definition of bipartisan seems to be bow down to what we want ) and start treating them like the ever shrinking marginal minority they are.
LikeLike
Kevin, first: if you break into my home you had better hope that I am not home as I have chosen to protect myself and my family under my second amendment right. That being said,that is a great analogy that you used about stealing my stuff to give to others as that is exactly what we are facing under Obama’s socialist agenda.
And lastly, your personal attack on me was not very original. I have heard that here before. But I have to ask, if that were the lifestyle that I had chosen do you think that there is something wrong with it?
LikeLike
How is Obama’s socialist agenda any better than what we’ve seen under the GOP since Regan? They have been able to hold real wages relatively flat as the economy grows. How is that not like stealing from you and giving it to the wealthy?
Really, the only difference between the democrats and the republicans are the recipients of the welfare.
LikeLike
Deja vu. For as of the criticism of Bush II, Obama really likes using some of the same policies. I’m surprised that he did not have them rounded up and taken to “free speech zones.”
LikeLike
Well, do you expect Obama to relinquish any of the power Bush passed through for himself? Maybe if the GOP wasn’t too busy with trying to have a one party state, and maybe if they held their guys to the same standard that they hold Democrats to…
I hate the free speech zones too. But nobody stood up for us when we were placed in them. Sorry, but Bush set the precedence on this one.
LikeLike
Actually, I was not expecting him to relinquish any power but to to also try to take more. Unlike most people that support him, I took a look under that nice shiny exterior and saw that it was not any different. It seems that I wasn’t too far off from my assessment. However, Obama built his campaign on that he was going to change Washington. It was change this, change that. He criticized Bush II on a multitude of things. I think it is fair to criticize him for not living up to the keystone of his candidacy.
I was one of those people who were criticizing Bush II for his use of free speech zones. While he did not invent them (democrats), he certainly used them to great effect. If Obama starts using them, I will give him the same criticism that I gave Junior.
LikeLike
I seem to remember there being “free speech zones” set up at the 2004 DNC in Boston.
LikeLike
There may well have been, but Bush made them his own during his time in office. Again, you seem to think that you get to take the high ground when people use your own tactics against you.
“The most prominent examples were those created by the United States Secret Service for President George W. Bush and other members of his administration.[3] Free speech zones existed in limited forms prior to the Presidency of George W. Bush; it was during Bush’s presidency that their scope has been greatly expanded.[4]”
from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone
LikeLike
“That being said,that is a great analogy that you used about stealing my stuff to give to others as that is exactly what we are facing under Obama’s socialist agenda.”
This once again shows the true GOP motto: Fuck you, I’ve got mine. Let me ask you this, it’s okay to steal your money to kill people in a country that did nothing to us, but it’s morally reprehensible to do the same in order to save people’s lives?
And another thing: You do realize that socialism started out as a working class people’s movement to try and share the means of production across all classes and procure true balanced and fair compensation for all workers? And that it is not a system of government, but an economic system right? And to your coming rebuttal that health care is in fact a business; No where else in the world are people stupid enough to allow capitalists to have free reign of people health and well being.
So you can cut the McCarthy era fear mongering by trying to make the name of a economic system into a curse word that’s supposed to strike fear into people (even if it’s only the woe-fully ignorant that have no interest in anything with more depth than a GOP pamphlet. )
LikeLike
Ah, so refreshing to see an American who actually understands the history of American Socialism and how big of a part it is today. It’s funny, it’s ok for the government to waste trillions of dollars invading other countries. Yet simply providing more competition towards the other health providers and people all of a sudden care about the deficit? It seems either misplaced rage or feigned outrage. And a whole lot of misinformation.
If we’re arrested and we can’t afford an attorney, the state provides one. If we’re dying and we can’t afford a doctor, as far as some are concerned, tough luck.
I guess you got to have priorities…
LikeLike
Oh hey, check out Lou Dobbs, CNN’s resident right wing crack pot, go around the world to show what hell holes their health care systems are. Oh wait, they’re better, so much so that even my GOP can’t spin it any other way.
