I think that person may be confusing “huge impact” with “unintentionally hilarious diversion.” It’s like if Bush pointed to the cataloging of his Freudian slips as evidence that everyone thinks his oratorical skills are mighty and fearsome.

Question:

Who first started using the term “tea bagging” to refer to these parties?  Was it someone on Fox News or a liberal blogger?  I’ve had a very angry conservative say that she was sick of Liberals (her caps) mocking the tea parties and challenge me to prove that it’s liberals responding to a conservative term.

Thanks.

I could never figure out what the baggers’ problem was either because I’m definitely not buying their conversion to born-again fiscal conservatism.

If these mopes were that concerned about expansion of government and Federal budgets where the hell were they over the past decade?

Oh, yeah…embedded up Bush’s rear end.

The eunuch effect of tea bagging is summed up nicely here:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/4/16/720821/-Why-yesterdays-protests-were-stupid

As one blogger pointed out, there are always a group of crazees protesting City Hall,state/federal government buildings EVERY tax day—which may be why Fox, et al, glommed onto April 15 as their protest day, there was bound to be a base which might have iappeared to inflate the numbers.

And I’m sure why they’ve chosen their next for July 4—when they can claim any random flag waver as part of their silly (but racist!) movement.

If you think liberal-blogger posts about something are an indicator of importance, then we’d better just turn the party over to our feline overlords right now.

They are a good measure of whether or not you bothered the liberals, which remember is the priority goal.

He’s right that we tended to belittle the tea parties, though I don’t think our mockery really fits his definition of success. I don’t know for certain that he was hoping that the tea parties would piss off liberals, but they certainly failed on that note.

In other words…they worked. I have rarely seen this many links on a single topic…

That’s an awful lot of effort to get traffic. Over at Salon, they just let Camille Paglia write a column once a month to create the same effect.

In other words…they worked. I have rarely seen this many links on a single topic…

There’s an awful lot of people linking to that guy holding the “Moran” sign, but that doesn’t mean he’s a role model either…

Huh, and I thought the nerds I went to school with were socially inept.

Human Social Cues 101: If I am laughing my fucking ass off, I am not really that pissed. Unless I piss myself laughing, in which case I now have more immediate problems to focus on.

Here’s a supplement to Aaron’s great photo spread from this afternoon’s rally. — Remember: Fox News reported on these rallies. It didn’t promote them!

I love how he has to reinforce this folly. Fox News promoted the hell out of these rallies. Or, I’m sorry, “reported” the hell out of these rallies. But for them it’s probably the same damn thing anyway.

Funny how they can’t tell the difference between pissed off and “hey look at the stupid” entertainment sharing.

Left_Wing_Fox:  one of the early signs from one of these events read, IIRC “Teabag the liberal Dems, before they Teabag you!”

I posted this somewhere else earlier today:

That sign doesn’t even make any sense unless the sign-maker understands the sexual connotation of “teabagging.” That sign IMHO most likely means “Give the Democrats a literal teabag before they try to give us a figurative teabag, i.e., suck our balls.” It’s a riff on “Democrats R Teh Ghey.”

++++

Otherwise, what’s the threat of “Liberal Dems” engaging in some “teabagging” on the public?

So I don’t think that whoever made that sign was ignorant of the sexual meaning.

My bet is that the 12-year old kid holding the sign got the joke (note shit-eating grin) and his parents may not have.

The tea baggers have made a huge impact.

This shit has me LOLing more than the hipster grifter.

I just think the whole thing is great because Fox News has all but admitted that they don’t broadcast the news.  Glenn Beck is constantly bitching about the “news media” failing the American people while he and his fellow mouth foamers are bringing this important cause to Teh Peepehl!  Since Fox News isn’t just covering, but actively encouraging teabagging, they must not be a legitimate news outlet.  This is by their own logic.

Speaking for this liberal only, I wasn’t the least bit pissed off by these wingnuts having their silly Balls-in-Mouthfests.

If anything, I would highly encourage them to further marginalize themselves and continue to hold events like this where they expose themselves to the moderates for the lunatics they actually are.

I don’t think they quite it.  The more wingnutty they become in their rhetoric and their tactics, the more they scare the bejeebus out of the centrists in America, centrists who are absolutely vital to electoral success in the ballot booth.

While one could reasonably argue that candidates like Sarah Palin are great for solidifying the base of the Republican Party and making them feel all powerful and mighty, what they fail to acknowledge is that for every diehard Republican who feels more enthusiastic about voting for the party they would have voted for anyway, they lose one fence-sitter who they might have gained had they put forward a less batshit crazy candidate.

Elections and agenda setting are won by gaining the support of the middle in America.  These teabaggings and talk of secession are not only driving away any hopes of gaining the support of the middle, they are probably pushing away the more moderate leaning members of their own party.  Which explains why GOP self-identification is currently down to 28% of voters in America.

So sure, these white nationalist gatherings are a success insofar as they let that 28% of America feel good about themselves because they totally got to see Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity in person, but they do absolutely NOTHING, NOTHING to attract anyone even somewhat politically moderate into their cause.

And until they figure that out, they will become more and more like the Whig Party every two years when we go to the ballot booth.  And this will go on until eventually, the words “Republican Party” are synonymous with the words “White Citizens Council” in the minds of average Americans.

Who first started using the term “tea bagging” to refer to these parties?

I can’t say who specifically used the progressive verb “tea bagging”, but Fox News has frequently used the word “teabag” as a verb to promote these events.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAcTMepFLhA

And I’m sure why they’ve chosen their next for July 4—when they can claim any random flag waver as part of their silly (but racist!) movement.

$100 says Fox News gathers up a bunch of crowd shots of people attending fireworks displays throughout the country on July 4th and tries to present them as part of the teabagger movement.

I posted as many links to this story as I could find to fairly report all sides, including yours.

I did not sort them or editorialize them in any fashion, letting the reader, if any, choose their own path.

That you choose to take me for task as a “wingnut” when all have said is that I applaud the exercise in constitutional freedom is in and of itself telling.

Why all of the anger and bile?  How does a protest against excessive government spending hurt you in any substantive way?  Is it just that too many people will not fall in line submissively?

Do you deny the constitutional protections to be free to assemble and petition the government?

Or is the message so appalling that you refuse to acknowledge the reality that whether the issue is right or wrong, it doesn’t really matter, as the real strength is the ability to discuss it openly in the first place.

That should have been the victory here, the path to the President’s bipartisan goals:  Debate, and discussion.

But feel free to mock the very constitutional freedoms that allow you to be publically mocking in the first place.

Peace,

LSU

You know what else really pisses me off?

People that try to reveal the truth behind 9/11.  I’m glad we were able to purge the liberal ranks of them before they let the cat out of the bag.  Thank goodness with Obama in office, there are no longer any protest movements available to get them on camera.

Why all of the anger and bile?

man, you really can’t read for comprehension, can you?

we are not angry. we are amused. very amused.

that’s right. we are laughing at you.

Do you deny the constitutional protections to be free to assemble and petition the government?

please, show me where anyone here has said that the teabaggers have no right to assemble and have their little rant…

i think most of us are glad that the rethugs continue to show their true colours to the large majority of the american people who are more than happy with their president.

Why all of the anger and bile?

Mocking laughter = “anger and bile”?  Seriously?

How does a protest against excessive government spending hurt you in any substantive way?

It doesn’t, nor has anyone here ever claimed otherwise.  If anything, I fully advocate you continue with your silly teabagging protests.  It makes you folks look like damn lunatics and only guarantees more Democrats in Congress next November.  Check out any major poll sometime.  The American public really thinks your party sucks.  Badly.

Is it just that too many people will not fall in line submissively?

No, I believe that was your side’s problem from 2001-2009 everytime you called us unAmerican for protesting an illegal war started by the 43rd POTUS.

Do you deny the constitutional protections to be free to assemble and petition the government?

Again, who has done that here?  Who here has ever questioned your side’s constitutional right to publicly embarrass yourselves?  I do seem to recall the president you guys voted for creating “free-speech” zones which seemed to be a serious abbrogation of those free speech rights, however.

I am answered, thank you.

LSU

“That you choose to take me for task as a “wingnut” when all have said is that I applaud the exercise in constitutional freedom is in and of itself telling.”

When there were massive protests against invading Iraq, did you “applaud the exercise in constitutional freedom”, or did you curse the radical peacnik hippie libruls and their capitulation to terraism?

“Why all of the anger and bile?  How does a protest against excessive government spending hurt you in any substantive way?  Is it just that too many people will not fall in line submissively?”

Did you protest “excessive government spending” when Bush Jr and his buds were racking up massive deficits?  Or did you not see it because he was a white Republican?

“Do you deny the constitutional protections to be free to assemble and petition the government?”

Did anyone say the “protests” shouldn’t have been allowed?  As far as I’ve read, every major voice in the Left Blogosphere thought they were great and hope for more.  Admittedly, the reason they’re great is because they present the stupidity, arrogance, and tantrumic power of wingnuttery so clearly.  The only thing that would have made it better would be book burnings and wearing brown uniforms…

“Or is the message so appalling that you refuse to acknowledge the reality that whether the issue is right or wrong, it doesn’t really matter, as the real strength is the ability to discuss it openly in the first place.
That should have been the victory here, the path to the President’s bipartisan goals:  Debate, and discussion.”

Debate?  Discussion?  It’s been clear for some time that the Reichwing is all in favor of debate and discussion…on their terms only and as long as they get what they want.

Besides, you can’t discuss anything with people who truly and insanely believe our president is a secret Muslim who wasn’t born in the US…and a socialist, but also a fascist, who is secretly bringing about the destruction of America in a deviously ingenious plan, but also not competent to be president because he achieved success only with the unfair help of Affirmative Action…

I am answered, thank you.

Translation: *sticks fingers in ears* “I can’t hear you! Nananananananananananananana.”

I’m glad that the Republicans have turned their attention to providing such tremendous entertainment.  Really, it’s been great since the last part of the presidential campaign.

My dad tried to make this exact point to me yesterday when I was getting riled up about it. Really pissed me off—it reminds me of when bullies tell someone they’ve pissed off to calm down. (And I’m not even sure what his opinion on the matter is.)

When there were massive protests against invading Iraq, did you “applaud the exercise in constitutional freedom”, or did you curse the radical peacnik hippie libruls and their capitulation to terraism?

I applaud anyone’s right to protest, I only blogged against violence to promote peace.

“Did you protest “excessive government spending” when Bush Jr and his buds were racking up massive deficits?  Or did you not see it because he was a white Republican? “

I have complained for years that Bush and the republican majority were spending like drunken sailors and fully expected them to get the oust they got in 2006.

“Did anyone say the “protests” shouldn’t have been allowed?  As far as I’ve read, every major voice in the Left Blogosphere thought they were great and hope for more.  Admittedly, the reason they’re great is because they present the stupidity, arrogance, and tantrumic power of wingnuttery so clearly.  The only thing that would have made it better would be book burnings and wearing brown uniforms… “

Shrug.  Its clear you have no respect for the protest process itself, just for the fact it makes your enemies look bad in your eyes.  Fair enough.  If the best you can do is liken them to nazi brownshirts, falling prey to Godwin’s law along the way, then so be it.

Frankly though, I have seen nothing about the protests to deride in regards to the issues.  Spending is out of control and claiming that Bush started it is pointless.  Deal with the fact there is a valid issue that has a lot of people in all political ideologies unhappy.

“Debate?  Discussion?  It’s been clear for some time that the Reichwing is all in favor of debate and discussion…on their terms only and as long as they get what they want.

More ad hominem attacks.  How quaintly typical.

“Besides, you can’t discuss anything with people who truly and insanely believe our president is a secret Muslim :

I don’t, nor do most conservatives…

“who wasn’t born in the US…”

I think he was and wish he would release the records and shut up the idiots claiming he isn’t…as do most conservatives…In fact most of the prominent bloggers on the right refuse to even address the topic.

“and a socialist”

he is advocating an increase of socialist policies, what should I call him?  A surgeon?

“but also a fascist, who is secretly bringing about the destruction of America in a deviously ingenious plan, “

I think there is a power grab going on that has been going on for decades, and *if* allowed to be unchecked would in the long term, eventually lead us into a fascist like state.  I also have confidence that it won’t happen however, because in my naive way I believe that even the democrats will not go that far.

I wonder, by your own logic, did you protest all the people calling Bush a Fascist?

“but also not competent to be president because he achieved success only with the unfair help of Affirmative Action… “

Depends on what you mean.  Did his race help his election?  Of course it did.  Blacks were clearly wanting to elect a black man.

Why is that a radical statement?  I have no issue with that at all.  Frankly the denials of it are silly.

Do I think he was under experienced?  Yes, of all the candidates he had the least experience.

But that is water long since under the bridge.  That was an election issue.  Not an ongoing one, unless you really want to debate his policies against that backdrop.  I do not.  I want to debate them by their merits against the needs of the country right now.

Every one of your complaints here as to why you cannot debate conservatives is based on extreme fringe beliefs.  Try again.

Though you do not need to:  Godwin has spoken…

LSU

I think he was [born in the States] and wish he would release the records and shut up the idiots . . .

Yeah, that’ll do it.

Did his race help his election?  Of course it did.  Blacks were clearly wanting to elect a black man.

Oh yeah. Because if the Dems had run a white candidate, McCain would have totally swept the black vote.

LSU, At least one of your complaints has been pretty well debunked; the President’s birth records are both on line and affirmed to be official by the great state of Hawaii, who currently has a Republican governor who is inexplicably BFF with Sarah Palin (in spite of Lingle’s long-rumored lesbianism).

Hawaii has affirmed the certificate is authentic, which should finish the debate unless you have a reason to think Hawaii either isn’t a state or that the Birth Certificate people are corrupt, in which case nobody can argue—as in the one case, you’re wrong, and the other, you’d have no proof.

Godwin’s Law is inherently stupid, yes,

I hate it when internet culture destroys its own tools.

the tea parties made a huge impact, not just on the people bragging about them, but also on the liberals belittling them.

So they were basically performance art?

“but also not competent to be president because he achieved success only with the unfair help of Affirmative Action… ”

Depends on what you mean.  Did his race help his election?  Of course it did.  Blacks were clearly wanting to elect a black man.

I will grant you this statement if you will grant me the statement that many whites wanted to elect a white president, and always have had this desire, even more strongly than the blacks. Since we have not had a realistic black alternative for president, until recently, the identity politics of whites have been more difficult to see, since they have always been satisfied. It seems to me that a major source of the energy displayed at wednesday’s rallies has been the anger and fear of whites who feel that a black president is inherently ineligible, inherently wrong.

It is the Tea Baggers’ and Birthers’ sense of deeply personal grievance based on race and cultural identity that leads them to the kind of absurd statements about birth certificates, Obama’s ‘socialism’ or his ‘Muslim’ religion, that they have been making. If you believe that the Tea Baggers are part of a nonpartisan movement which seeks to resist taxes and government spending, then you should realize that to most of the Tea Baggers, their source of anger is simply Obama instead. In addition, their movement has been started, supported, and given PR by conservative political elements, such as the group “Freedomworks”, whose aim is likewise to attack Obama rather than to advance any particular political or social agenda.

Learning Straight Up:

I have complained for years that Bush and the republican majority were spending like drunken sailors and fully expected them to get the oust they got in 2006.

Frankly though, I have seen nothing about the protests to deride in regards to the issues.

And yet all these people—and FOX News’ marketing push—decided to wait until Obama’s first 100 days to make such a public display of it.

Odd, that.  Why, some of us more cynical types would consider the timing of this event awfully suspicious and your/their explanations closely teetering on the brink of bunkum.

Spending is out of control and claiming that Bush started it is pointless.  Deal with the fact there is a valid issue that has a lot of people in all political ideologies unhappy.

I shall do no such thing.  The absolute numbers of the attendees, and their proportion of the electorate, were so small as to justify ignoring their concerns completely.

I should also add that the comment “spending is out of control” is completely in the eye of the beholder, and thus a thoroughly worthless opinion.

I’m sure there were plenty libertarian/anti-war types in the crowd who feel one more penny spent on the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan is one too many.  And surely a couple of anarchists would love to see the Department of Defense completely dismantled.  Any chance you could poll the rest of your conservative brethren and find out how much of our income you insist on appropriating for the expenditures you do support?

“Debate?  Discussion?  It’s been clear for some time that the Reichwing is all in favor of debate and discussion…on their terms only and as long as they get what they want.”
More ad hominem attacks.  How quaintly typical.

That, sir, is an observation supported by watching Congress and POTUS and their interactions since 1994 when Gingrich put a Contract On America.  Like all partisans, I believe my observation is accurate…

Everybody else took the rest of your replies and ripped them up pretty good…except for the parts about protesting Bush the same way, and you answered (no doubt correctly) that you did not protest his actions (you may have bitched a little, but then sat down and watched American Idol again until you forgot about it…).  Nope, no hypocrisy there…

In other words…they worked*.

*For made-up definitions of worked.  In this case, they didn’t accomplish anything, but since they had no goal to begin with, the tea parties couldn’t technically not work.  Therefore, they worked by default.

The new favored right-wing meme is that anything progressives subject to well-deserved mockery and ridicule is because progressives “fear” the power of right-wing ideas (or whatever).  We heard it over and over again about Sarah Palin (somehow we “fear” her because she is clearly the next Churchill, or something like that.)  Now the same topos is applied to Teabagpalooza.

Did his race help his election?  Of course it did.  Blacks were clearly wanting to elect a black man.

Most black Americans are Democratic anyway.  The majority of people who voted for Obama because of his race would have voted for any Democratic candidate.  Likewise, the majority of people who voted against him based on his race are Republican anyway, and wouldn’t have voted for even a white Democratic candidate.  Obama’s race may have caught a few extra votes, but those few extra were balanced out by the people who wouldn’t vote for him because of his race.

There are many reasons that Obama won, and the biggest two were George W. Bush and Sarah Palin.

On a side note, I would love to see if LSU actually knows the meaning of “socialist”.

I think these wingnuts are more deeply concerned that Obama’s race was nearly irrelevant to the vast majority of voters in the country.  They want identity politics, and so do some African Americans ... the difference is that a huge swath of white voters wanted a president who was competent to lead and wouldn’t act like a seagull.

Thank you Molly and Ms Kate. As an African-American I can tell you that I would have voted for Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden or any of the other primary contenders (except John Edwards) over any person the Republicans had to offer. Racists love to project their own nonsense on others by saying that black people voted for Obama only because he is black. While there certainly was a level of pride as a black person voting for Obama, his progressive ideas and his political party trumped his skin color.

I am going out on a limb here and speaking for all 40 million black people in this country—we don’t vote for Republicans because they’re racist. Southern strategy, Reagan’s “welfare queens” and kicking off his campaign in the place where Emmett Till was lynched, Willie Horton ads., etc. This list could go on all day but you get the picture. You saw the ugly, racist, angry Republicans out on Tuesday claiming that theirs was a grassroots movement. Remember when they made fun of community organizers? When will they stop co-opting progressive ideas for their own twisted ends?

Their blinding anger is not directed at taxes or government spending—it is directed at a black man who just happens to be POTUS. These bottom feeders watch Fox “news”, listen to lunatics on the radio and only read their local paper. So they never saw an Obama rally on a real news station or read a balanced article about him in a real paper. Someone said it earlier and they are spot on right—these folks are pissed off to the highest of pisstivity that white Americans voted for Barack Obama. It’s hard being a racist because in your filthy heart you believe everyone who looks like you IS like you. And they had to acknowledge on Nov. 4th that there are millions of white Americans who are NOT ignorant bigots. And the anger they show all the time is a result of that. They just can’t hide their disappointment in their fellow white people.

The new favored right-wing meme is that anything progressives subject to well-deserved mockery and ridicule is because progressives “fear” the power of right-wing ideas (or whatever).

As I’ve always said, when the question is, “Why do conservatives/Republicans think that about liberals/Democrats?” the answer is always—always—“projection.”  They make their “jokes” out of hatred and hostility, and they can’t even imagine that someone would make a joke in return for any other reason.

I love how one of the automatically generated ads at the bottom of this page reads “Annoy a Liberal.”

you know, i think we are missing an important element here. and i only just saw it—thinking about lsu’s claims here and martha’s in another thread. they seem really invested in believing that this is the release of long pent-up frustration and anti-government (rather than anti-obama) protest. they want it to be seen as some kind of mass movement, taking the nation by storm.

but,

we have just seen a grassroots, mass movement taking the nation by storm—the majority of the nation that is. not the 28 percenters that are now teabagging, but many other folks. young people, people of colour, people who hadn’t yet dared to believe in the possibility of an african-american president…

the teabaggers are hoping for their grant park. they saw the rest of the country come together, joyfully, to elect president obama.

of course, they don’t understand that joy and hope were huge parts of WHY this presidential campaign was so huge, and so successful. they believe that the rest of us are like them, and can only be motivated by hate and fear.

it’s jealousy and sad mimicry. that’s all.

Kay, I went over to LSU’s site.  Ducky!!!???  Seriously?

I love how one of the automatically generated ads at the bottom of this page reads “Annoy a Liberal.”

Hell, I saw a bumpersticker a few years back that said “Annoy A Liberal—Have a Job.”

