- Stay Connected
Crazy American Reunion: A visit to the Tea Party Zoo
by Valeria Rotella
Lately, the tea party movement has taken the nation by storm. They travel across the country protesting the actions of President Obama and Democrats in the government. And on Tax day, April 15, they took to the streets of Washington D.C. again, holding up signs like “The American Taxpayers are the Jews for Obama’s Ovens.”
So in honor of tax day and the resurgence of the tea baggers, I’ve decided to share my experience with these people.
About a month ago, the day before the health care bill was passed, I went down to the Capitol with a friend of mine. We soon found ourselves in the middle of the tea party protest against the health care bill. We decided to investigate, my friend and I, to see if these people really were as loony as they were portrayed by the “biased left- wing media.”
We first decided to take a quiet, journalistic approach to the calamity, and simply treat it as an anthropological experience. But we couldn’t remain totally inconspicuous because 1) we pulled out a camera phone and began taking pictures and 2) my friend brought along her very large and adorable dog that garnered a lot of attention. So we just decided to see where the afternoon took us.
Apparently, there was a strict dress code: wear or carry something with a message. Whether they be wearing a t-shirt with the American flag or holding up a poster depicting Obama as a communist, the tea party protesters were making a statement: We are mad about the health care bill, but we’re madder at the government because they’re Democrats. Or at least, that’s what I thought they were trying to say.
Everyone was screaming and making a lot of noise. A lot of people brought their drums, probably to encourage a civilized and calm form of protest. Around us, there was a lot grumbling about how Obama was a fascist and a communist, and that Pelosi hated America and there was one man who asked where the Fox News van was. I actually didn’t see any representatives from “Fair and Balanced” headquarters while I was there. Which is a pity. I wanted to ask them if they were happy with the product of their anti- health care bill propaganda.
What really fascinated me were the posters. They ranged from the average message of protest (DON’T RUIN OUR HEALTH CARE) to the inappropriate. I think people were really crossing the line with images of Obama with a Hitler moustache. Sure, you can disagree with the guy, but compare him to one of the most vile and repugnant people who ever lived? Show some respect for your country and president.
There was more than one Obama- Hitler poster comparison. There were also posters comparing him to Mussolini, Mao, and the Devil. There were people decked out in full colonial era regalia. I was also surprised at the number of children at the event. Some were perched on their fathers’ shoulders, waving flags, some were trying to find some sort of shelter from the blistering heat, and others were just mindlessly chanting right along with the other protesters.
It was pretty spectacular and frightening. There were thousands of really angry people chanting “KILL THE BILL!” and “DOWN WITH OBAMA!” and “BOO!” As the day went on, the chants became more vulgar and violent.
But then they would turn to us and say, “What a cute puppy! What kind of breed is it? A mutt? Well, that’s a very cute mutt!” and “Sure, honey, you can take a picture of my sign! Make sure to get the [ultra- conservative Minnesota congresswoman] Michelle Bachmann’s autograph on it! Now you have a nice day!”
It was a confrontation with reality. When I see the tea baggers on the news, I sort of have to dehumanize them in order to swallow some their crazy and even indecent comments. But when I interacted with them, I realized some of these people may be nice, polite members of society, or at least act that way.
Then I started to talk with my friend. I told her I thought the protest didn’t make sense, because the reason the health care bill had taken so long to pass was to work into the bill the demands of some of the Republicans. I told her Obama couldn’t be a communist, because America would never elect a communist President. And I told her that I think Nancy Pelosi is a decent woman who cares about this country.
Some people overheard my comments. I got a lot of glares and some people whispered to each other. When one woman heard my Pelosi comment, she yelled, “No, she doesn’t!”
A heavy set Southern gentleman chimed in on my argument that Obama wasn’t a communist. “Yes he is. Read your American history, sweetie. We came to America to escape that.”
I’ll be honest; I really don’t know what he was trying to say. He also added, “This is what the winning side of history looks like.”
I would have liked to have had a pleasant debate with him, but he was a large, not- very- pleasant looking man whom I would peg as an NRA card-carrying member, so I was a little intimidated. Plus, we were leaving, so I let the matter drop and headed off towards the car.
When I got back home the day of the protest, I found out that this mindless mob had shouted anti- gay slurs and racial epithets, and one of them had actually had the nerve to spit on an African American congressman.
I find that type of behavior atrocious and reprehensible. It’s one thing to be against the ideas of the health care bill and go out to protest in a reasonable manner. But these teabaggers have been scared by certain individuals (Hey Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin!) into believing that the government is out to kill them and respond by making wild and unfounded claims, like calling Obama a communist. And I guess it’s their constitutional right to believe in those bedtime stories, but I really think we should draw a line at the racist and homophobic comments and violent attacks.
Since the health care bill passed, Democrat politicians have been receiving death threats and someone even shot a gun through a window. All these people are really doing are diminishing any rational argument that can be made against the health care bill, which I’m sure has its flaws. And agree or not with the Democrats, you have to admit that President Obama is only trying to help the country. I can’t tell you if his plans will succeed overall.
But I can tell you what I saw at the tea party protest, and here’s an image that sticks out in my mind. I saw Jon Voight, 70s movie star and father of Angelina Jolie, about 50 feet away from me on the grassy hill next to the Capitol. He was surrounded by bodyguards and tea party protesters trying to get an autograph. Behind him, a man dressed as Uncle Sam on stilts was walking around carrying a sign declaring, “LIBERTY, NOT TYRANNY” (I took a photograph with him on his insistence). At the bottom of the hill, a woman was angrily beating a drum. Next to her, propped up on a tree, was a poster of President Obama with a hammer and sickle.
This may sound like a description of a dream I had last night. But I can assure you it was all very real. Only in America, folks.
Aaron W.
April 27, 2010 at 2:47 pm
Doron: “To form a more perfect union, establish justice….promote the general welfare”
Doron Tauber
April 27, 2010 at 9:23 pm
yes. to keep the peace (protect the people by military and police) and establish justice (courts system)
dimitri halikias
April 27, 2010 at 11:28 pm
and to borrow money, and to tax, and to spend, and to coin money, and to regulate commerce, and to maintain roads, and to maintain the postal service, and to promote the progress of science, and to set rules and regulations for industry, and to nationalize the militia, and to establish courts, and to pass any law which is necessary and proper or carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States. That last part means that congress can pass any law in order to promote the general welfare, meaning establishing educational systems, fire departments, and yes indeed welfare
Doron Tauber
April 28, 2010 at 7:05 pm
their idea of “regulating commerce” meant to help free trade by stopping the states from putting outrageous taxes on each other’s products. i disagree with maintaining roads. they promoted the progress of science by issuing patents and copyrights, which would go into the court system. the last part means that they can enforce the foregoing powers by passing laws, not that they can just make any laws they want regarding anything relating to “the general welfare”.
Aaron W.
April 22, 2010 at 3:32 pm
Libertarians want to legalize everything, including abortion and gay marriage. Not very Republican.
Doron Tauber
April 22, 2010 at 5:08 pm
because libertarians are actual conservatives, who want to give complete freedom to all, like the Founders
Aaron W.
April 22, 2010 at 6:33 pm
The founders most certainly did not want to give complete freedom to all. If that were the case, there would be no law and no government. In other words, we would be anarchist.
Doron Tauber
April 22, 2010 at 9:18 pm
anarchy does not give absolute freedom to anyone. in fact it takes away freedom. government exists as the sole entity with the power to use compulsion and force against individuals to protect the individual rights of all. that is the government’s one job: to protect the people. without a government, our rights and freedoms would not be protected, thus your statement is invalid.
Aaron W.
April 23, 2010 at 3:37 pm
The founders intended government to do more than just provide for the common defense.
Doron Tauber
April 24, 2010 at 8:48 am
Aaron: what else did they want it to do? (use evidence from the Constitution and/or Declaration of Independence)
Jackson Fritz
April 23, 2010 at 8:50 am
Also, if they wanted complete freedom we wouldn’t have slaves since the 1700′s and no civil war. The founders were politically bound, just like today’s government.
Doron Tauber
April 24, 2010 at 8:47 am
the founders did want total freedom. most of them were stark abolitionists, but they feared that if they abolished slavery right away, the Southern states wouldn’t ratify the Constitution.
Jackson Fritz
April 24, 2010 at 9:31 am
They weren’t stark abolitionists. The founders tried to prevent the growth of slavery with the 1808 compromise, which supposedly would end the slave trade in 1808. But, the most delegates came from Virginia, and other slave states. Furthermore, when Thomas Jefferson wrote the draft of the Declaration of Independence, he received a LOT of criticism for putting down “all men are created equal” when the wast majority of founders did not believe in this. They thought slaves were inherently unequal
Doron Tauber
April 24, 2010 at 12:31 pm
not true. most of the founders were abolitionists. it was just those few from the southern states that forced them to bend. also, the 1808 compromise just said that no more slaves would be brought from Africa, not that the entire trade would be dead.
