Department of Hoocoodanode


Remember how when the political press types were all swooning over the “new,” “grassroots” Tea Party movement and we said nah, the Tea Party is just SoCons in patriot drag? We were right.

Posted by Betty Cracker on 08/17/11 at 10:04 AM • Permalink

Categories: PoliticsNuttersTeabaggeryOur Stupid Media

Share this post:  Share via Twitter   Share via BlinkList   Share via   Share via Digg   Share via Email   Share via Facebook   Share via Fark   Share via NewsVine   Share via Propeller   Share via Reddit   Share via StumbleUpon   Share via Technorati  

Our analysis casts doubt on the Tea Party’s “origin story.” Early on, Tea Partiers were often described as nonpartisan political neophytes. Actually, the Tea Party’s supporters today were highly partisan Republicans long before the Tea Party was born, and were more likely than others to have contacted government officials. In fact, past Republican affiliation is the single strongest predictor of Tea Party support today.

Also, Pat Peale lives!

Just noticed, but is that Glenn Greenwald in the lower right corner?

From the article:

Of course, politicians of all stripes are not faring well among the public these days. But in data we have recently collected, the Tea Party ranks lower than any of the 23 other groups we asked about — lower than both Republicans and Democrats. It is even less popular than much maligned groups like “atheists” and “Muslims.” Interestingly, one group that approaches it in unpopularity is the Christian Right.

Oooooh, what a beautiful mooooorniiiiing…

I was about to paste the same graph as Scott. I’ve looked forward to the day when “Christian Right” is used as an epithet for quite some time.

Did the NYT poll for popularity of the term “PUMA” I wonder?

Anyway. Glenn Greenwald is pissing me off. I wouldn’t be surprised if he became a full throated Paultard one of these days. His arguments equivalencing the Dems and Repubs could just be cover for that.

Scott beat me to it, but it bears repeating:

It is even less popular than much maligned groups like “atheists” and “Muslims.” Interestingly, one group that approaches it in unpopularity is the Christian Right.


But remember, Campbell & Putman are the real racists for pointing out the fresh cream-colored goodness of the Teabaghists. And so uncivil, also too.

It’s like being a wargamer and discovering that furries exist. Suddenly, I’m not the most hated kid in school anymore!

Indeed, it looks as though they have a little entrance gamut like the Disneyland rides, only instead of a “You must be this tall” hurdle there’s a Pantone 474 chip with “You must be this pale” and a frame a yard across saying “You must be this wide” to enter.

By 2012, teabaggers will be the most hated group in America, but their members in the House are stupid enough to think they’re the most popular. And of course Jake Tapper, Chuck Todd and their colleagues in the MSM will continue to reinforce their delusions.

What took them so long? Tea Party Express has been an Ur-Republican/lobbyist front from the get-go, Judson Phillips’ Tea Party Nation was conceived primarily as a power-and-money-machine for some folks who think you should own land before you get the right to vote, and the rest of it has been all about T-shirt sales and local support for extremist candidates who figured a “Tea Party” affiliation sounded better than running on the “No Black Presidents” platform.

This is the same right-wing fringe that’s been with us since the Dawn of Time, except that this new incarnation has discovered how to frame ignorance and prejudice as Constitutional rights. The “Tea Party” is a construct created by old-school corporate GOPers to channel that Obama-fear and anti-Democrat sentiment where they need it to go…although, as usual, it’s a deal with the Devil for them.

AltHippo ~ I am told GG was a good critic of Bush, but ever since I discovered him, he annoyed me.

@ Strange:

What took them so long?

Damn good question. Like you said, it was painfully obvious from the get-go, yet even some non-hacks bought into the ruse.

@ Anya—I finally gave up on Greenwald altogether awhile back, but even back before he came down with Obama Derangement Syndrome, his screeds were a chore to read. He is an awful writer, even when he’s right.

GG was a good critic of Bush

It wasn’t exactly a difficult or lonely furrow to hoe.

“Indeed, at the opposite end of the ideological spectrum, today’s Tea Party parallels the anti-Vietnam War movement which rallied behind George S. McGovern in 1972. The McGovernite activists brought energy, but also stridency, to the Democratic Party — repelling moderate voters and damaging the Democratic brand for a generation. By embracing the Tea Party, Republicans risk repeating history.”

As do the PL.

@Betty Cracker - I too find GG, hard to read. He’s also petty, dishonest and full of himself.  I agree with him on civil liberty issues, but as you said, he’s a chore to read, even on a topic you’re in agreement with him.

It wasn’t exactly a difficult or lonely furrow to hoe.

Oh, the good old days when we were all on the same team, and this was the first click of the day.

Judging by the way that Greenwald goes full-bore vengeful on Twitter critics and other people in the blogosphere, one would have to conclude that he’s the spineless, thin-skinned motherfucker in the room - not Obama.

I coulda told them that.  Sheesh.  As for GG, I agree with the majority that even when he does know what he’s talking about, his writing is excruciating to wade through—and not just because of the length (I am not in a position to throw stones in that department).

Is the woman to the left of the Flagzapoppin Lady (wonder how many code violations SHE is sporting?) the winner of the lookalike contest for Bev, Roseanne’s TV mom?

Page 1 of 1 pages

Sorry, commenting is closed for this post.

Next entry: Have You Seen This, Er, Man?

Previous entry: Just GO already

<< Back to main