Modern Esquire on this Tea Party Fraud

By On March 16, 2009 · 3 Comments

I’ve always thought one of the biggest strengths great bloggers have is an ability to distill something down to it’s essence and communicate it. ModernEsquire has always been one of those highly capable of such. He does so again with the wingnut tea party nonsense:

Apparently, I’m supposed to be impressed that 4,000 people showed up in Cincinnati for the area’s “Tea Party” protest. I’m not. That’s about how many showed up regularly for McCain/Palin events in the fall, which isn’t surprising since it’s the same people in both crowds.

Of course, he goes on to pummel the fraudulent underlying analogy with more words than I’d use, but ME always was a thorough type.

Glad to see Modern still blogging after the Armageddon of Incompetence over at BSB.

Evangelize!
  • Print
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
Tagged with: • • •
 
  • Joe C.

    Ahhh…any evidence that these are the same people? Either way, shouldn’t all the future pro-green, pro-abortion, anti-war rallies be ignored as well since they most certainly are the same people that voted for Doh!-bama? Just asking for a single standard, that’s all.

  • http://www.plunderbund.com Eric

    Let’s see. They spat at and drove off reporters. Compare and contrast that to the Palin Mobs. I’d say the likelihood is rather high.

    To your other point. a) no such position as “pro-abortion”, b) given the historic landslide electoral result i’d say those who voted for Obama and are pro-green/anti-war have the upper hand about now. You?

  • Modern Esquire

    Well, since the speakers at the Tea Party event were almost exactly he same lineup as the McCain-Palin rallies, attendence was the same, the bloggers and radio/TV talk show hosts promoting it were the same ones promoting the McCain/Palin rallies, yeah, I’m fairly comfortable making that assumption.

    As I stated in my post, the group makes a distinction that can only be explained as being the result of partisan blinders. One cannot oppose the stimulus bill on grounds that did not also apply (in some cases on much stronger ground) to the TARP. Even though the TARP was supported by “Tea Baggers” Boehner and Schmidt.

    Chabot can hardly decry pork as he was a noted earmarker for his campaign donors. Don’t like TARP being used to help out people behind in their mortgage? Well, guess who supported giving the same “cram-down” authority to bankruptcy judges as President Obama does? Yep, Steve Chabot.

    Using a historic tax increase protest to defend protesting one of the largest tax cuts in American history is pathetic. Creating some distinction between the TARP as good, but the stimulus as bad is just silly. And just about any Republican politician who embraced this farce scores a new high in political hypocrisy.

    Given your well-established history of cherry picking polling data and methodology when it supports your cause, you’re hardly the person to demand a single standard on anything.

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!

Visit our friends!

A few highly recommended friends...

Archives

All entries, chronologically...