Outrage

[Anonymous]

Given how outraged many of us were during the Bush years, I wonder why the tea partiers are such big news. Is it that they are louder than we were, that they are less rational (possibly a biased view on my part), that they are more numerous (I doubt that, but I have already admitted to possible bias), that they came up with a catchy name, or what?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Given how outraged many of us were during the Bush years, I wonder why the tea partiers are such big news. Is it that they are louder than we were, that they are less rational (possibly a biased view on my part), that they are more numerous (I doubt that, but I have already admitted to possible bias), that they came up with a catchy name, or what?

One reason is how the two major political parties react to their more extreme wing. The Republican Party embraces its for the most part, while the Democratic Party treats the progressive wing like lunatics that should be hidden in the basement.

For example, Republican office holders routinely attend Tea Party rallies. Many times, either signs in the audience or even speakers on the same podium compare Obama to Hitler. I've never heard an elected Republican condemn such things. During the Bush Administration, a member of the public submitted a video mentioning Hitler as an entry in a contest held by MoveOn.org. Both Chambers of Congress passed resolutions condemning MoveOn, despite the organization did not produce or promote the video. Even Hillary Clinton voted in favor of the condemnation. Could you imagine Democrats introducing a resolution condemning the Tea Parties, let along Republicans voting for it?

Democrats happily joined in the attacks that led to the dismantling of ACORN. No organization has done more to register voters. But, because of a few fake videos, Dems turned on their own. Republicans will never do that. This attitude finds its way into all aspects of our society, but especially the major media who reflect the same attitudes. Nut job right wingers get taken seriously, while serious left wingers are portrayed as nut jobs. Who do you think is the more serious thinker, Noam Chomsky or Sarah Palin? But, look how they are treated by the media and the two major political parties.

This is not to mention Rahm calling left wingers "F'ing retards" and Gibbs saying we should be drug tested. Again, you will not hear Republicans talking about Tea Partiers that way. The result is a clear message that the Tea Party is legitimate while left wingers are not.

[Anonymous]

Sorry I'm re-submitting my questions because I did the quote thing wrong (I'm new at this!).

Hey Jeff,
I could be wrong on this one, but didn't Karl Rove speak out against O'Donnell? I don't know much about this story, but I thought I heard that somewhere. I only remember because I was surprised that there's a republican so against someone from the Tea Party. If this is true, it could be possible that some republicans are a bit upset by the Tea Party movement (or perhaps embarrased by it). What do you think?
Thanks!

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry I'm re-submitting my questions because I did the quote thing wrong (I'm new at this!).

Hey Jeff,
I could be wrong on this one, but didn't Karl Rove speak out against O'Donnell? I don't know much about this story, but I thought I heard that somewhere. I only remember because I was surprised that there's a republican so against someone from the Tea Party. If this is true, it could be possible that some republicans are a bit upset by the Tea Party movement (or perhaps embarrased by it). What do you think?
Thanks!

I deleted you first post to keep the thread tidy.

Rove initially spoke out against O'Donnell. BUt, after he got lambasted by Limbaugh and others, he had a come to Jesus moment. Now, he's fully onboard with O'Donnell. I would guess that a great many Republicans are embarrassed by the Tea Party movement. But, their circumstances don't allow them to say or do anything about it.

There was a conservative Republican congressman who was defeated in primary in South Carolina. His name is Bob Inglis. Google him and see what he says about some of his meetings with Tea Party people. If other Republicans are dealing with such things, for sure they are embarrassed.

[Anonymous]

IMHO, a lot of it also has to do with how the Post covers the respective party wings. The Post has given the tea party considerable front page coverage from the outside, which tended to legitimize them from their very beginnings. I don't know if the Post did this hoping it would sell newspapers, or because the Post leans right.

Meanwhile those of us who objected to Bush were called "shrill" (see Brad DeLong's excellent Shrillblog) and were driven to the NY Times.

[Anonymous]

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/why-does-howard-kurtz-have-a-job.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:IMHO, a lot of it also has to do with how the Post covers the respective party wings. The Post has given the tea party considerable front page coverage from the outside, which tended to legitimize them from their very beginnings. I don't know if the Post did this hoping it would sell newspapers, or because the Post leans right.

Meanwhile those of us who objected to Bush were called "shrill" (see Brad DeLong's excellent Shrillblog) and were driven to the NY Times.

The WAPO leans right?? On what planet??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMHO, a lot of it also has to do with how the Post covers the respective party wings. The Post has given the tea party considerable front page coverage from the outside, which tended to legitimize them from their very beginnings. I don't know if the Post did this hoping it would sell newspapers, or because the Post leans right.

Meanwhile those of us who objected to Bush were called "shrill" (see Brad DeLong's excellent Shrillblog) and were driven to the NY Times.

The WAPO leans right?? On what planet??

On our planet. Do you remember their unrelenting support for the Iraq war? Anything that might undermine that support was buried on page 11 or 12. And all the puffing of the tea party. Liberals are having a rally on the mall this weekend (One Nation) -- see if you can find coverage in the Post.

Plus their columnists.... I was unable to read Safire. Brooks is at least more intellectually honest but he's still on the right. Samuelson? George Will? Krauthammer? And don't get me started on Howard Kurz. Why can't they get Krugman, or somebody on his end?

[Anonymous]

This is Ezra Klein's "Journo-List" employer, right?

[Anonymous]

The Post's print edition finally ran an article about the liberals' One Nation rally on the mall - today, Thursday, two days before the event. The electronic version went up two days ago.

Thanks, WaPo!