Was The Message Of The Tea Parties Secession, States' Rights and Racism?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:12:48 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

I consciously avoided denigrating the Tea Parties before because I thought the message, muddled as it was, as wrong as it was and as hypocritical as it was coming from Bush deadenders, it was a legitimate expression of a point of view. Texas Governor Rick Perry's secession threat changes that. Consider the comments thread of this eminently sensible post from Allah Pundit:

[Rick Perry's statements on secession were] [s]imply awful, whether as a convenient distraction for the media from the tea parties or as a brush for them to tar the protests as motivated by crackpot neo-confederate sentiments.

The Tea Partiers have tarred themselves. And consider the reaction to Allah Pundit's rationality:

Texas was an independent nation before it was a state. it was not conqured or bought. I last I checked you can withdrawl from treaties… I am not a traitor. I have served this country for 11 years and have gone on 3 deployments since 9/11. I do not view sucession as a good idea… but, as I learn more about our fouding fathers, I see why people view it as a viable option. My “rights” do not come from government. They come from god. government can only take (or try to take) them from me. BadBrad on April 16, 2009 at 7:15 AM

At this point Americans have three options, those being leave, stay and fight, or stay and take one in the pooper like a Jetboy on prom night. Well look at that! Texans want to fight! What a shock! And look there! AllahP is taking a backdoor delivery! Also a shock! /already gone TMK on April 16, 2009 at 7:20 AM

Ron White: In Texas we have the death penalty, and WE USE IT! If you come to Texas and kill somebody, we will kill you back! radiofreevillage, We have an express lane for execution in Texas and would be more than happy to put your smart-ass at the front on that line!! try again later on April 16, 2009 at 8:17 AM

Unfortunately tethered to slavery… Secession was a legitimate option when Massachusetts threatened it and when SC, AL, etc. acted on it. You need to read the case for secession. Jefferson Davis, et al, believed that they were saving the Constitution. They were originalists. Of course, you can’t mention this absolute right championed by Jefferson and the Founders without being tagged a racist… but that is just a red herring. People can secede for the SAKE of the Constitution. Secession can be seen as upholding and the defending the Constitution of the United States from domestic enemies. mankai on April 16, 2009 at 8:25 AM

The Founders were not “traitors,” they argued that the King and the people had a social contract… when a King becomes a tyrant he breaks the contract binding his subjects to him. I realize that we elected our “King,” but when Jefferson spoke/wrote of a people’s right (duty?) to revolt, he didn’t make that distinction. The Second Amendment was proposed in part as a rememdy against tyranny UNDER THE CONSTITUTION. We defend the right of the citizenry to be armed as a defense against an oppressive federal government… so we can assume that the Founders could imagine a scenario whereby asserting that right would not be akin to “treason”… rather it would be the greatest act of patriotism. mankai on April 16, 2009 at 8:32 AM

Political agendas determine the findings published. Until you read the documents yourself, Allahpundit, you remain ignorant. Recall your blame on Joe Wurzelbacher, apprenticed employee of a certified and registered plumber. Your thread then stated that Joe was breaking the law. Prick. maverick muse on April 16, 2009 at 8:44 AM

Secession failed in the civil war. But does that mean it’s unconstitutional? Do states not have the RIGHT to secede? If, say, 66% of the people in a state voted to secede, would they have the right to do so? If not, then doesn’t that really mean the Federal government IS the ultimate authority in this nation? hawksruleva on April 16, 2009 at 9:05 AM

As for the racism message, Matt Yglesias covers the significant number of instances at the Tea Parties.

In the end, it turns out the message of the Tea Parties is the one that has turned the Republican Party into the Southern white party it now is. This is just more of the same.

Speaking for me only

< Prison Consultant Convicted of Impersonating Lawyer | Colorado Considers Sweeping Sentencing Reform >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Was The Message Of The Tea Parties Secession, States' Rights and Racism? | 93 comments (93 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Texas's economy is heavily (5.00 / 2) (#2)
by ruffian on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:36:22 AM EST

dependent on defense spending. I'm sure Michigan would be happy to take on that aerospace work. What an idiot Perry is.

