Danville TEA Party reconsidering effigy burning of Perriello, Pelosi
The chairman of the Danville TEA Party Patriots said yesterday he was unsure about whether the group will continue with its planned effigy burning of Rep. Tom Perriello, D-5th District, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at a bonfire rally Saturday in Blairs.
Hours after news of the bonfire hit the Internet on Friday, at least one national news outlet had the story on its Web site, among dozens of bloggers. Chairman Nigel Coleman said coverage of and public reaction to the event was "kinda strange."
"We've been getting a lot of flack about this," Coleman said, "about burning those two in effigy and a lot of people in the public are unhappy about it. The story has gotten so large, it's kinda strange."
Coleman sent a news release to local media Friday about the event, which opened with: "In a move sure to spark controversy, the Danville TEA Party will close their 'Fired Up for Freedom' rally by burning Rep. Tom Perriello and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in effigy in response to the passage of landmark health care legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives."
But Coleman said Sunday that some members of his group were "uneasy" with the idea of counter-protesters and that people might mistake the TEA Party Patriots for being violent. Coleman compared the event to similar acts of protest in the nation's history, such as opposition to the Stamp Act of 1765.
The bonfire is still planned, Coleman said, but the effigy burning was in question. However, TEA Party member Patricia Evans wrote in an e-mail to the group Saturday night that "nothing will be burned at our upcoming bonfire except an occasional hot dog."
"I still would like to do it," Coleman said, "but it's still up in the air at this point. We've already started stacking firewood and building the effigy we will have a bonfire. Burning someone in effigy was just gonna be part of it."
In a news release Friday from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Chairman Chris Van Hollen condemned the bonfire.
"These shocking and despicable acts are becoming all too common at extreme right-wing Republican rallies, "Van Hollen said in the statement. "While there should be a robust debate about reforming America's broken health insurance system, violent expressions are beyond the boundaries of a respectful debate."
Coleman defended the burning, which he said was not violent in nature.
"We were using it as a symbol of how things are similar to that (colonial) period in history," he said. "Things have gotten out of hand the more real we get, the more unreal it gets.
"We knew that it would garner attention; we didn't know how much People are upset, people are angry. This isn't just some $100 million bridge to nowhere. This is a fundamental change in the constitution; a fundamental change in America."
Amos is a staff writer for the Danville Register & Bee.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Posted by AG on November 16, 2009 at 2:33 pm
I’m very happy for you Jack… I am not so lucky. To date, I am down nearly $50k.
Welcome to my world (AG_BEE E ), but I do not expect YOU or “””CHINA””” to pay my way!!!
Get the #-N over it!!!
It’s OK, Fred. No one’s “losing the rights and freedoms that millions of Americans have died to protect”. In fact, it’s almost comical how the TEA partiers equate what they’re doing to protest of the Stamp Act of 1765. The circumstances are not even close to similar, and James Madison would be the first to point that out.
But, you know what? This type of protest is as old as this nation itself. While I vehemently disagree with the point TEA partiers are making… I celebrate their right to make their views known.
Effigy burning is an interesting dilemma. I do not believe Mr. Coleman are the huge majority of such protestors are “violent” through their wishes to do such a thing. Protest throughout American history has involved a lot of “hard-ball” played… short of violence. However, security experts say such actions can trigger someone who might be unstable to action.
I appreciate Mr. Coleman’s sensitivity to not want to appear violent or spark violence. Chances are great that any effigy burning will result only in a lot of people who disagree with the TEA party view of being offended. It is not a new protest tactic in American history, and the vast majority of such result in no violent outbreaks. But there is a small chance of sparking something he doesn’t want to.
The fact that Mr. Coleman even has this choice, and TEA partiers can voice their views as well as I can shows freedom rings loud!
Posted by AG on November 16, 2009 at 2:33 pm
I’m very happy for you Jack… I am not so lucky. To date, I am down nearly $50k.
Welcome to my world (AG_BEE BE ), but I do not expect YOU or “””CHINA””” to pay my way!!!
So get F-N over it!!!
Well said Fred. Unfortunately there are too many people that think the proposed health care will be free or next cost very little. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Man are they in for a rude awakening if this blastic thing is signed into law.
There are no free lunches unless you are at a soup kitchen and get lucky.
This insanity must be stopped.
Tea partiers can’t stop telling us that all of our freedoms and rights are being taken away. They just can’t tell us which freedoms and rights are being taken.
Unfortunately, after reading some of the comments posted here, it becomes obvious that some people either don’t recognize or are OK with loosing the rights and freedoms that millions of Americans have died to protect. Every Tea Party person I have talked with, recognizes that vigilance in protecting our basic rights and freedoms is paramount to the future of the country. If you are not worried or consider it no big deal with what the Govt. is doing to destroy our fundamental rights and freedoms, then YOU are the problem not the Tea Party People.
Posted by jerry78linda on November 16, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Wow Jack, you lost $200,000? But gained it back and then some. If you lost that much, you had to have had twice or three times that to start with. Not all of us are that fortunate to be able to save that much. Having 5 children, 7 grandchildren, and worked my whole life, I saved all I could when the money was not needed for living.
Wow yourself! 5 children. You had a plate full and I understand. We had 3 and 2 grandchildren.
A long time ago we made the decision not to buy a house that would take most of our income for 30 years. We did not buy expensive vehicles, boats, ATV’s and only recently bought a flat screen tv when our 10 year old CRT type died.
In my earlier working years I worked 3 jobs at times to support my family. We saved and invested knowing that sooner or later we would be retired and SS is nowhere near enough to sustain us.
I worked hard went to night classes and became very successful with the company I worked for. Now we are at least not worried about starving.
What distresses me is the attitude of some that this government insurance is free. Nothing is free. Someone will have to pay. Now in the case of some they don’t pay anything to start with so naturally they are all for it. Maybe in their position I would do the same. But the cold hard fact is the CBO says that if government provides the coverage the premiums likely will be higher than the private plans now. I don’t see any benefit in that.
Also I don’t think many understand how insurance premiums are set. The company I worked for basically was self-insured but contracted with Cigna to administer the plan. The company forecast what they would have to pay out, the amount Cigna charged and divided that amount by the number covered. The salary workers contribution was determined and the union workers contribution by contract terms was set. The only money Cigna made was for administering it. Now how can one rail against the insurance company? The employer set the amount of premium, the coverage limits and what was not covered.
like I said nothing is ever free.
I totally agree with marclips post. Could not have said it better!
I’m just saying, for a party that does not want to be taxed for those who aren’t supporting themselves… how do you deal with a 70 year old who loses the ability to pay for retirement due to crooks in the private market (ie. Madoff, Mortgage Securities, AIG, Worldcom, Enron, etc). Or even those who just live longer than expected?
I think we all are in agreement that we should help those who truly need it. The problem is the abundance of leeches in this country who are more than able to provide for themselves like the rest of us, yet drain the system. They are just as bad as the “crooks in the private market.“
I’m very happy for you Jack… I am not so lucky. To date, I am down nearly $50k.
I’m just saying, for a party that does not want to be taxed for those who aren’t supporting themselves… how do you deal with a 70 year old who loses the ability to pay for retirement due to crooks in the private market (ie. Madoff, Mortgage Securities, AIG, Worldcom, Enron, etc). Or even those who just live longer than expected?
FYI, I just googled “accounting fraud cases” and you wouldn’t believe the big corporations that popped up!
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement