I've noticed some snickering from some folks about the "tea parties" that have been a feature of the political landscape over the last few weeks. The MSM seems to have cast a blind eye on the whole phenomenon, with the rallies barely receiveing any coverage at all. The LA Times was recently taken to task for failing to report on a rally which drew some 15,000 people; they actually claimed it wasn't "newsworthy." Right.
Here’s a partial list of the cities that have seen Tea Party Protests rallies: Cincinnati, Nebraska, Tampa, Lexington, Ridgefield, Conn., Raleigh, Orlando, D.C., Staten Island, Pasadena, Boston, Rochester, N.Y., Jacksonville, Minnesota, Cleveland, Columbus, Mo., Little Rock, Ark., Philadelphia, Kansas City, Harrisburg, Green Bay, Salt Lake City, Fullertown, Boise, Monterey, Maui, Yonkers, Utah, Tucson, Phoenix, Hoboken and Chicago. I do believe there was even one down in Lafayette, LA. According to some sources, there are another 150 events planned in the coming weeks, many to coincide with April 15th.
Of course, none of this is "newsworthy." Especially if it doesn't advance the political narrative.
What a contrast, then, with Obama's attempt at grass roots organization. A few days ago, the President called for nationwide house parties this past weekend to build support for his economic stimulus plan. Apparently, not a lot of folks seem interested:
A McClatchy survey of sign-up rosters for a score of cities across the country revealed only 34 committed attendees in Tacoma, Wash., as of midafternoon Friday; in Fort Worth, Texas, only 54, and in Sacramento, Calif., just 78.
"Before the election, we would have had 500 to 800," said Kim Mack, 46, a Sacramento city-facility manager who's hosted house parties for political figures and causes since the mid-'90s.
Kinda shabby for a veteran community organizer, don't you think?
I haven't been able to find any real numbers for what happened at the house parties, but I did see that the ACORN sponsored AIG protests were a fizzle. At this Connecticut rally, only one bus full of protesters showed up, followed by some 20 vans of reporters.
And this is just priceless:
The protesters stopped at one point in an organic grocery store and were suprised to learn that many AIG execs were shoppers there, and that according to the store's proprietor, they were actually very nice people. The flummoxed protesters spent several minutes outside trying to figure out how such "evil" people could be nice to an organic grocer.
6 comments:
Thank God you're on this, along with all the other members of the 101st fighting keyboards. I heard about the teabagging (apparently this is legal to do publicly if you're a Republican!) parties on ABC news this morning and here are some other places stories about these idiots can be found in newspapers in Orlando, Raleigh and Ridgefield, CT, where the parties took place. Most of these parties have already been exposed as gatherings brought to you by the local wingnut radio which helps promote the people's uprising or tea-bagging or reach-arounding or whatever this was, which makes the whole demonstration a little less grassrooty and a little more station promotey. This is not to say that there weren't actual patriots and Going Galters in the audience and that people only showed up to score promotional WLAP t-shirts, Taylor Swift tickets, or two-for-one de-chiggering coupons good at Dub's Chigger-B-Gon. I remember the good old days when protesters were giving aid and comfort to the enemy, I guess that's only of more than 50 people show up. Heh, indeed!
Here are some other fun facts about the reach-arounders (I have work to do tonight so some of this is gathered from other people who blog and hate America):
-- The “Tea Parties”, of course, started springing up in response to Obama’s stimulus package, a package whose largest fiscal component is a tax cut that will largely benefit the people in the income brackets who make up the Tea Party movement. That I find funny.
-- The folks in the blogosphere largely cheerleading the Tea Parties are the same folks in the blogosphere who cheerleaded the war in Iraq. So apparently, government intervention to the tune of $950 Billion (off the books, of course) is okay to spend when it comes to an unnecessary war that in no way advances American interests, but not okay when it comes to building bridges, cutting taxes, helping state governments meet budget shortfalls, or making sure that Americans don’t get covered in molten lava. Gotcha!
-- Some of the biggest proponents of the “Going Galt” bandwagon in the blogosphere and at Pajamas Media are Glenn Reynolds and his wife, both of whom have jobs (Professor of Law at a public university; forensic psychiatrist) that are dependent on public, taxpayer-funded institutions.
