Who Hates the Tea Party and Why

For more than a year media pundits and celebrities and an army of lesser-known left-leaning editorialists and bloggers have ridiculed and dehumanized Tea Party protesters as “teabaggers” and “racists”. With the recent surge in anti-White sentiment openly expressed in the “liberal” media it must be dawning on more and more Tea Partiers that the problems with their country go beyond taxes, healthcare, or socialism.

In Teabaggers Vs. Immigration Rally: A Tale of Two Americas – huffingtonpost.com, Miguel Guadalupe writes:

At the immigration rally, you saw a wide spectrum of races and ethnicities. Those attending were mostly Latino, but the rally also welcomed the participation of Whites, Asians, and Blacks who support a path to citizenship, reuniting families, and providing opportunities to students and veterans.

At the Teabagger rally, the monochromatic masses were spitting and yelling racial and homophobic slurs at Black, Latino, and openly gay congressional reps.

At the immigrations rally, the participants were expressing hope – hope that reform would reunite them with their families. Hope that they would be given the opportunity to fully contribute to society, and the hope that their sacrifices, including the sacrifices of those who have served in the military or have lost their lives defending this country, will not be in vain.

At the Teabagger rally, the participants were expressing fear – fear of a socialist nation, fear of some type of take over of individual rights, fear of some conspiracy involving the democratically elected President and a democratically elected representative majority. They punctuated their expression of fear with threats of violence.

I highlight these opposing images because soon enough, these two groups will collide. The national debate on immigration reform will come soon, and if the Teabaggers act as they have against health care reform, we can expect more vitriol, fear mongering, harassment and acts of violence. These so-called “Americans” will feel even less restrained against people they consider to be “foreign” or “illegal,” deserving even less respect than they gave to our elected officials.

In Whose Country Is It? – NYTimes.com, Charles Blow writes:

The far-right extremists have gone into conniptions.

The bullying, threats, and acts of violence following the passage of health care reform have been shocking, but they’re only the most recent manifestations of an increasing sense of desperation.

It’s an extension of a now-familiar theme: some version of “take our country back.” The problem is that the country romanticized by the far right hasn’t existed for some time, and its ability to deny that fact grows more dim every day. President Obama and what he represents has jolted extremists into the present and forced them to confront the future. And it scares them.

Even the optics must be irritating. A woman (Nancy Pelosi) pushed the health care bill through the House. The bill’s most visible and vocal proponents included a gay man (Barney Frank) and a Jew (Anthony Weiner). And the black man in the White House signed the bill into law. It’s enough to make a good old boy go crazy.

Hence their anger and frustration, which is playing out in ways large and small. There is the current spattering of threats and violence, but there also is the run on guns and the explosive growth of nefarious antigovernment and anti-immigrant groups. In fact, according to a report entitled “Rage on the Right: The Year in Hate and Extremism” recently released by the Southern Poverty Law Center, “nativist extremist” groups that confront and harass suspected immigrants have increased nearly 80 percent since President Obama took office, and antigovernment “patriot” groups more than tripled over that period.

Politically, this frustration is epitomized by the Tea Party movement. It may have some legitimate concerns (taxation, the role of government, etc.), but its message is lost in the madness. And now the anemic Republican establishment, covetous of the Tea Party’s passion, is moving to absorb it, not admonish it. Instead of jettisoning the radical language, rabid bigotry and rising violence, the Republicans justify it. (They don’t want to refute it as much as funnel it.)

There may be a short-term benefit in this strategy, but it’s a long-term loser.

A Quinnipiac University poll released on Wednesday took a look at the Tea Party members and found them to be just as anachronistic to the direction of the country’s demographics as the Republican Party. For instance, they were disproportionately white, evangelical Christian and “less educated … than the average Joe and Jane Six-Pack.” This at a time when the country is becoming more diverse (some demographers believe that 2010 could be the first year that most children born in the country will be nonwhite, less doctrinally dogmatic, and college enrollment is through the roof. The Tea Party, my friends, is not the future.

You may want “your country back,” but you can’t have it. That sound you hear is the relentless, irrepressible march of change. Welcome to America: The Remix.