But more to your point.... (5.00 / 3) (#4)
by ruffian on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:46:02 AM EST

Yeah, from what Matt and others say, it seems like basically the same group of people that show up at most rightie events. Heavy anti-government, tinged with nationalism and white supremecy, this time with more financial angst than usual though, and blaming the biggest Dem target for all.


Except for the democrats that also attended (2.00 / 2) (#5)
by Pianobuff on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:47:48 AM EST

All 10 of them? (5.00 / 2) (#8)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:50:24 AM EST

In my family, yes.... (none / 0) (#9)
by Pianobuff on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:50:48 AM EST

Heh (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:51:54 AM EST

You do realize your family is an outlier among Dems I hope?

BTW, how do you like that secession idea?


Complete silliness (2.00 / 1) (#12)
by Pianobuff on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:53:45 AM EST

Pols will be pols. No secession talk at our local events, at least that I've heard of. Maybe that was an outlier?


Pols will be pols? (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:07:01 AM EST

Secession? wow.


this really goes back to what I was (5.00 / 3) (#20)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:14:50 AM EST

worrying about in the open thread yesterday. the Obama administration, for several reasons, is going to bring out the worst of the worst on the right. and unlike the looniest of the loonies on the left they actually have elected representatives who will pander and coddle them.
it is a scary scenario. its worth mentioning in passing that the events yesterday had a substantial attendance of the militia types.
it was pointed out by someone in that thread yesterday that I "seem to know a lot" about militia types.
unfortunately this is true. they are in my family. I have dealt with them all my life and I know what the are capable of.
and I am pleased that the administration does not seem to be inclined to misunderestimate them.


Interesting... (5.00 / 2) (#60)
by jbindc on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:24:01 PM EST

The Obama administration, for several reasons, is going to bring out the worst of the worst on the right.

I thought that's why we couldn't have another Clinton in the WH - the right wouldn't have let her govern and the worst of the worst would come out. Come to find out, it happened even though the country elected Obama.

Hmmm.....


Most of wanted to (5.00 / 1) (#61)
by Socraticsilence on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:33:44 PM EST

believe that Americans had moved beyond at least overt racism: seriously, its hard to find a crowd shot of the tea parties that doesn't feature at least one sign taking a shot at Obama's heritage.


: Naive (none / 0) (#65)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:36:41 PM EST

belief then. After 8 years I can't believe that people didn't realize what the GOP was all about and thought that somehow they had changed. They haven't.

as I said (5.00 / 1) (#78)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 01:12:39 PM EST

I think several things are at play. part of it is that he is black. undeniably. but there are other parts. there is the "socialist" thing. there is the "he hates vets" thing. absurd but it seems to be getting traction. there is the torture memos.
if he does in fact release those, IMO, all hell is going to break loose.
Obama is the worst nightmare of those guys. and I would also say that because of the campaign he ran, which was to the center or even the right on many thing, like FISA, I think they feel duped.
yes, they would have hated Hillary. probably almost as much if not more. what is frustrating to them is that with Hillary the media would have helped them do their work. with Obama, not so much.
they are feeling decidedly out in the cold.
something they are not used to after being coddled for 8 years by BushCo.


Maybe over at DK this was the case... (none / 0) (#75)
by Thanin on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:59:25 PM EST

but here the argument during the primaries/general election it seemed to be more about the whole media darling theory than anything else. Also, I dont remember anyone here saying Hillary shouldnt be president.


Maybe, (none / 0) (#24)
by KeysDan on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:24:59 AM EST

Governor Perry should be placed on the "no fly list". People have been placed on that list for a lot less--for example, a draft-card burner charge (dismissed) during the Viet Nam war. Or, alternatively, Perry can just hook up with the 'first dude' in Alaska, and the two of them can cool their heals in the tundra.


"Its worth mentioning in passing (none / 0) (#39)
by coast on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:52:19 AM EST

that the events yesterday had a substantial attendance of militia types"...really? Could you care to provide some form of evidence to back this claim. Wait a second.....I'm white, middle-aged, went to a military school, pay my taxes, pay my mortgage, and don't believe that Geitner has done one thing to help solve the situation that we find ourselves...my God slap a swachtika on my arm and send Janet Napolitano to my frontdoor.


I am relating reporting I heard and read (none / 0) (#43)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:57:19 AM EST

from people who were there.
and you?


: The event that I witnessed in (none / 0) (#46)
by coast on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:02:42 PM EST

Charleston SC did not have "militia" in attendance that I could tell. The crowd was overwhelmingly white, yes. But "militia", no.

Amazes me too. (none / 0) (#19)
by Pianobuff on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:12:46 AM EST

"Impeach the (none / 0) (#13)
by KeysDan on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:53:51 AM EST

Kenyan Pirate and his Crew" could be seen on a placard just over the right shoulder of Hannity on FOX report, but probably just a play on current high seas events, right?


: It still strikes me as ironic (5.00 / 1) (#63)
by Socraticsilence on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:35:18 PM EST

that the last Presidential election actually featured a major party canidate born outside of the US, but the other guy was the one accused of it.

The return of the Freepers (none / 0) (#66)
by gyrfalcon on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:37:04 PM EST

I thought the same, Ruffian, when I read those. (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by easilydistracted on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:36:05 AM EST

remarks in the Fort Worth Star Telegram earlier this morning. Last I looked, Texas was number two (behind California) on the list for receiving most pork dollars (actual dollars, not the capita list). I would venture to guess that the vast majority of the remaining 49 would say something along the lines: "its about about damned time and good riddance. And, by the way, we'll take that pork you obviously no longer want. After all one man's pork is another man's paycheck."

I think Perry is posturing for a run at Kay's senate seat when she runs for gov, maybe he's even got his eyes on POTUS in 2012. His remarks were aimed to stir the repub base in this state. And, of course, the rednecks here lap up this frenzied rhetoric.


We could also move the border patrol (5.00 / 2) (#55)
by MO Blue on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:16:59 PM EST

to outside the Texas border instead of between Texas and Mexico.

Sounds like a win win solution to me.


Hey, I agree...but, but, but, please wait until (5.00 / 4) (#67)
by easilydistracted on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:37:16 PM EST

I can throw a few things in a grip and pitch my wife and dogs into the car and head north. I'll call when I cross over the red river, right outside the new international border town of Gainesville.


: LOL Well you might want to cross over (5.00 / 2) (#80)
by MO Blue on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 01:22:25 PM EST

the red river before Gainesville becomes the new international border town. Applying for citizenship may be a problem. It is my understanding that the INS is understaffed and requests are backed up for years.
Also, don't want your dogs to have to go through quarantine.
Is this (: the snark sign? I can never remember.

: Damned, I just realized..another river that we'll (none / 0) (#72)
by easilydistracted on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:42:39 PM EST

have to contend with.

: Maybe I should start... (none / 0) (#87)
by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 03:14:42 PM EST

...a new underground railroad. Help the good Texans get out and ship back ones like Bill Owens and his merry band of carpetbaggers.

We'd have to (none / 0) (#64)
by Socraticsilence on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:36:01 PM EST

make INS raids at Clint Black Concerts.


: And ZZTop (none / 0) (#69)
by easilydistracted on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:40:04 PM EST

Yup (5.00 / 2) (#16)
by Dr Molly on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:05:18 AM EST

The other day, I was traveling in a rental car that happened to have satellite radio and I came across a right-wing satellite station that was talking about/planning these tea parties. What an eye-opener. They are completely based on hate from what I could tell - hatred of Obama, liberals, taxes, non-white people, non-rich people, etc.

Did the Cascade Curtain (5.00 / 1) (#51)
by oldpro on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:11:18 PM EST

contingent show up locally, I wonder?

Every few years the Rs in Eastern Washington and Eastern Oregon make noise about secession and/or dividing the state in two.

Fine by me. With a few exceptions, the eastern half reminds me of Texas (and latter-day Texans) anyhow.

