An opinion piece by Kate Zernike in Sunday’s New York Times reveals the true nature and motivation of many Tea Party activists. Surprisingly, they are better educated than the general public, more likely to be employed and more likely to describe their economic situation as very or fairly good.
So, why all the anger over healthcare, the economy and bailouts for these well-to-do malcontents?
Perhaps, because all the ostensible bleating over economic issues is, for many Tea Baggers, a cover for their real passions – race baiting, anti-immigrant sentiment, opposition to LGBT equality and promoting America as a fundamentalist Christian nation. Consider these facts reported in Zernike’s New York Times op-ed about the wonderful “patriots” whining and screaming across the land:
- They were almost unanimous in their dislike of President Obama
- Overwhelmingly, they said he does not share the values most Americans live by and does not understand the needs and problems of people like them.
- They are significantly more likely than Republicans or the general public to say that too much attention has been made of the problems facing black people, and that the policies of the Obama administration favor blacks over whites and the poor over the rich or the middle class.
- 3 in 10 do not think Obama was born in this country
- They tend to be white and male, with a disproportionate number above 45, and above 65
- In the poll, 57 percent of them view Mr. Bush favorably — about the same percentage in the general population that has an unfavorable view
It is time for America and the media to get real.
The Tea Party has a large number of white guys (and Caucasian women) who are bitter because the old fashioned America they once thrived in is slipping away. Many of these folks are used to getting plum jobs and advantages simply because they belonged to the majority.
Now that America is changing into a religiously, ethnically and sexually diverse nation, these individuals are having to compete in a true meritocracy. The notion of the right person, rather than the white person, getting a job based on skills is driving many Tea Baggers bonkers.
A few of these seething, fringe activists are entertaining far out fantasies that they can return America to the 1950′s, or create a new Christian version of Iran in the U.S, through intimidation tactics or even outright violence.
They mindlessly attack the federal government, embrace the lost cause of the salve-loving confederacy and flirt with sedition. Such extremism must be stopped in its tracks, before America experiences another Oklahoma City – where domestic terrorists disguised as “patriots” caused death and destruction. (Fifteen years ago today, a delusional Timothy McVeigh blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Building, killing 168 innocent people.)
President Bill Clinton rightfully spoke out this week against the over-heated language and even traitorous talk that once again places America at risk:
Americans have more freedom and broader rights than citizens of almost any other nation in the world, including the capacity to criticize their government and their elected officials. But we do not have the right to resort to violence ‚Äî or the threat of violence ‚Äî when we don’t get our way. Our founders constructed a system of government so that reason could prevail over fear. Oklahoma City proved once again that without the law there is no freedom.
Criticism is part of the lifeblood of democracy. No one is right all the time. But we should remember that there is a big difference between criticizing a policy or a politician and demonizing the government that guarantees our freedoms and the public servants who enforce our laws.
We are again dealing with difficulties in a contentious, partisan time. We are more connected than ever before, more able to spread our ideas and beliefs, our anger and fears. As we exercise the right to advocate our views, and as we animate our supporters, we must all assume responsibility for our words and actions before they enter a vast echo chamber and reach those both serious and delirious, connected and unhinged.
One of the biggest reactionaries, of course, is talk radio host Rush Limbaugh who oddly said that Clinton’s comments calling for non-violent rhetoric “set the stage for violence.” Huh?
Perhaps, it is time for Limbaugh to undergo drug testing, because only a man who is incredibly high, out of touch or out of his mind would make such a loopy statement.
Truth Wins Out has been on to this frothing extremism on the right – particularly with the Tea Baggers – for quite some time. This is why people donate to Truth Wins Out. We are usually weeks or months ahead of the curve, whether it is highlighting Evangelical ties in Uganda, the dishonesty of the ex-gay myth or the danger presented by Tea Party crazies.
Yes, I consider the fact that mainstream politicians and the media are finally catching on as vindication for calling it like it is for several months, while many tried to unwisely whitewash the August town hall meetings — where thugs posing as concerned citizens — tried to bully lawmakers into dropping support for healthcare reform.
Anyway, on Sunday, several commentators on the The Chris Matthews Show round-table were quite clear about the imminent danger posed to this nation by right wing nuts. Matthews wisely pointed out that the Southern Poverty Law Center reports that militia groups and patriot groups have increased by 250% this year.