In The Rage Is Not About Health Care – NYTimes.com, Frank Rich writes:

That a tsunami of anger is gathering today is illogical, given that what the right calls “Obamacare” is less provocative than either the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or Medicare, an epic entitlement that actually did precipitate a government takeover of a sizable chunk of American health care. But the explanation is plain: the health care bill is not the main source of this anger and never has been. It’s merely a handy excuse. The real source of the over-the-top rage of 2010 is the same kind of national existential reordering that roiled America in 1964.

If Obama’s first legislative priority had been immigration or financial reform or climate change, we would have seen the same trajectory. The conjunction of a black president and a female speaker of the House — topped off by a wise Latina on the Supreme Court and a powerful gay Congressional committee chairman — would sow fears of disenfranchisement among a dwindling and threatened minority in the country no matter what policies were in play. It’s not happenstance that Frank, Lewis and Cleaver — none of them major Democratic players in the health care push — received a major share of last weekend’s abuse. When you hear demonstrators chant the slogan “Take our country back!,” these are the people they want to take the country back from.

They can’t. Demographics are avatars of a change bigger than any bill contemplated by Obama or Congress. The week before the health care vote, The Times reported that births to Asian, black and Hispanic women accounted for 48 percent of all births in America in the 12 months ending in July 2008. By 2012, the next presidential election year, non-Hispanic white births will be in the minority. The Tea Party movement is virtually all white. The Republicans haven’t had a single African-American in the Senate or the House since 2003 and have had only three in total since 1935. Their anxieties about a rapidly changing America are well-grounded.

In Too much tea party racism – Salon.com, Joan Walsh writes:

The tea party movement is disturbingly racist and reactionary, from its roots to its highest branches.

These views well reflect the increasingly obvious race-based double standard propounded in the media for more than a decade now: non-White aliens good, White natives evil.

The psychological device they’re using in the battle over healthcare is the same one that’s been used against anyone opposed to immigration. They call Whites “racist” for objecting to anything we don’t believe is in our best interests, trying to guilt-trip us and implying that we’re somehow morally or mentally defective. As we can see from the full-throated anti-White reaction to even the largely deracinated Tea Partiers, whether we think or speak in explicitly racial terms is irrelevant. Our “anti-racist” antagonists are hyper-sensitive to race and any conflict with their own racial interests, or as in the case of Joan Walsh, act as a self-righteous proxy for such interests. White leaders perversely reject and profess distaste for our group interests even as we see an increasing number of non-White leaders who openly and unabashedly advocate in favor of theirs.

White fears are justified. We had a country of our own and still want one, organized to our tastes and run for our benefit. What sane group of people does not? In 1965 we were told that the changes to the immigration laws would not alter the ethnic makeup of our country. Anyone who foresaw that it would was smeared as an insane “racist”. Today it’s clear that immigration has in fact radically changed the ethnic makeup of the country. Now we’re told it’s irrepressible, irrevocable, and the country is no longer ours. Anyone angered by this situation or the duplicity used to produce it is smeared as an insane “racist”.

We are being displaced and dispossessed by genocidal levels of immigration and concomitant inter-racial transfers of wealth and power. This is foisted on us by liars and hypocrites whose deceptions, self-interests, and disdain for us becomes more transparent every day. They control all the major channels of education and discourse, and thus shape the terms of debate, defining and denigrating practically anything we have to say about any of this as “hate”. Their moralizing invokes injustices decades or centuries past, while they disregard and even celebrate the injustices being done to Whites right here, right now. They project onto us and decry their own malign motives and guilty deeds, shamelessly broadcasting a never-ending stream of race-based vitriol and fear mongering from myriad well-funded, high-profile sources, attacking us for peaceably expressing legitimate political interests. We have accommodated and appeased them for too long. For decades we have demonstrated our good faith, which they have taken advantage of and not reciprocated. The harder they try now to scapegoat us and the louder they insinuate that our calls for self-determination portend violence, the more they reveal their malevolent intent.

(Snide image discourtesy of the New York Times.)

32 thoughts on “Who Hates the Tea Party and Why”

  1. The irony seems to be the tea party types earnestly deny there is a racial element while the left/liberals insist there is.

    In which case, embrace it!

  2. Anonymous 7:49, Isn’t it time that the Tea Partiers learned? The information is widely available as to whom hi-jacked and controls the movement and the search is not difficult. It just goes deeper than most of them can imagine with their self-imposed ignorance. Funny, isn’t it? They have the guts to attend meetings and to organize, but don’t have the guts to recognize and publically identify who is responsible for the problems (and it isn’t just immigration). Until they can do that they are only Tea-bags constrained by their holders.