They'd better start putting up those windmills in the wheat fields 'cause they're gonna need a tax base.

Oh come on (5.00 / 1) (#77)
by DancingOpossum on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 01:11:41 PM EST

She is hardly a one-issue blogger -- unless that issue is feminism, and NOT anti-Obamaism and your description of her blog is completely off the mark. I guess every liberal who doesn't blindly support Obama is completely untrustworthy, is that what you're saying?

And in any case, she wasn't the one who wrote that.

Here's another account, from an openly right-wing blog:

But Republicans should not be rejoicing quite yet. Many protesters went out of their way to say they are upset with both parties and hold George W. Bush equally responsible for launching the now never-ending stream of bailouts. And the crowd, if anything, was libertarian in bent rather than conservative. These people are advocating less government, restraints on federal power, and a return to "constitutional government." Social conservatives who seek expansion of state power on issues from abortion to support for faith-based programs may find themselves at odds with a newly invigorated movement to shrink government and enhance individual liberty.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dc-tea-party-republicans-should-not-be-rejoicing-quite-yet/2/

By the way I'm not saying anybody's right or wrong in their accounts of who was at these protests. I didn't attend any and even if I did, they may have had a very different flavor and cast of characters than those in other areas. I'm just noting that the descriptions of who attended seem to vary greatly.

It's not (2.00 / 1) (#6)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:49:33 AM EST

the southern white party. It's the southern fundamentalist party. There's plenty of African Americans here in GA that sympathize with the fundamentalist belief system. It's really a lot more regional than race based.

Disagree (5.00 / 1) (#7)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:50:08 AM EST

Well (none / 0) (#11)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:52:08 AM EST

then how do you explain the support of someone like Donnie McClurkin from the African American community?


: That's one issue (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:56:10 AM EST

the republican party (5.00 / 3) (#15)
by CST on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:01:14 AM EST

is not the party of African Americans in Georgia.


Not right (none / 0) (#26)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:35:29 AM EST

now but they are moving that way.


Not any time soon (5.00 / 2) (#32)
by andgarden on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:44:03 AM EST

Don't bet (none / 0) (#44)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:57:49 AM EST

on it. I've seen how the GOP has been courting the African American vote down here in GA. They're using the social issues to garner support from the ministers and the community. Remember all the support George W. Bush got from these Ministers? And they heavily voted for the gay marriage ban.


: The African-American (5.00 / 3) (#62)
by gyrfalcon on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:34:33 PM EST

community is by far the savviest voting bloc in the United States. Not a single chance in he** they will vote GOP now or any time in the foreseeable future, not because of gay marriage, and certainly not because they're disappointed in Obama, which they most certainly are not.
Sheesh.

Any hard numbers for this? (none / 0) (#28)
by Thanin on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:38:27 AM EST

if the results of the gay marriage thing in CA (none / 0) (#29)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:39:35 AM EST

is an indicator of the future you could be right.
and not just in GA.


One issue... (none / 0) (#31)
by Thanin on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:41:08 AM EST

doesnt mean AAs are going to start flooding over to the republicans.


I think that depends (none / 0) (#33)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:46:10 AM EST

on the issue


I don't think (none / 0) (#38)
by CST on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:51:56 AM EST

that is the number one voting issue for them. When on the ballot as a seperate issue it may go the wrong way, but especially after the last election, I don't see the voters switching parties.


If Obama (none / 0) (#47)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:03:49 PM EST

doesn't deliver economically (which it's looking like he's not going to do) you can bet they'll either stay home or vote on social issues with the GOP.


: Yes... (none / 0) (#49)
by Thanin on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:06:22 PM EST

but that scenario could apply to half the country.

Wouldn't be the first time that a voting bloc (none / 0) (#34)
by easilydistracted on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:47:36 AM EST

aligned with a party strictly on the basis of social issues rather than its overall best interests.


exactly (none / 0) (#37)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:51:52 AM EST

blue collar whites have been doing it for decades.