Oh, dear. Wasn’t there recently a post here about the actual meaning of the phrase “ad hominem,” or am I thinking of another blog?

Hell, I saw a bumpersticker a few years back that said “Annoy A Liberal—Have a Job.”

And yet those same people had plenty of leisure time to go to political rallies on Wednesday while the rest of us were at work.  Funny, that.

when the question is, “Why do conservatives/Republicans think that about liberals/Democrats?” the answer is always—always—“projection.” They make their “jokes” out of hatred and hostility, and they can’t even imagine that someone would make a joke in return for any other reason.

This. Add to it their disgust with (fear of?) education, and what do you get? Someone who can’t even imagine that other people might be motivated differently, and who actively avoids new knowledge because it might force them to admit they’ve gotten something wrong. Sounds about right to me ...

*applauds DC Fem*

It’s amazing to me that after all these years Republicans don’t understand why they don’t have more of the black (and even women’s) vote. They hem and they haw about “family values” (no abortions, no jobs and no fun for you womenz) and have representatives like David Duke and then just stare stupidly as Democrats get those votes. And then, to try and balance the scales they’ll run around and find the nearest thing with boobs (Palin) and the nearest black guy (Steele) hold them up and go “See! We have women and blacks who like us!” believing that the only reason people would vote for Hillary Clinton or Barak Obama was because of some sort of Borg mentality and then are shocked, SHOCKED, when it doesn’t work and instead of flocking to them they get laughed at.

They honestly don’t believe that women and black people can think for themselves and now I think it’s like someone whacked them across the nose with a newspaper and are forcing them to see that, yes, Virgina, women and black people can think for themselves.

Unlike, you know, YOU.

Their blinding anger is not directed at taxes or government spending—it is directed at a black man who just happens to be POTUS.

Aha… did you catch Janeane Garafalo on Countdown with Keith Olbermann last night?

She said almost precisely what you just said here.  I think she was right.

This isn’t about taxes.
This isn’t about the deficit.
This isn’t even about a Democrat winning the election.

These people are furious about the fact that a legally elected black man is now living in the White House.

Of course, stating the issue that plainly will always result in conservative douchebags accusing you of whipping out “the race card”, but when I see a protest filled with signs so clearly racist in nature - “I’m not gonna let some Kenyan destroy my country!!”  WTF???!!? - what the hell else am I supposed to think?

I have no doubt that many of these folks would be still be angry even if a white Democrat had won the election, but the level of outrage wouldn’t be nearly this high.

And when they make dismissive comments like “he only won because of the black vote” - completely ignorant of the statistical reality of the black vote (Obama won 96% of the black vote; Kerry won 90% in 2004 - 6% of 13% doesn’t change outcomes) - what they are really doing is hiding what they are really outraged about.

They aren’t pissed that black people voted for Obama (though they are pissed that black people even have a right to vote), because they knew that would happen.

They are pissed that their white brethren who have absolutely nothing ideologically in common with them would dare to betray their own race by voting for someone they perceive to be a wholly unworthy black candidate.  They see that as the ultimate slap in the face to everything they believe in, because for the longest time, they just assumed that white people would never elect a black president, so, case closed.  They pawn it off with racially charged phrases like “liberal white guilt”, but the simple fact is, the diehard racists are losing their power.

Don’t get me wrong - it would be assanine to claim that racism is dead or that things are anywhere close to fair in terms of race relations in America - there is too much evidence freely available to indicate that racism is still quite alive and well, and still dominates most of our major power structures.

But a black guy getting elected to the White House with the support of millions of white people - it freaks them the fuck out.  Because it means that they are losing that battle.  For the longest time, their conventional wisdom was right - white people wouldn’t be willing to vote in large numbers for a black man.  And many of them just assumed it would always be this way.

On Election Day, with all of the evidence clearly indicating that Obama was gonna cruise to a victory, I was headed out the door and got into a chat with my racist 63 year old neighbor.  He asked me who I thought was gonna win the election, and I said, “Oh, it’s gonna be Obama, easily.  Not even close.”  He chuckled, and responded, “Keep telling yourself that, kid (I’m 34).  I don’t care what any damn poll says, when people go into that ballot booth and vote in secret, they aren’t gonna go against their own race.  The blacks are all gonna vote for him, but white people ain’t voting for no nigger.  John McCain is gonna be the next president, and it ain’t even gonna be close.  You wait and see.  A black Muslim is NEVER gonna be the president of ‘merica.”  Rather than getting into it with this idiot, I just responded, “Well, I guess we’ll find out soon enough.  I think you’re gonna be real disappointed tonight.”