    “The “We Were Strangers Too” campaign is organized by the HIAS (Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society) and endorsed by many of the largest Jewish organizations in America. Check out the HIAS homepage here. A hysterically cheesy promotional video of the campaign was released by the Jewish Council on Urban Affairs. Check out their website here, and notice their propaganda about “social justice” (i.e. social communism). Be sure to read about their history and mission. What is even more startling is their “Achievements” Page. The typical Jewish communist involvement in racial agitation is extremely prevalent throughout their activities.”


  3. Another quote from the link above addresses the left/right division.

    “Apparently if you care about America’s economic future you must be a bigot.

    This type of behavior has always been characteristic of the Left. Their arguments are never based in rationality, so intimidation and propaganda become the norm. The biggest problem is that modern conservatives are still concerned with “playing by the rules.” They actually think that if you just give people the facts then the “truth will win.” Unfortunately the Left has never cared about the truth, nor are they intent on playing by the rules;”


  4. I once saw a series of photos taken in South Africa of 3 Afrikaners shot to death at close range, already wounded by blacks and down on the ground. They were fighting in the waning days of apartheid.

    It was in Time or Newsweek, and I distinctly remember the gleeful air in the words of the caption at the sight of Whites dying, as they tried to fight back.

    The same feelings came back to me reading those NY Times articles above.

    These people truly want to see the White race on it’s knees and a spat-upon minority.

    We had better do something about it, or we’ll end up just like the Afrikaners today — tortured and murdered in our own homes by races that will laugh in our faces while killing us.

  5. I haven’t seen any evidence the TP people are coming around to our point of view — just the opposite in fact. They are arguing even more strenuously that their grievances have NOTHING AT ALL to do with race. Maybe if the administration pushes for amnesty we might get some more explicitly racial rhetoric from some people, but those people will be condemned by the leadership and the overall movement will remain kosher.

    The TP people remind me of my older relatives who are/were extremely bitter about blacks destroying their city, but who could never bring themselves to actually accept white racial consciousness as a solution. WN pay to much attention to liberals. We need to engage the people who know the truth about race but want to ignore it.

  6. ATBOTL- the Saxon has just not ‘awoken’ yet.

    GIve them another four or five months of the ‘Obamanation.’ And send Blow[hard’]s NYT editorial, to EVERYONE you know.

    This is a declaration of WAR. BRING IT ON.

    – Fr. John

  7. Auster is so happy to criticise black killers I wonder if he has written anything about the JEWISH serial killer Rodney Alcala or will he defend him like he did Polanski.

  8. Here in flyover land, there’s cause yet for cautious optimism.

    Bill Ayers was scheduled to speak at University of Wyoming. Some social-justice something-or-other org invited him (headed by a Black woman, shockingly). The plan was that after indoctrinating the college students, Ayers was to teleconference-indoctrinate the high school principals.

    A tsunami of complaints erupted. The “conference” was cancelled.

    Of course, the Black head lady claimed (falsely) it was due to threats. And she, of course, accused us of “racism”.

    I’m hearing grumblings that if we’re going to be given the name, may as well play the game.

    Thanks, Anonymous: “In which case, embrace it!”

  9. Curvaceous, There is a comment at the Incog Man post which applies to all Americans, but it will have special significance for those who are in the “Big Sky” rural areas like Montana, Wyoming and Texas. The comment is at April 1, 2010 at 5:20 am, by foley

    “The article “Arizona Rancher Killed by Illegal” (linked at the bottom of Incog’s post above) is comparable to the article posted here a couple of weeks ago “I killed them cause they were white.” The dangerous situations for white farmers in S. Africa and the white ranchers near the US/Mexico border are similar in many ways. Both the white S. African farmers and white American ranchers are easy targets because farms and ranches are remote and isolated. The communist jew controlled governments of both S. Africa and the US do nothing to protect white farmers and ranchers but actively thwart their efforts to protect themselves, their families, property and livestock. The white ranchers are being driven out through fear.

    I’ve seen a S. African video of one white man standing with Nelson Mandela in front of a large crowd of African blacks. They are singing a “traditional” song in an African tribal language about beating and killing Boers– meaning white S. African farmers. The “white” man standing with Nelson Mandela is communist Jew union leader Joe Slovo.