: Precisely my point! (none / 0) (#40)
by easilydistracted on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:53:46 AM EST

Maybe... (none / 0) (#41)
by Thanin on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:54:47 AM EST

at this point its only speculation as to whether or not AAs will mass vote for republicans in 2010 and beyond. Im just on the side of not.


Not flooding (none / 0) (#42)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:55:53 AM EST

just some.


African-Americans (none / 0) (#71)
by Socraticsilence on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:42:35 PM EST

are more culturally conservative, but they aren't going to vote for the GOP-- especially not in the South, I mean BTD could tell you if they still do it but when I left Florida in 8th grade (late 90s) they still held Andrew Jackson days (yes, he was a Democrat) and a large percentage of the 'necks used it as an excuse to celebrate the other Jackson- you know, the traitor not the father of American Populist Presidencies.


Yep (1.66 / 3) (#1)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:35:42 AM EST

Yglesias thought that Hillary Clinton's wins were all about racism too. He is a distorter.

: Sheesh (none / 0) (#3)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 10:37:37 AM EST

: So the sign... (none / 0) (#52)
by Thanin on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:12:43 PM EST

in MileHi Hawkeye's link in post 48 isnt racist?

: Yeah (none / 0) (#68)
by Socraticsilence on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:38:39 PM EST

he's crazy on this one- I mean how could he see racusm in contiued references to the President as "the Kenyan" or in phrasings such as "President Obama's Economic Plan: Monkey See, Monkey Spend" I mean heck those simian and Africa references are purely coincidental.

Yup, this'll work great -- (none / 0) (#18)
by wagnert in atlanta on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:12:37 AM EST

responding to citizens with real economic concerns by swinging the "racist" tarbrush. Can't think of a better way to lose Congress in 2010.

Wait, you mean that white southerners aren't (5.00 / 2) (#21)
by andgarden on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:16:27 AM EST

going to vote for Democrats? Knock me over with a feather!


Well, they did for nearly a century (none / 0) (#22)
by wagnert in atlanta on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:22:23 AM EST

and then they didn't. During the time they were voting Democratic, they were pretty racist. Now, not so much. Draw your own conclusions.


: You think I'm that stupid? (5.00 / 4) (#25)
by andgarden on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:29:54 AM EST

The Republicans gave them a more racist bid.
Good riddance.

: Oy (5.00 / 4) (#35)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:48:53 AM EST

: The GOP Southern Strategy (5.00 / 2) (#91)
by jondee on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 04:31:24 PM EST

sounds like somebody never heard of it.
Next it'll be: "Lincoln was a Republican, draw your own conclusions."
As long as theres an inexhaustible fund of American stupidity, the Rethugs always have a chance.

: Strange, (none / 0) (#73)
by Socraticsilence on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:47:09 PM EST

how a large number of the more prominent Race-Baiting Southern Dems, served as Republicans through the 90s and early 00s- I mean its almost like African-Americans (once the most loyal of GOP consituencies) and Racist Southern Whites- flipped parties or something- like around the time the "solid South" began going red, almost as if there was a calculated effort to win that part of the country, a Southern Strategy if you will- but, I'm probably being paranoid it'd take a sociopathically inhuman scumbag to push a strategy like that.

Waiting for an update (none / 0) (#23)
by Pianobuff on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:22:28 AM EST

Had some Dem family at the Valencia, CA event. I'll have to check with mom-in-law today to see if she felt like she was surrounded by racists and if not, if she minds the emerging characterization of the events and, by association, herself as a right wing loon.


Yes... (5.00 / 1) (#30)
by Thanin on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:39:54 AM EST

because anecdotal evidence proves so much...


Not submitting as proof of anything (5.00 / 1) (#36)
by Pianobuff on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:49:37 AM EST

just collecting a data point. Can't I be curious?


Sure... (none / 0) (#45)
by Thanin on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 11:58:17 AM EST

just like I was curious if my friends thought they were surrounded by racist, right wing idiots when they went to see some of the teabagging. And just as I suspected, they did.


Similar to those... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:04:50 PM EST

...racist, right-wing idiots featured here, no doubt.


