Patriot Vs. Politic

Editor:

I would like to address two incidents which occurred at the Fourth of July Parade in Bel Air.

The first was the booing of Gov. Martin O’Malley and his family, U.S. Rep. Frank Kratovil and Attorney General Doug Gansler. This was extremely negative and immature. This parade was to be a celebration of Patriots, Then and Now, not a partisan attempt to show favoritism of one political party while showing hatred toward another. This was not patriotic at all, but disgraceful. Showing disrespect for our elected officials was uncalled for. The lady buys into the progressive myth that all Americans are Patriots. But how does she define “Patriot”? Webster’s defines is as “a person who loves his and loyally or zealously supports his own country”. Do the individuals booed meet this definition? Or are they power seeking professional politicians who pay little to no attention to the Constitution they are sworn to uphold and protect? Are they essentially plunderers who use their political power to appropriate their fellow citizens wealth for purposes not sanctioned by the Constitution? If they are Patriots, then the booing was out-of-line and deserves condemnation. If they are not, then booing is the minimum they deserved.

The second was an attempt by socalled Teabaggers to hijack the parade for blatantly partisan political purposes. They claimed to be supporting the theme of the parade, which was “Patriotism: Then and Now.” Yet holding up a sign saying “Support the Constitution” along with signs reading “Support the Tea Parties,” “Stop the Taxing,” “Stop the Spending,” clearly changed the message from unity and patriotism to one of

partisanship. The Tea Bag movement has nothing to do with patriotism, nor free speech. It consists of a group of people claiming they are protesting the paying of taxes, similar to the reasons for the Boston Tea Party. Guess they don’t quite understand their own history: the Boston Tea Party was against taxation WITHOUT representation. It’s not quite the same thing now, is it?

They also like to protest government spending. Where were they when the Bush Administration demanded and initiated the Wall Street bailout? Where were they during the budget deficits that have plagued every single Republican administration since 1980?

As I recall, of the last three presidents, only Bill Clinton had a balanced budget. Where were they when Reagan almost tripled the national debt, and George W. Bush almost doubled it? Now it’s suddenly all President Obama’s fault?

As the lady admits, the theme of the parade was “Patriotism: Then and Now”. Is the lady suggesting that the participants in the 1773 Tea Party were not “Patriots”? If not, how can she object to modern day Patriots raising the same issues as were raised by that Tea Party at a celebration of “Patriots: Then and Now”? With regard to the lady’s claim to be a historian, does the lady actually believe the 1773 Tea Party would not have occurred had there been "representation"; or was the real issue the heavy handed government that was stifling the freedoms of the colonies? What the lady fails to understand is that the fundamental objection of the modern Tea Party Patriots is that the Federal government no longer adheres to the Constitution; it consistently exceeds its legal authority; it ignores the amendment procedure to the Constitution, making massive changes without legal authority. This is not a partisan issue; both Democrats and Republicans are involved. It also involves a run-away judiciary and a cowardly Congress that has failed to use its power to balance the other branches as the Founders intended. Spending and Tax levels are the symptoms of this problem; not the problem itself. And our fellow Americans who are willing to stand up and confront this issue are today’s brave Patriots; not you who hide behind political correctness and are afraid to confront the power hungry plunderers who currently control much of our government.

The purpose of the parade was to be one of commemorating our Declaration of Independence, and of patriotism, NOT protesting the things one does not like about this country or our political leaders. That should have been left for another time and place. Mr. Blum was right to try to remove the signs. Clearly he recognized that they were neither in keeping with the theme, nor the tone of the parade. He was right, because the result was anger, vicious attacks and name calling.

Barbara McNamara

Joppa

What the Tea Party Patriots were doing was exactly what the lady says was the purpose of the parade; “commemorating our Declaration of Independence, and of patriotism”. Patriotism is not blind, the way the lady apparently would like it to be. [The blind one is supposed to be Justice, but that’s a subject for another day.] Patriotism wants the best for our country; it aspires for greatness. The Tea Party Patriots recognize that our Government has wandered far off the path established by our Constitution and to save our land, we need to restore ourselves to that path. Denying Patriots their right of free speech is just another example of how far we strayed. Such denial rightly results in anger.

Jon Bauman, the Woodlands, Texas...