Tea Parties aren’t against Democrats only
CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and every other liberal media organization out there have desperately tried to convince Americans that the tea party protesters were Republican hacks who ignored President George W. Bush’s irresponsible behavior and who are now using recession to tar Democrats. Sadly for them, however, they are incorrect. The Tea Parties were bipartisan in nature: they were not merely attended by Republicans but also by Democrats and Independent voters, and protesters only fed up with the Democratic Party but with Washington as a whole.
Want proof?
At the Greenville SC Tea Party last night, via Palmetto Scoop, an estimated 3,000 people booed and heckled GOP Rep. Gresham Barrett, who supported both the trillion-dollar TARP and now supports the trillion-dollar porkulus package. The crowd blew air horns as he tried to speak… he anger at reckless spenders in Washington is palpable, deep-seated, bipartisan, nationwide, and not going away.
Just like you, I am not sure whether this tea party movement is here to stay or whether it will disappear in the coming weeks or months, but I do know that Michelle is right when she says that the protesters were and are angry with Democrats and Republicans. This is not about Democratic plans, it is about fiscally irresponsible policies.
Watch the video:
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