Yeah... (5.00 / 1) (#50)
by Thanin on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:09:05 PM EST

seems like theyre smearing themselves with the racist tarbrush.


: I'm always happier when they (5.00 / 2) (#54)
by oldpro on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:15:28 PM EST

come right out in public like this so I can identify them.
It's when they don't show up that I get nervous. They could be in a meeting instead.

Always unpleasant, but worse when kids (none / 0) (#89)
by Inspector Gadget on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 03:40:06 PM EST

are the ones holding such signs.

This, I believe, is why marching against an issue is difficult to organize. There will always be a few on the fringe pushing their own low level insults and prejudices...and, those are the ones the media will photograph and give center stage to.


tea parties and secession (none / 0) (#53)
by diogenes on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:13:33 PM EST

In a way, yes--didn't the Boston Tea Party act as a push to secession from the British Empire?

yes (5.00 / 4) (#56)
by CST on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:17:02 PM EST

although what everyone seems to forget about that - is that they were arguing against taxation without representation. Not against general taxation. And last I checked - you still get to vote for the government in the U.S.


: I find it (none / 0) (#70)
by CST on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:41:59 PM EST

unbelievably ironic that the right is now using Boston as an example/excuse.

Indeed it did.... (none / 0) (#59)
by kdog on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:22:27 PM EST

and I often wonder if we wouldn't all be happier with 50 soveriegn countries with a common defense and currency...kinda like an EU type arrangement.

We aren't well served by this massive, wasteful, incompetent, and sometimes downright tyrannical federal government...bigger is often not better....look at the banks and AIG.


Its a two-sided thing though (5.00 / 2) (#74)
by Socraticsilence on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:57:53 PM EST

I mean you get the bad yes, but without a federalist system balanced towards the central government you also wouldn't have had things like the Civil Rights movement- I mean Georgia might just have gunned down King like South Africa did Biko if they didn't have to answer to the rest of the country- heck MS might still have Jim Crow laws on the books.


: I hear ya... (none / 0) (#79)
by kdog on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 01:13:23 PM EST

we'd lose our constitutional protections as individuals unless our state adopted them as they became a nation unto itself.
Maybe more state sovereignty and federal government shrinkage within the current framework is better.

Another poster (none / 0) (#57)
by DancingOpossum on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:19:57 PM EST

...over at another liberal blog posted his own account of a Tea Bag party in Chicago, thus:

I had to see for myself, so I went to a tea party here in Chicago. I went as a gay man, a Democrat, and as an American to see who these "right wing crazies" were.
Well, I hate to burst your bubbles, but there were no right wing crazies except maybe two or three in a crowd of a few thousand. There were more left wing crazies protesting everyone there by calling their fellow Americans "rascist" for oppsosing massive multi-trillion dollar spending with little appearance of oversight or sense of where the money was going, other than bailing out a vast nebulous black hole of toxic assets at 100% to the dollar!
There were men, women, Democrats, Independents, Republican, Libertarians, gays, straights, Black and White, Latino and Asian, Young and Old, Urbanites and Suburbanites and Ruralites. It was a rainbow coalition of Americans who were fed up depending on who you were talking to.

Again, anecdotal yes, but all these reports are anecdotal, and perhaps it depends on where in the country the Tea Party was held.

Oops, forgt link: (none / 0) (#58)
by DancingOpossum on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 12:20:28 PM EST

http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/showDiary.do?diaryId=2717

: Dude (5.00 / 1) (#76)
by Socraticsilence on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 01:00:08 PM EST

that's like quoting FR telling me how things were perfect in Iraq and everything was good- Alegre- is a one-issue blogger, and that issue is opposition to Obama- everything else is viewed through that prism.

Tea Parties, Secession, Vermont (none / 0) (#81)
by STLDeb on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 01:25:19 PM EST

I was unable to attend one of the tea parties (due to my husband working & I didn't want to go alone). That being said, I have several dear friends from church that went to the St. Louis rally, there was no talk of racism. Everyday people are just fed up with the government (yes George W. Bush started it with the 1st TARP bill), but it has just ramped up to bail out everybody and their brother.

