The other day, I posted a piece at within blog, where I mentioned that back in the day of their office-holding in Illinois, no one was a racist or liberal guilt-appeaser (or other “social cooties” victim) just because they discussed or approved ideas emanating from African-Americans Roland Burris (as Illinois Attorney General/Comptroller) or Harold Washington (Chicago Congressman/Mayor); this, despite the then presence of Trent Lott and his “cooties” in both the House and then Senate, David Dukes, and so on…officials, media, and most people just didn’t link official acts of government, no matter WHO ran them, to be more than abstract ideas for democratic debate and input re effectuations, without tether to anything else or the luxury of giving into terroristic/Mafiosi-style “cootie callings” and violence against any race or person where some didn’t like majority rule, and neither could someone whip up that unless you DO what someone they like/put in of this or that color, no matter what it means, you WILL be ipso facto equated with a racist, terrorist, ad infinitum.

Today, the likes of PFAW are emailing PSAs representing that a Congressman of non-white demographic at least appears to have had an office sign defaced with a swastika and “the N-word” used against him; well, that certainly leaves open any pro-Obamacare sympathetic person of any demographic trying to build “aw shucks, let’s just do what he wants or folks will think we’ve got cooties” public opinion; and it leaves open that someone strongly opposed themselves did or contracted the defacement, to make the public think bad things will happen to ANYBODY who supports Obamacare or whatever.

Both alternatives are horribly WRONG in what they seek. It is traditional terrorist activity to attempt to inculcate public opinion for or against matters of public policy via threats or use of violence; the public should not be made to feel they HAVE to react one way or the other to the alleged incident of defacement or be called “accessories” to the act in any way(s); the Congressman and staff should not have to think they have to stop being for or against anything just because of some terrorist; and in fact the public at-large…high, low, and in between… should not have to fear that such things should generally happen at all.

Wherefore, I would respectfully submit all relevant law enforcement investigate the matter, and prosecute any appropriate party(ies) for the primary offense of attempting public opinion manipulation via threat and force, concurrently with the offenses of racial hatred, trespass, and criminal damage of property.

As to Obamacare, I would offer that whereas the President appears moved to unbelief any peaceable, sane person could even have questions about it, I most respectfully submit that in media and in official floor activities of Congress, not much if anything has been said of the economic, trade, credit, and job loss conditions which keep impelling people to “need” mass government healthcare, subsistence funds, food stamps, and exclusively HUD-controlled housing…so it is people can perceive honestly if erroneously(?) that mass healthcare means commitment to a new kind of regulated culture.

But recently, here in Oregon, radio stations under FCC licensure have started airing ads with a man saying that sure, the economy’s bad, lots of wind disasters and such to ever-sprawling New Urban housing, lots of jobs lost, but did we know some people disadvantaged by those things actually get depressed, and that all they need do is visit the advertising mental health party, get a therapy that stops depression, and just like that, an improved attitude will lift them out of their difficulties?

I continue to puzzle over how, ala the April 2009 DHS reports, the DHS NICC coordinates things across the public and private sectors, for their stated purpose of influencing public opinions on this and that (http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf , Page One, Topic “Scope”, sentence three thereof).