LikeLike
If you honestly believe that the wealth should be spread around, then you will be sorry. If you want something you have to go get it yourself. You’re d**n skippy, f**k you, I’ve got mine. Because I worked my a$$ off for it. I earned it. Expecting the government to take care of you, to take from the rich and give to the poor, has failed every time it’s been tried. You can blame Bush 43 all you want, call him an idiot, whatever. It does not matter now– Obama is messing things up, and you know it.
LikeLike
To Unerlion,
I have more time tonight than I did this morning to explain my positions so I will attempt to do that now in this one comment rather than to reply to all of your previos comments individually.
I assume that when you write about my taking of the high ground in regards to Bush while using the same tactics that you applied in your first comment that I opposed you were referring to my comment to Terrant.
Terrant is a regular reader here and posts comments on a regular basis, we agree on some issues and disagree on others. Terrant views all of the issues in a much more bipartizan light than I do, and I would guess but I do not know, probably in a more bibartizan light than you do also.
I perceived Terrant’s comment as a slight “dig” on my original post so by invoking the Kerry campaign of 2004 I was merely returning the “dig” that I thought he was giving me. It was meant as a kind of joke. I was not taking any high ground against him.
When writing about the issues at hand I try to stay away from the “if a Republican had said this” or “if a Republican had done this” or the “if Bush had said or done this” defense as a justification for my positions. I do not always accomplish this but for the most part I feel that I do.
Time after time people come here and defend what Obama is doing as president by siting what Bush did in the past, sometimes that is warranted but most of the time instead of defending Obama they use this tactic to bash Bush as a means to validate Obama, that is why I left my original comment to you. I would prefer to debate the issues at hand.
I believe that the smaller the government is, the better it is and in the end I just want the government to stay out of my life. I want the government to stay out of your life, I want the government to stay out of everybody’s life.
I have been very hard on Bush over his last few months in office, I disagree with his spending, his attempt to pass immigration reform with amnesty, and his bailouts and TARP. These are the same issues that I differ with Obama on. Just add healthcare reform into the mix.
My motto is not “fuck you, I’ve got mine” just because I do not want the president taking my money and giving it to other people. I work hard for what I earn and my wife works even harder for the money that she earns and I think that it is criminal for the government to take the money that we earn away from us that we could use to provide for our family and give it to someone else. I am a middle class American and I do not have enough money to provide for my family as well as another family. Is it so selfish of me to want to give my two boys everything that I can? If so than I am selfish, I can live with that.
I understand socialism’s origins and I understand that it is an economic theory but I also understand that it cannot be implemented without political help from above. Obama is meddling in the economy and private businesses eith the goal to push socialism to an extent that may not have been seen before in this country and I oppose it. In the end I believe that people have the right to keep the money that they earn.
I do not have a problem with the government providing TEMPORARY assistance to a family in trouble by providing welfare however I am opposed to the system that encourages people to stay on welfare rather than look for a job so that they can provide for their family the way that I try to provide for mine.
I will never defend Bush for the use of free speech zones as I am against ALL restrictions on free speech,the idea that you have to go to a certain zone in order to protest is loathsome to me. From McCain’s campaign finance reform to the fairness doctrine, I oppose all attempt to curb the voice of the people.
LikeLike
Huh… I thought I was just an annoying liberal that you tolerate.
I’m really curious about what you thought I was referring to with Kerry ’04. I rarely reference anything from that election. Send e-mail if you don’t want to make it a comment.
LikeLike
Don’t let those comments go to your head, you are still an annoying liberal. Just kidding!
I perceive you as being more in the center to center/left with a healthy skepticism toward government rather than an outright liberal, am I wrong?
I think that you misinterpretted what I was trying to say to Unerlion, while you were referring to Bush’s use of “free speech zones” I was the one who referred to the Kerry ’04 election and the DNC’s use of “free speech zones” during their convention to counter your comment. Unerlion took my mention of the Kerry campaign in response to your comment as being hypocritical to the comment that I left to him when I was really just trying to draw a reaction from you.
LikeLike
Yes, I try to keep things in the center. Liberals have some good idea. Conservatives have some good idea.