All of this talk about TX and them wanting to secede (is that spelled right?) from the U.S. gov't. How soon we forget ... Vermont wanted or wants to secede from the U.S. gov't over their disagreement with the Iraq war during Bush's administration. Where was the outcry then? I am generalizing, of course, but for the right to be cheering about TX and the left cheering about VT is just plain wrong.

How's that old saying go, two wrongs don't make it right.

Just my little old 2 cents worth.

I recall a great deal of outcry from the right (none / 0) (#85)
by BobTinKY on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 01:55:38 PM EST

on the Vermont initiative such as it was. Ridicule fo Vermont was then and still is great fodder for the fair and balanced network.


Bob (none / 0) (#86)
by STLDeb on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 03:05:37 PM EST

I think you missed my point. The "left" is outraged because TX wants to secede from the U.S. The "right" is/was outraged because VT wants/ed to secede from the U.S.

So which is it? How can the left proclaim to be outraged at TX if they were outraged about VT & same for the right. They were outraged about VT and not about TX?

You can't have it both ways (and that goes for both sides of the political spectrum)


: Well not quite apples to apples here (none / 0) (#88)
by BobTinKY on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 03:18:26 PM EST

the VT initiative as I recall was being pushed in town hall meetings by local citizens and, in a few instances, their selectmen and selectwomen. In Texas, it's the sitting Governor.
Personally, neither one outrages me. VT saddened me as I would hate to see it go. Texas? Eh, I can't honestly say I would mind.

: This Leftie says (none / 0) (#92)
by jondee on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 04:39:08 PM EST

Texas cant secede soon enough. Dont let the door hit you in the as* on the way out.

Sometimes savvy, sometimes not (none / 0) (#82)
by Sweet Sue on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 01:25:29 PM EST

by gyrfalcon
The African-American community is by far the savviest voting bloc in the United States.
Then why was "he" so easily fooled into believing that Bill and Hillary Clinton (!)are racist.
Not so savvy then.
Yes, Obama is bringing the crazies out of the woodwork, again, but this time the crazies don't have the Media on their side. The Media was hand in glove with all but the most bug eyed murderous loons during the Clinton Years.
Why? I don't know, but I fear that it's because Clinton was a Democrat who made sure that there was something left for the middle class.
That and classism.
Having said that, good for Obama for releasing the torture memos.

: I agree with some of this (5.00 / 1) (#83)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 01:36:48 PM EST

I said a lot of the same upthread. or maybe another thread. but I think the reaction to the Clintons is a lot more complicated than that. I think a lot of the MSM hatred of the Clintons came from the fact the they were seen as hicks who did not deserve to be where they were. and some from the early treatment of the press corps by Clinton.
and other things. like I said, its complicated.
but I agree with you that one of the things that is most chapping the butts of the right wing is that they dont have the media to help this time around as they did with the Clintons.
for whatever reason.

Any plan for a peaceful & orderly (none / 0) (#84)
by BobTinKY on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 01:54:09 PM EST

secession must include an agreement to adhere to the Constitution's right to travel for a period no less than 20 years before any seceding state(s) can build internment camps or wall off their borders. This way the millions of reasonable folks living in these states have the opportunity to leave.

the wingnut sites (none / 0) (#90)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 04:21:19 PM EST

are all breathlessly reporting about the "surge" in ratings for the FAUX news coverage of the teabagging.

wow.
who could have predicted that, huh?

Wow (none / 0) (#93)
by catmandu on Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 07:52:58 PM EST

one of my fav historical studies is the great depression. People reacted with protests to the gov't at that time as well. People are hurting and the gov't does not seem to be able to do the job.
People are scared they will lose everything (and righfully so) and blame the gov't (perhaps not so rightfully so). It is not Democrat/Republican or liberal/conserv, its universal.
Whats really scary, the economy is reacting in a similar way as it did in the depression, which was really a severe recession-slight rebound-even more severe recession.
At least we don't have a dust bowl to add to our problems--depression era starvation doesn't seem to be in our future.