The political morning show on NBC began by highlighting some of the crazy statements recently made by right wing politicians:
Sarah Palin at a Tea Party Express rally:
“I’m not calling anyone un-American. “But the unintended consequences of these actions, the results, are un-American”
Michael Savage on his talk radio show:
“What we need is a vigorous right wing movement in America, not a Tea Party. And you need to face-off against those scum on the left. And then you’ll have a nation.”
Mike Vanderboegh, Freedomizer Radio, March 17, 2010:
“The only way we’re going to avoid this if possible, is to get across to the elites that we’re not going to be worried so much about shooting the folks who come to shoot us. We will skip several levels and go straight for their throats.”
The commentators on Matthews’ show showed courage by telling the truth. They stopped pretending that these short-fused zealots were simply good ole wholesome town-folk who had economic grievances (although this is true, to be fair, of many people at these rallies). Here is what the panel participants had to say:
Joel Klein, Time Magazine:
“I looked up the definition of sedition, which is conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of the state. But the statements, especially the ones coming from Glenn Beck, and to a certain extent Sarah Palin, rub right up close to being seditious.”
“The difference now is the presence of a television network – and I’m going to call it FOX – that allows its commentators – like Sean Hannity, like Glenn Beck to rouse the Tea Party. The biggest difference was that in the past when there were right wing movements that came up…the responsible, moderate leadership of the Republican Party would slap it down. And there is no responsible, moderate leadership in the Republican Party.”
Jon Heilman, New York Magazine:
“Joe’s right, and I’ll name another person, Rush Limbaugh…who talks about the Obama Administration as a regime, which has connotations of tyranny.”
“You have a right wing media that is encouraging a lot of this behavior. You have a Republican Party that is, if not encouraging it, is certainly tolerating it at this moment. And I think it is a very combustible and very dangerous moment for the country in that regard.”
Kathleen Parker, The Washington Post:
“It is volatile and it is scary. I think the Republican Party has to distance itself from all the fringe elements.”
“If something does happen, you can’t sit by and let things go un-dealt with, or you become complicit in what happens. This is where they are. This is a moment of real self-definition for the conservatives.”
Norah O’Donnell, Chief Correspondent, MSNBC
“There is a seething anger out there and Sarah Palin is stoking that anger…there are fringe elements (in the Tea Party). These hate groups that believe Obama is coming after their guns.”
“This will go on as long as you have commentators pouring gasoline on the fire…people are profiting off the Tea Party Express and profiting off this language.”
Chris Matthews, Host
“There is this common speak out there. He (Obama) is not one of us. We need to take back our government.”
“It seems to me there is this dangerous resonance all the way from the center right to the far right. Gun owning not to go hunting or to protect yourself, but to protect yourself against government.”
In responding to Palin’s “un-American” quote by Palin (see above) Matthews said, “Those words are license words. They are permission words.”
Welcome to reality. When confronted with genuine extremism and possible sedition, we can’t bury our heads and wish it away. Doing so only emboldens these fringe elements and allows them to operate in broad daylight, where they can gain traction and legitimize their twisted goals.
The one element missing from the otherwise terrific Chris Matthews Show on Sunday was the recognition of the role religious fundamentalism plays in exacerbating this craziness.
Having just come home from monitoring the The Awakening conference in Lynchburg, I can tell you that many people are using the Tea Party as cover for their desire to bring about theocracy in America.
The role of fanatical religious beliefs is a crucial part of the “crisis of crazies” that confronts us. We ignore this incontrovertible fact at our own peril.
Tags: Bill Clinton, FOX News, Glenn Beck, Joel Klein, Jon Heilman, Kate Zernike, Kathleen Parker, Michael Savage, Mike Vanderboegh, New York Magazine, President Barack Obama, Rush Limbagh, Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity, Tea Baggers, tea party, The Chris Matthews Show, The Washington Post, Time Magazine
4 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Exactly. I’ve been saying it for months, but the tea party movement is more about stung white pride than anything else. Many of them may not think they are overtly racist, but they’re the types who preface their racist comments with “Now, you know I’m the furthest thing from a racist, but…” and then proceed to say something which, in its simplest form, can be translated “Nigger, nigger, nigger.”