I used to be a libertarian (shocker eh?). However, I’ve come to the conclusion that the corporations can be just a detrimental to liberties as Washington; maybe more as they are not limited by the constitution. One of the things that annoys me is the people who stand for free markets but advocate meddling in the labor side of said market. I think that is the biggest thing that slides me to the left. Somewhere along the way, these ideas got labeled as liberal, socialist, communist, marxist, lootist,… take your pick. Most of the topics where I am conservative have not become the topic du jour.
LikeLike
You said that you used to be a libertarian, the funny thing is that the more I blog the more I realize that I am a libertarian at heart. The problem I have with the Libertarian party, other than they are not a vialble party, is that they seem to go too far. There do have to be some rules in place.
LikeLike
“I do not have a problem with the government providing TEMPORARY assistance to a family in trouble by providing welfare however I am opposed to the system that encourages people to stay on welfare rather than look for a job so that they can provide for their family the way that I try to provide for mine.”
I completely agree with you here. That’s an easy perspective to have when you routinely make more than unemployment pays. I know a teacher who swears unemployment is more than what his salary would have been. How messed up is that! Anyhow.
I do contract work for one of the largest health insurance companies in the NYC area. When I was full time, I did not get any health insurance. In fact, the majority of the workers were “temps” and received no benefits, yet did all the work.
This is one of the more successful companies too, but the only department where they make a profit… is in Medicare/Medicaid. The 2 government run programs. Everything else, is a loss. Now, the government already runs both programs quite well… why have a middle man jack up the price?
I’ve been at line at the DMV. I understand the horror of government workers, taking their sweet a** time… but I have never seen the vast amount of wasted resources like I do with this now client of mine. In fact, they wouldn’t need me and at least one other contract worker if they simply replaced the senior web guy. They had to hire 2 high priced workers to compensate for the full time salaried guy who doesn’t understand current web practices.
I guess what I’m saying is that I don’t think most private industry is any more competent than the government. But at least when the government proposes it, we can fight for oversight. That’s not an option in the private industry.
The sick part is that health insurance companies have no incentive to reform. People got all bent out of shape over the made up “death panels”. Yet private insurers already kind of have that in the form of “preexisting conditions”. They are the ones jacking up premiums. And they are the ones that aren’t paying what they owe to doctors, forcing them to jack up their prices, and the cycle continues. Who has the power to even suggest to these companies that they should do this or that?
No one really. But we can create some competition, and maybe that can bring down the prices. I see no problem with a single payer option, at least for self employed people like me who make too much for government assistance, but not enough to buy private insurance. I really don’t understand what the problem is. If you don’t want it, opt out. From what I gather, it’s just like Medicare already, and old people seem to like that.
And it must be frustrating wanting to point out mistakes Obama has made without people automatically defending him at the drop of a hat. It’s not fair to the legitimate observers because the fringe came out during the election and went too far. Sarah Palin definitely went overboard in campaigning against him. So naturally, people are probably lumping in any criticism of Obama with the morons that think he’s a terrorist who’s somehow infiltrated the Senate and wants to destroy America.
There are plenty of things to rip on Obama. Too bad it gets drowned out because of the crazies stealing the scene.
On a side note, I am impressed with your comments and civility on the matter. It is refreshing.
LikeLike
“it’s just like Medicare already”
I guess that is what scares me the most, the government has already dabbled in healthcare with Medicaid and Medicare and both of those programs are soon to be bankrupt. How are they going to add 40 million people to the system and still bring the prcie down when they haven’t shown that they can properly run the healthcare programs that they already run? I just have an adversion to the government running anything. That doesn’t mean that I am against any healthcare reform, but the reform that I would like to see would start with TORT reform.
Thanks for your compliment, sometimes my posts wind people up so much that they just come here and insult me and swear at me instead of trying to prove me wrong, I used to get upset about it and swear back at them but I am passed that now. Sometimes leaving a more civil comment to a person that is swearing at me makes them even madder as they were hoping to draw a reaction out of me. I have to admit that when that happens it does make me smile a little. I can’t help it. 🙂
LikeLike
And as far as Lou Dobbs goes, I do not watch television. I do not watch him just as I do not watch Glenn Beck, Hannity, O’Reilly,I do not listen to Limbaugh. These people are entertainers and should not be counted on to give the straight news, they have a schtick and they adhere to it.
LikeLike