I find Hot Air's conclusion very interesting:
When opposition to ObamaCare reached a fever pitch last summer, a number of Democrats in Congress went home to angry constituents — or at least those who had enough guts to hold town-hall events. Many Democrats simply chose not to hold them at all, or to hold staged "virtual" town halls in conference calls. Now with ObamaCare behind them and a tough midterm election approaching, one might expect these incumbents to reconnect with their constituents, but the New York Times reports that even more of them have gone into hiding:
The sentiment that fueled the rage during those Congressional forums is still alive in the electorate. But the opportunities for voters to openly express their displeasure, or angrily vent as video cameras roll, have been harder to come by in this election year.
If the time-honored tradition of the political meeting is not quite dead, it seems to be teetering closer to extinction. Of the 255 Democrats who make up the majority in the House, only a handful held town-hall-style forums as legislators spent last week at home in their districts.
It was no scheduling accident.
With images of overheated, finger-waving crowds still seared into their minds from the discontent of last August, many Democrats heeded the advice of party leaders and tried to avoid unscripted question-and-answer sessions. The recommendations were clear: hold events in controlled settings — a bank or credit union, for example — or tour local businesses or participate in community service projects.
And to reach thousands of constituents at a time, without the worry of being snared in an angry confrontation with voters, more lawmakers are also taking part in a fast-growing trend: the telephone town meeting, where chances are remote that a testy exchange will wind up on YouTube.
Nancy Pelosi assured America that we would love ObamaCare as soon as it became law. Why then are Democrats putting themselves on milk cartons in their districts during recesses? If ObamaCare is such a great deal, wouldn't these supporters be rushing to hold open forums to accept the love and gratitude of their constituents?
For a bunch of class warriors, the majority party sure seems intent on setting themselves up as an American nobility. They want to exercise their power without having to account for themselves to the people they rule who send them to represent their interests, as if mixing with commoners has become somehow beneath them. The "commoners" need to send them a big reminder in November about who works for whom in the American political system...
Distributed monarchy, anyone?
Seriously, though, it's just more proof (as if we needed more) that these Dems know they've been voting and governing contrary to the will of their constituents. Therefore, they know that those constituents are seethingly angry at them. The icing on the cake is that, more often than not, those constituents were actually far more knowledgeable on the bills and issues than the elected representatives, so not only do these Dems have to endure all this anger, but they end up looking like total idiots to boot. Is it any wonder they'd rather just avoid these situations?
Still, the danger here is one of precedent - are we going to allow our elected leaders to escape responsibility for misbehavior and misrepresentation? If so, then all this angst will have been worth it. It's up to you, me, and 310 million of our closest friends to vote them into retirement to prove that theory wrong.
One last note - did you catch how the Democrat leadership actually recommended they avoid their constituencies? The radical Leftists in charge are deliberately trying to separate the pesky obligations of actual representation from their ability to wield political power in whatever way they choose. Is anyone else disturbed by this?
There's my two cents.