When I got home the next day from Chicago (I got last minute tix to the Grant Park Rally), I was wearing an Obama t-shirt, he was sitting out on his porch, and we briefly exchanged a glance.  I smirked at him, and he scowled, and he said, “Boy, I tell you what.  This is not my country anymore.  America died last night.  And it’s because of you stupid liberal white kids not knowing what’s best for you.  You’re gonna regret what you did last night, and one day you’re gonna apologize for going against your own people.”

I saw that neighbor throwing some cheesy homemade signs into the back of his pickup yesterday headed down to our local teabagging.  He looked at me and said, “We’re rising up, and taking America back.  This black Muslim illegal ain’t gonna gonna get away with this.”

Yup.  This is racism, plain and simple.  The only thing these rallies were missing were the burning crosses.

“We’re rising up, and taking America back.  This black Muslim illegal ain’t gonna gonna get away with this.”

...I heard he whistled at a white woman once.  Cletus, git a rope!...

***

I do believe it’s primarily because a Democrat won, but the racial thing does make the animosity worse, or at least gives it a pointed target.  And as usual, not all Republicans/wingnuts are racists…but almost all racists are Republicans/wingnuts…

DTG, my parents still live in southern MO and while we where chatting on election night, my mom told me to be careful in L.A. cause she was worried there would be riots or something with a few fringe SoCal rednecks and/or skinheads. I told her I wasn’t really worried about myself but more so for her and my dad cause they’re right there and she’d been describing to me all the McCain/Palin signs her co-workers had been putting up in their yards.

So, the next day after the election she went to work and basically just kept her head down and her mouth shut because people were pissed and they would give her these side eyed looks and no one said anything to her, not even “hello” or “Good morning” or the usual small talk (though, I take that back, I think she told me someone said, “you must be happy today.”)  She is literally the only black person where she works and all the negative (though mostly silent) attention was directed at her, she pointed out that they would probably have a heart attack to find out some of their white “brethren” voted for Obama too and she knew at least two who did, though they admitted it to her in confidence and never to anyone else. It’s sad, that in 2008/9 we’re still dealing with this.

I certainly don’t think that everyone who voted for McCain is racist.  But the most extreme conservatives certainly are.  When you protest one man for things that he didn’t actually do, while over-looking another man who actually did those things, and the main difference between those two men is race, then racism is a reasonable conclusion to come to.  It is certainly possible that parties play a part in this hypocrisy, but racist signs make racism seem more likely.  It’s most likely a combination of both.

I don’t assume that someone is racist just because they didn’t for Obama.  I do assume that someone is racist when they act blatantly racist.

I certainly don’t think that everyone who voted for McCain is racist.  But the most extreme conservatives certainly are.  When you protest one man for things that he didn’t actually do, while over-looking another man who actually did those things, and the main difference between those two men is race, then racism is a reasonable conclusion to come to.

I should clarify my statements a bit.  I wasn’t trying to suggest that all McCain voters or all Republicans were racists.  I was saying that I believe that a fairly significant number of the teabaggers were racists, which I believe is true.

Given the fact that Obama won the election with just shy of 52% of the vote, but enjoys approval numbers in some polls in the high 60s, it indicates that not everybody who voted for McCain is unhappy with Obama, and at least a decent number of them approve of Obama’s job performance.  That extra 10-15% edge he has in his approval numbers versus his election numbers shows that not every McCain voter is an intolerant racist hater, as I can only assume that much of that 10-15% is coming from people who voted for McCain.  I have moderate Republican relatives who voted for McCain who think Obama’s doing fine, and think the teabaggers are silly idiots.

Anyway, if I’m being really generous, let’s say that the total number of protestors nationwide was around 200,000 people (some cities had a few thousand people, some only had a hundred or so - altogether, there were reportedly several hundred protests nationwide).  John McCain got just shy of 60 Million votes on Election Day.  I imagine those attending these protests were among the most diehard conservatives out there, but their numbers only represented 1/3 of 1% of McCain’s vote total.  I think it’s fair to say that the vast majority of the most conservative 0.3333% of conservative voters are probably at least somewhat racist.

