Is calling political protesters "winers" a rhetorical tactic to demean &discourage all forms of protests?

Question

My Q does not ask if the name-callers have the right of free-speech and those who made this the point of the answer are addressing an issue that was not asked. To put this comment do"wn as an answer is posting a "red herring" without addressing the Q I asked?I see no need for such a defensive response unless you are one of those brainless people using the term "whiners" as a political rhetorical device with the stated intent.

I meant to spell "whiners" not "winers." My mistake and my humble apology for the error.

Answer 1

First to tham 153, I accidentally gave you a thumbs down when I meant to push thumbs up. sorry.

Yes, it is, just as they do this with voting rights activists calling them "conspiracy theorists" "conspiracy nutcases" etc. If one is afraid they will be embarrassed or thought of like that, they may be less likely to protest, so it is a tactic that works for those who worry what others may think and hurts those who are brave enough to ignore it and protest despite what others may think of them due to the continual use of this term for those seeking to demean people more aware than them or by those worried other may believe the voting rights activists.

Remember what Ghandi said, "first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, and then you win." Words like the ones you mention place us at stage two but we are also going into stage three as more wake up to the massive vote fraud and insecurity of electronic voting machines and electronic optical scanners. They will continue a combo of the first three until, god willing, we win and reclaim our democracy for the people. Ghandi's words hold true for all protests of merit and truth. So using terms like these are nothing new, only the issues and words used to laugh at, or demean you are. This gives one hope that someday our work as protesters and activists will one day overcome despite the odds against us. When people ignore such terms and follow their conscience and hearts; hopefully, others will join them in time shaking off apathy and fear.

I remember our republican newspaper the Columbus Dispatch calling congresspeople Dennis Kucinich and Stephanie Tubbs Jones, whose constiuencies contain mamy minorities and poor people, and who spoke out against the massive vote fraud and disenfranchisement in Ohio 2004 election as pulling "adolescent stunts" and "childish tantrums" which definitely demeaned them for actually representing the voters who sent them to US congress and speaking up boldly against wrong. This also smacked of racism since Tubbs Jones is black , many of the disenfranchised voters were black, and both congesspeople represent blacks in their districts, and the term "boy" used to be used to demean black adults.

It is the same as now they keep calling protesters "antiAmerican" and telling them to essentially shut up and leave the country if you don't like it.

It is the same as putting protesters in freespeech zones like during the democratic convention when protesters where told to go into an enclosure no where within sight or hearing of the convention center, that had standing water in it, only two exit and double razor wire fence around it..peope were afraid to go in it as if they threw tear gas or something in there for some reason, people might panic and one could get trampled. Even the judge was shocked by these atrotius "frespeech zones," but said protesters must still be confined there. The strong symbolism is that, since it looked just like that found at prisons with the double razor barbed wire fences, protesting is a crime..that is how it looked if it was filmed.

We did not have free speech zones like this until Dubya had his inaugural parade car pelted with eggs and his limo was stopped by massive protests..this apprently ticked him off. You see how they made sure to change that the following inaugural so there were no repeats. People were afraid to bring signs to the inaugural events in DC as they didn't want to be put blocks away out of ear and vision range..

Notice how if you wear a t shirt or have a sign that does not show support for Bush or his policies, at any Bush event including the areas the tv cameras will scan and including and extending to mothers of fallen soldiers, you will be dragged out and most likely charged with a crime (as happened to the grieiving mother who was booed for having a shirt about her so killed in Iraq).

I remember once hearing fox tear into protesters who protested days downtown against some politician who decided he didnt hear them and who tthen took their protest and went to his house so he could hear them...fox was puting them down so badly and telling their viewers they were horrible people to do this to the poor politican who had done some corrupt, atoscious thing..the protesters were the bad guys and the politician was the poor victim. It was unbelieveable..they got heard though by that guy.

They also have trained police to do urban warfare if the protests become too large and to use microwave weapons that burn the skin like a lightbulb if you don't move in 5 seconds. They do not want protests.

Look for it to get worse and people to be arrested for the smallest thing. May even be outlawed or greatly restricted soon. When we did an extremely peaceful antiBush protest/march for wordcantwaitt Oct 5th in Columbus, we were followed throughout the day by police. At the federal building, there were two bicycle police, a paddy wagon in middle of street parked the whole time and several guards from the building at least 7 or 8 of them...this for 100 people standing there with signs and chanting.