Doron Tauber
April 24, 2010 at 12:31 pm
*sold. not dead
Doron Tauber
April 24, 2010 at 12:35 pm
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-wall/wal-g003.html
disregard the whole christian thing and just look at the quotes
Jackson Fritz
April 24, 2010 at 8:41 pm
Africa was where they got slaves. There were NO slaves from any other continent. And I recall that both John Hancock and John Adams, who were not from the South, expressed dissent of Jefferson’s draft. And just to point out, there is a big difference between being an abolitionist and what most of the founders were. Frederick Douglas was an abolitionist. The founders worried about the rising population of slaves, but they weren’t concerned with human rights and such.
Jackson Fritz
April 24, 2010 at 8:42 pm
Just think about the time period. Even during the civil war, the north discriminated against former slaves. The founders lived a hundred years prior. They are human, and to think that slaves were equal to white men was absurd.
dimitri halikias
April 24, 2010 at 9:15 pm
what are you talking about doron, none of the founding fathers were abolitionists. Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, Patrick Henry, and George Washington all owned slaves. The only founding father I can think of opposed to slavery was John Jay, but I didn’t really think a conservative like you would be a big Jay fan.
dimitri halikias
April 21, 2010 at 6:18 pm
Income tax was never set at 70%. That would imply we had a flat income tax rate which we obviously dont. You are right however that the top rate income tax for the top .02% of the population did reach 70%, and I agree that that was way too high.
I also never said the tea partiers were racist or evil, it is a strong conservative movement with radicalized elements, just like Code Pink. The only difference is that republican leaders have been quick to endorse their actions 100% without a word of condemnation for the dangerous rhetoric. Van Jones was not a democratic leader, so although he is a socialist he is not a good counter-example.
I also never equated tea partiers with republicans, they are clearly an entirely different movement. I only said that republicans are trying to liken themselves with the tea party movement. I think we can all agree on that. But Doron is (surprisingly) right, they are definitely not libertarians. I’ve never heard of libertarians supporting enhanced interrogation, increased American intervention abroad, and the belief that Christianity is the root of american democracy and freedom. Those are hardcore, conservative principles.
Doron Tauber
April 20, 2010 at 7:02 pm
so no complaints for when the democrats called Bush Hitler and said that he should die, that he was a moron, that he should be impeached, that he should go to jail, that America was evil, but when people hold a protest and insinuate that the President holds communist views, it’s vile and disgusting?
you were intimidated to have a conversation with a man because you believed him to be a member of the NRA? because of course the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution is so frightening, isn’t it? self-defense and all just sends a shiver down my spine. well at least I have a spine, unlike the worms in Washington.
I don’t care that Obama is “trying to help the country” because intentions don’t matter, it’s what becomes of them. you’re taking the “ends justify[ing] means” approach. Hitler was just trying to help make Germany stronger, Stalin was trying to create a strong Russia. But they’re evil, are they not?
You say that we’ve never elected a communist president? maybe not openly (Although Eugene Debbs did pretty well) but try presidents like Woodrow Wilson and FDR. They were Progressives, which are pretty damn close to communists.
the American people are mad. they have every right to be, and it’s people like you who mock them for standing up for the principles of smaller government and more freedom, who allow the corrupt Washington machine to function.
dimitri halikias
April 20, 2010 at 7:25 pm
Communism as set forth by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels is a philosophy which argues for the destruction of class barriers and the uprising by the proletariat to form a new stateless society without government. Communism was transformed by Lenin into a new philosophy which argued that in order to bring about Marx’s classless society, strong leaders were required to oversee the progression of the nation into a series of communes each with strong governments coordinating and assigning the roles of the individuals.
Progressivism was an American political movement in the early 20th century which worked to improve working conditions, bring democracy closer to the people, and protect the American environment. In fact we have progressivism to thank for weekends, women’s suffrage, child labor laws, the 17th amendment, the Australian ballot, the initiative, the recall, the referendum, and charities like the famous settlement houses. While progressivism did have several noticeable weaknesses like the propaganda campaigns run by Wilson during WWI and the over-regulation and protectionist policies put in place during progressive administrations. However, it is a far stretch to say that “progressives are pretty damn close to communists”
Also the difference with the presidential respect issue is that the democratic leadership never endorsed the actions of radical leftists like Code Pink. Republicans on the other hand have jumped at the opportunity to associate themselves with the Tea Partiers without denouncing the harmful and dangerous rhetoric coming out from some more radicalized elements within the Tea Party movement.
And I am 100% with you on the 2nd amendment
Doron Tauber
April 20, 2010 at 8:26 pm
because Republicans in Congress are weak and cowardly, and will align themselves with anyone who will get them re-elected.
dimitri halikias
April 20, 2010 at 8:45 pm
So then you admit it is unfair to accuse democrats of hypocrisy.
dimitri halikias
April 20, 2010 at 8:46 pm
and I’m still confused how you equate progressives with communists
Doron Tauber
April 20, 2010 at 10:32 pm
how is it unfair to accuse them of hypocrisy? they are hypocrites, as are most, if not all, politicians. that doesn’t excuse them.