Yes, I’m sure there were some non-racist conservatives at these protests.  But I think they were in the minority at the teabaggings.  I have a hard time believing, given the proliferation and acceptance of clearly racist signs at these teabaggings, that there wasn’t a fairly significant presence of people with racist tendencies present at these events.  One doesn’t need to be carrying a sign exposing their racism to be a racist.  Nor does one have to be a formal member of a white nationalist group to be a racist.

I agree that most teabaggers are motivated primarily by racism, as they are protesting a black guy for things he didn’t actually do even though they tolerated the white guy who actually did those things.  I’m not sure if I misunderstand your point, but I am actually agreeing with you.

I agree that most teabaggers are motivated primarily by racism, as they are protesting a black guy for things he didn’t actually do even though they tolerated the white guy who actually did those things.  I’m not sure if I misunderstand your point, but I am actually agreeing with you.

Yeah, I think we’re on the same page.  I just wanted to make it clear that I wasn’t trying to suggest that each and every last McCain voter was a white robe wearing Klan member.

I think MikeEss made the point the best - not all Republicans/wingnuts are racists, but almost all racists are Republicans/wingnuts.  Some racists may defend themselves by saying, “Nuh, uh, I’m a Libertarian/Constitution Party member!!!!”  But still, they are all politically conservative in most regards.

And by the same token, while we can’t say that all Democrats aren’t racists (far from it), I do believe the vast majority of folks who truly adhere to a genuine liberal/progressive belief system would have trouble reconciling themselves with racism.  And if they are OK with being racists, I question whether or not they can truly be called liberal or progressive.

”...I do believe the vast majority of folks who truly adhere to a genuine liberal/progressive belief system would have trouble reconciling themselves with racism.  And if they are OK with being racists, I question whether or not they can truly be called liberal or progressive.”

The Democrats in the Appalachians who wanted Hillary, were sympathetic to the Democratic Platform, but would not vote for Obama are an example.  Very odd that was.

Of course, when you get to individuals anything is possible.  I’ve found a lot of times someone will in general (at least at a surface level) not be bigoted, but one race or one gender (guess which one), or sexual orientation (guess) will be a personal problem for them for some reason.

Oh well.  I guess if we were all perfect there’d be nothing to talk about…

not all Republicans/wingnuts are racists, but almost all racists are Republicans/wingnuts.

I think this is one of those rare times that a Venn diagram would be extremely useful.  Too bad I don’t know how to make one that I can link to.  I guess I would have to make it in Excel, take a screen shot of it, and upload it to a photosharing site.

The Democrats in the Appalachians who wanted Hillary, were sympathetic to the Democratic Platform, but would not vote for Obama are an example.  Very odd that was.

Again, I question whether or not those people could truly be called either “liberal” or “progressive”.

Can we call them Democrats?  Sure.  Do they hold liberal-minded attitudes on many things that traditional liberals or progressives agree with?  Yes.  Might some of them call themselves liberals or progressives?  Perhaps.

But in the end, I think for one to actually be a liberal or a progressive, they cannot have hatred of any traditionally marginalized group as part of their thinking.  No more can one be a true progressive while clinging to patently racist beliefs than could one be a true feminist while clinging to patently anti-choice beliefs.

I certainly don’t think that everyone who voted for McCain is racist.

No. But crazy-ass racists, the type who made no bones about it, did manage to chase away a lot of undecideds, thus increasing both the racist and the crazy-ass percentages of McCain’s supporters.

And the campaign uncovered a lot of racism (much as Katrina did).  Obama won because he’s a hardworking brainiac with a wide range of personal experiences and a precise handle on the modern world, who ran against an elderly hack who thought not knowing how to use the Internet was still cute, nominated by a party so notoriously corrupt and incompetent that most of its candidates for other offices wouldn’t put “Republican” on their campaign literature.

So what do LSU, George Will and the usual herd of ‘winger apologists say? “Oh, people only voted for him because he’s black.” 

LSU, if you’re reading this: That’s not why he won in a landslide; and you are a racist if you think that.

* * *
That said, you want to remember about these teabaggers that, although they hold a genuine minority view, they have no reality check. They’ve been encouraged to think of themselves as utterly mainstream for the last 8 years, and to avoid real exchanges with anyone who disagreed with them except as objects of ridicule—coupled with the basic tendency of wingnuts to go along unquestioningly with whatever their own consensus is. 

From this profoundly insular point-of-view, the last election must have been extremely disconcerting, racism or no.