A few weeks later, a women in her 50's and I protested (also in my 50's) the governor's debate. Earlier there were over a hundred noisy protestors about 75% for Blackwell (rep) and 25% for Strickand (dem who won). Several police cars there..not a word said even though reps had a loud speecher, were standing in the street as well as curb and pushing dems and getting in their face, but when me and this women returned for exit, just the two of us, she was approached when I was at one driveway exit and she the other, shown a picture with three pictures of herself from protests with all her contact info and told she was on the highway patrol list and dept of public safety and was a "known troublemaker: to intimidate her apparently. She's one of the most peaceful people I know, very tolerant. This was at 9:30 at night within 5 minutes of our returning. don't even know how they could see us that well in the dark and identify her so fast with no contact. It made me feel we are all on lists.

I also had my civil rights violated when I protested a polical event with Anne Coulter and Alan Keyes by police who threatened me with car-towing and arrest for standing within the area a policeman told me was legal that I spoke with three times previous to coming to make sure I did nothing worng. I was told I was a safety hazard as the people might slow down to read my sign and have a wreck. This is the same with any highway sign, protest, or strike. The difference, high strings were pulled as they did not want this event attended by 5000 to see me protesting. I was harassed and intimatidated despite my being very polite and nice. My complaint was tosssed out even though the policeman I made the citizen complaint to (which included rudeness and violation of civil rights) told me that he knew the policeman I was complaining about and he knew it was true as everything you said sounds just like the guy and things he would say.

It is and will get worse...take action while you still can.

Answer 2

Not ALL forms of protest. Just those protesting against people & policies the name callers believe in.

Both 'sides' are guilty of this. And there are SOME protesters who are just whiners or people just wanting the attention. But even that doesn't make the protest invalid. I wonder how many white civil rights activists were just getting back at bigotted parents. But that didn't make the civil rights issue any less important.

We need more discussions, a bit less protests & MUCH less name-calling.

Answer 3

Yes. By answering yes I mean it is a rhetorical tactic to demean & discourage all forms of protest. I do not think it should be illegal. Though I'm probably the one protesting, I recognize that it is your constitutional right to call me a winer.

Another way to discredit the opposition is by creating strawmen, for example: comparing the 911 truth theory to a big foot theory or UFO's.

Answer 4

Yes. Another form of this tactic is to tact 'Nazi' onto the title of the protesters. Like, Rush Limba calls feminists 'femanazis'. Both of these tactics immediately demean the protester without addressing the issue.

Answer 5

No, it's merely a comment on the protesters. The 1st amendment gives you the right to protest. It also gives other the right to criticize you. It cuts both ways.

Answer 6

What does he win, Johnny...A scholarship to the Karl Rove School of Deception. 1. Change the question. 2. Embarrass and Humiliate. 3. Make it Personal. 4. Create the Boogeyman.5. Scare 'em some more. 6. Make spelling the main point of your constitutional argument! 7. When all else fails; Lie Like Hell!!

Answer 7

Yes and yes and yes! Remember "New World Order?" At least the democrats don't try and change the laws to fit there war at the time. If you want to protest you are going to have a hard time finding people to stand up with you, the reason---- chicken ****s! Protesters aren't even aloud to be any where near George Bush. Man, that guy makes me want to puke! How many days do we have left of this so called Texan sh^t kickers crap? I've never been more ashamed of our country than at this very minute. We are one giant bulls eye - what cha going do when they come to you for committing war crimes GB? Cry to daddy? or pay them off?

Answer 8

Protesting is a right that Americans have, and it shouldn't be harmed in anyway.

Protestors aren't "whiners". They have serious issues with a problem, and they are excercising their rights.

Answer 9

We already have a Congress and a Supreme Court to check the President, and the President has hundreds of military and political advisers;so why do we need the help of ill informed protesters like you harassing our government and destroying the morale of our military?

Answer 10

Depends on the issue, some are very important and deserve to be put into the lime light, some are nothing more than a bunch of WHINERS trying to get attention when none is deserved.

Answer 11

The word "freak" would not be my best choice to commence foreplay with. I think it would be a turn off for most people! I can think of some more erotic terminology that that.