Tee-Hee, indeed!
Also: condoms cause AIDS and canaries cause coal mine explosions, and Sarah Plain turns down federal money -- it's been quite a week. Thankfully at least everybody hates Obama now.
" . . . a tax cut that will largely benefit the people in the income brackets who make up the Tea Party movement." Wait--is that the tax cut that nets me an extra $13/week? Your right--that is a pretty large benefit you got there, Mr. President!
"The folks in the blogosphere largely cheerleading the Tea Parties are the same folks in the blogosphere who cheerleaded the war in Iraq." So?
And this idea that Saddam was just, you know, sitting in his palace, minding his own business, when Bushitler just bowed up for no reason and put a can of whupass upside his head---puhleeze. And it's not about the building of bridges, or making sure that grad students with a lot of scraggly facial hair keep getting to wear their "Volcanologist" T-shirts--it's about "stimulus" vs. a regular fiscal outlay bill. There is a big difference there.
And Glenn Reynolds has earned far more of my respect than some other folks who have been sucking at the public tit on Capitol Hill.
I'm pretty sure that not everybody hates Obama now, but when you start to lose the likes of Dowd and Krugman and Friedman--well, then by all means, it's time to head out to Leno and "60 Minutes" and chuckle as much as you can!
For a pic of some of the representative coverage, try this link. You think I make this stuff up.
And let's keep up all the class warfare rhetoric, too. I guess if you disagree with Obama, you not only are bitter and cling to your guns and religion, now you are also afflicted with chiggers.
Hope and change, he said wearily, scratching at his chigger bites.
You're missing my point completely. It's these other liberals that just don't understand. It's sucking at the public teet unless you're a republican. Excessive spending by the government is socialist unless you're a republican, and then deficits don't matter. Teenage single mothers are ruining the moral fabric of this country unless you're from Alaska.
The overwhelming culture of victimhood that is smothering the conservative movement (not enough coverage for our local radio promotions, etc) is now a badge of honor.
Did you hear the roar of support for Obama now that the dow is up 500 points today, just like they blamed every single point lost in the last 6 months on him? No, I'm still waiting too.
And finally, yes I did notice the New York Times criticism of Obama over the weekend, and no I never saw anything like that from the right wing spin machine during the last 8 years -- thanks for pointing that out.
It's phony outrage, but it just what the country needs.
Ooops -- Palin already flip-flopped on not taking the stimulus money. I'll bet flip-flopping is going to be cool now too, but again, probably just for the repubs.
And now it's OK to ridicule the troops of the country that has lost more soldiers in Iraq than any other ally:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVKlFT58Zwc
What's really great is that within an hour or so of the taping of this segment of these 4 courageous Americans, 4 canadian sissies were killed by a bomb outside of Kandahar.
Do you think Instahick would have had a post up by now if it had been Jon Stewart?
Don't you have something better to do this morning?
First, I checked out the belief.net post. I don't see, either in the post or in most of the comments, where it is being labled as "cool" to leave the country. And I don't see some kind of "hate" for the president, as opposed to some of the similar comments made by (for example) the wonderful Alec "Father of the Year" Baldwin in the past.
On AIDS and condoms, here's a quote from he director of Harvard's AIDS Prevention Research Project, Edward C. Green:
[interviewer]: Is Pope Benedict being criticized unfairly for his comments about HIV and condoms?
[Dr. Green]: This is hard for a liberal like me to admit, but yes, it's unfair because in fact, the best evidence we have supports his comments — at least his major comments, the ones I have seen...There's no evidence at all that condoms have worked as a public health intervention intended to reduce HIV infections at the "level of population." This is a bit difficult to understand. It may well make sense for an individual to use condoms every time, or as often as possible, and he may well decrease his chances of catching HIV. But we are talking about programs, large efforts that either work or fail at the level of countries, or, as we say in public health, the level of population.
The clip from the Red Eye show is despicable. Perhaps you missed Gutfeld's apology in which he said "It was not my intent to disrespect the brave men, women and families of the Canadian military, and for that I apologize." You know--it's one thing when an entertainer disses an ally; it's a bit more serious when the President of the US does it.
And as far as that missing roar of approval for Obama as the stocks shot up, I guess you missed Katie Couric on Monday night.
Post a Comment