Progressives believe in forced redistribution of wealth by the government to eliminate class gaps. under Wilson, taxes for the top bracket were raised to 75% to try and destroy the rich and bring them down to the level of the poor. the communists and progressives know that to even the playing field, you cannot bring the poor up to the level of the rich, so they resolve to drag the rich down to the level of the poor, and hope they end up somewhere in the middle.
dimitri halikias
April 20, 2010 at 10:45 pm
Name one democratic leader who supported Code Pink. Name one republican leader who has not endorsed the Tea Party.
And also congratulations, you are very good at making up statistics. In the 1913 Revenue Act, Woodrow Wilson put in place the first ever income tax, an astounding SEVEN PERCENT for the top income bracket. That 75% number was one of the biggest, most blatant lies I have ever seen. Truly worthy of Rush Limbaugh. The same law, by the way, also almost completely eliminated import tariffs. It would be really nice if you knew what you were saying before you posted something.
Doron Tauber
April 21, 2010 at 5:42 pm
“A bit of history is in order. Following WWI, the Harding-Coolidge-Mellon Republicans returned the country to tax normalcy by reducing Woodrow Wilson’s 75 percent wartime tax to 25 percent — thus triggering the roaring growth of the 1920s. Then came the Depression, spawned in large part by Herbert Hoover and FDR, who raised the top tax rate to 63 percent, 70 percent, and finally 94 percent.”
http://article.nationalreview.com/389149/a-hidden-agenda-behind-the-90-percent-tax/larry-kudlow
fifth paragraph
Aaron W.
April 21, 2010 at 4:39 pm
A couple of comments:
1. Some of the tea partiers may be ignorant, but that doesn’t mean that they’re stupid or evil. Not all of them are racist or evil.
2. Don’t equate them with Republicans. They’re libertarians.
3. Progressivism and unions were good, but they had their time and place. They were necessary in the early 1900s. Now, people are trying to take progressivism too far.
4. Most Democrats didn’t endorse left-wing radicals, but most didn’t condemn them either. And some did endorse them. After all, Obama did give Van Jones a high-up government job (and only fired him because of a public uproar.)
5. McCain was compared to Hitler and Mugabe during the election, and nobody cared.
6. Income taxes were 70% at one point under Carter.
7. The bill didn’t work in too many of the Republican demands.
Doron Tauber
April 21, 2010 at 5:40 pm
they most certainly are NOT Libertarians. they are a new movement that is a blend of Whigs, Libertarians, Republicans, and Independents. They don’t believe in abortion rights, and are very religious, which rules them out of Libertarianism. They are only Libertarian in their belief that government is evil by nature, which is not true. That’s what separates Libertarians from Objectivists. We believe that government at its root is good, so long as it sticks to protecting the people, and nothing else. Libertarians are closer to anarchists.
Aaron W.
April 21, 2010 at 10:12 pm
What I should have said was that they’re closer to libertarians than to Republicans. All they care about is low taxes. Everything else is secondary. Republicans only endorse them because they want to get Obama out of office. Not all of them are religious.
Doron Tauber
April 22, 2010 at 6:10 am
most of them are religious. and “low taxes” aren’t the only thing on the Libertarian agenda. it’s as conservative as you guys, they’re just more passionate about it.
dimitri halikias
April 21, 2010 at 6:17 pm
Income tax was never set at 70%. That would imply we had a flat income tax rate which we obviously dont. You are right however that the top rate income tax for the top .02% of the population did reach 70%, and I agree that that was way too high.
I also never said the tea partiers were racist or evil, it is a strong conservative movement with radicalized elements, just like Code Pink. The only difference is that republican leaders have been quick to endorse their actions 100% without a word of condemnation for the dangerous rhetoric. Van Jones was not a democratic leader, so although he is a socialist he is not a good counter-example.
I also never equated tea partiers with republicans, they are clearly an entirely different movement. I only said that republicans are trying to liken themselves with the tea party movement. I think we can all agree on that. But Doron is (surprisingly) right, they are definitely not libertarians. I’ve never heard of libertarians supporting enhanced interrogation, increased American intervention abroad, and the belief that Christianity is the root of american democracy and freedom. Those are hardcore, conservative principles.
dimitri halikias
April 18, 2010 at 11:45 pm
To be fair, most of the Hitler mustache posters come from LaRouche supporters, who are critical of obama from the left, not the right.
proudamerican
April 18, 2010 at 10:33 pm
These represent the thoughts of the common man in America. You should try and help us repair our Communist country rather than criticize those trying to fix it for you.
G-d bless America