As Steve Benen memorably said last week, if you drew a Venn diagram of issues Tea Partiers are upset about and issues Tea Partiers are confused about, you would see one circle, because really it’s a movement of blind rage. Many of them may not even know what they’re enraged about, specifically! But they know they’re mad, and they know that they “want their country back.” That statement is so loaded, because the country they imagine hasn’t existed since the 1950′s (and it really never existed in the way they imagine it). But what they want back is the days when they were able to easily discern where they fell in the caste system, and as white people with decent education (business degrees, most likely…the kind you can phone in) and, for the most part, as Christians, they used to always know that no matter, what, they were near the top of the caste system by virtue of their pigmentation, and for the men who lead the families, by virtue of their penises. That tide has been turning for years now, but the election of Obama really set it off, because every time they turn on the television, they see a president who is black, who they view as condescending and elitist (mostly because he’s clearly smarter than they are), and they’re stung by it. It’s like the thing I quoted last week, that included the quote from “Mississippi Burning,” about knowing who you’re better than. The teabaggers, most of them older, grew up in a society where, for most of their lives, they’ve always been able to pat themselves on the backs, comfortable in the belief that they’re better than most of the country. Then the rest of the country (in their eyes) slapped them across the face by electing someone they’ve been taught to view as less to the presidency. The seeds of this were when Obama made that hilarious and quite true statement on the campaign trail about people “clinging to guns and religion.” It might not have been the best thing to say at the time, but that was one of the moments that, for the teabaggers, “that boy” crossed the line.
When you combine that with the fact that wingnuts make superheroes out of their enemies, and that they’re melodramatic in general, it’s easy to see how the leap from anger to outright sedition wasn’t really that far for them at all. And granted, most of them haven’t crossed into full sedition, but the rhetoric is out there, and they’re entertaining revenge fantasies.
The sad thing is that, even if they bitch and moan and somehow manage to recruit somebody to run in 2012 who has a chance in hell of beating Obama (unlikely at this point), the roots of their resentment are here to stay, and they will be growing. More minority babies will be born this year than white babies. LGBT people are rising. Women have more freedom than ever before. The professional class, which has long been underrepresented by conservatives (it’s hard to study really brainy things and end up conservative…a few do, but they end up being beltway douchenozzles like David Brooks and Kathleen Parker), will continue to diversify. Meanwhile, the bid’ness class, which is the only high paying field where conservatives really dominate, is in the shitter right now, so again, they’re going to be looking around and trying to claw their way through the question “who am I better than”? for a while. Maybe a few of them will at some point get over it. Others will probably teabag themselves to an early death.
Comment by Evan Hurst — April 19, 2010 @ 1:31 pm
Good to see someone in the outside world seems to finally be onto these jerks. I would go with the opinion that they are “borderline seditious”. Something needs to be done to counter them, because they are not “the real America”, no matter how much they might wish that they were. IMO, they’re people who are pissed that the world is no longer their racist, xenophobic, homophobic little oyster.
Comment by Merlyn — April 19, 2010 @ 1:35 pm
You hit the nail on the head when you said fear was at the root of all this hysteria and hate. Liberal talkshow host Thom Hartmann said on his radio program that he was raised by very conservative republican parents who even used to take him to meetings of the John Birch Society when he was a child. What he learned from this was that conservatives are extremely fearful people. Back then it was fear of communism, fear of the influx of Catholics from non-English speaking countries, fear of Jewish power and money, and fear of any type of change. Today, as you say, it’s fear of the growing number of non-white, non-Christian people in this country as well as more power and independence for women and the increased visibility and acceptance of lgbt people.
I was watching the show Brothers and Sisters last night and there was a scene where the gay couple were kissing and the one was still lying in bed with his shirt off. I still marvel at far we’ve come since 1969!
Comment by Gary (NJ) — April 19, 2010 @ 2:30 pm
Most Tea Partiers are conservative morons, yes. But there are much better ways to handle that than senseless and untrue claims of “racism”.
Additionally, claiming jobs/colleges to be a “meritocracy” now is equally ridiculous. Right now, the policy is “minorities preferred”, rather than “best person for the job”. I’ve been turned down for several jobs and scholarships in favor of minorities despite my having superior credentials and test results. I can’t even take a person who claims things to be pure now seriously.
Right now, it’s not better, it’s just on the opposite extreme. Hopefully in 20 years it’ll be a real question of merit, rather than race.
Claiming that all tea partiers (I’ve attended several in the Tucson/Phoenix area) are driven by fear is ridiculous. I’m bisexual, and in favor of gay liberation. Some of us are actually serious in the economic objections to policy. We were also talking during the Bush years.
Comment by Christopher Bullivant — April 21, 2010 @ 7:31 pm