    Instead of Joe Slovo we have leftist jew Andy Stern leader of the SEIU labor union and “most frequent visitor to the White House.” Andy Stern’s SEIU is the large and powerful restaurant and hotel workers union. It’s members are largely hispanics and other minorities many of whom are not US citizens but illegal aliens. The SEIU is one of the powerful financial factions supporting amnesty for illegal invaders.

    The same tactics used to destroy white farmers in S. Africa are being used against white ranchers in the American SW.

    Zimbabwe was a “bread basket” and agricultural food exporter before white farmers were driven out. Now Zimbabwe is a “basket case” and is experiencing a severe food shortage. It now depends on donations of billions of dollars to import food. The same will happen in S. Africa when the “Boers” are driven out. By inciting murderous black gangs to genocide the white S. African farmers, the jews are setting the stage for the eventual genocide of blacks by famine and starvation.

    [The video linked in the comment should be viewed for the comparisons drawn between Mandella and his jewish handler, Joe Slovo and Obama and his handler, the jewish Rahm Emmanuel].



    As stated by another commenter in the same thread: “In the secular jew world we are all equal But once you understand that the secular jew world is all about jews, than you start to get jew-wise.”


  10. Tan, I found this series of exchanges at the following thread about Gates of Vienna and Baron Bodissey and I thought you would find it to be of interest. I did.:


    April 1 – 9:30pm comment
    “Re the link you provided: [Referring to another commenter’s link]


    Did you see how quickly they deleted my comments about Hutarre being Zionists, and blocked me.

    I used to go there regularly years ago, because I was (and am) concerned about all this “Islam is a Religion of Peace” garbage, but they banned me as soon as I commented on Jewish involvement in promoting indiscriminate immigration, and Jewish subversion of the US and Europe.

    Just commented under this new IP address, and my comments deleted within minutes.

    “Gates of Vienna”: Hasbarat Jews pretending to be “Crusaders”.”

    The thread continues with considerable amount of details.

  11. At the immigration rally, you could hear the crowd chanting, “Obama, escucha, estamos en la lucha!” and “Si, se puede” (“Hear us Obama, we are in the struggle!” and “Yes, we can!”).

    Uh, that’s “escuche”. He can’t even speak his own language!

  12. @ Uh, that’s “escuche”. He can’t even speak his own language! –BT

    Actually it’s “escucha“. Spanish conjugation is as comples as French (with “a” it means you are addressing a common guy, not your boss).

    Back up everything. -TP

    I always do. I don’t trust Blogger.

  13. Tea bag flea bag.
    Until these idiots stop pussy footing with the jews and their shabos goys like palin, maccain, hannity, beck and every white gentile in the government they are just blowing air out of their anuses.

  14. Tan, You may already have seen this, but…

    “We are deeply concerned about the seeming pattern of overzealous prosecution in this case,” said Rabbi Pesach Lerner, executive vice president of the National Council of Young Israel.

    Similarly, Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zwiebel, executive vice president of Agudath Israel of America, reported that “the volume of e-mails and phone calls we have received about the Rubashkin case has reach a loud crescendo in recent weeks, as the full horror of how he is being singled out for harsh treatment has become strikingly clear.”

    Those who believe Rubashkin has been treated unjustly have launched a new Web site to present their case, Justice for Sholom Mordechai Rubashkin. The former plant supervisor faces several decades in prison at his upcoming sentencing.”



  15. What’s appalling is the righteous indignation of this black columnist, Joe Blow, conveniently forgetting of course that blacks, who make up less than 15 % of the American population, commit some 80% of the violent crime, and sexually assault Whites fantastically out of proportion to White on black assaults. According to DOJ numbers in 2005, blacks sexually assaulted Whites 37,000 times, while the White on black figure stands at “0”. Plainly, it’s blacks who refuse to assimilate and presumably the reason is that diversity really doesn’t work, with blacks, to be sure. To hear this pawn of the jew york times tell it, it’s Whites who are the problem. See the animals in action …



  16. Tan,
    This article by Gottfried at Alternative Right is powerful:


    For oh-so-long the non-Gentiles have insisted they are victims, and the pogroms are just a manifestation of a remitting-relapsing form of insanity afflicting Whites.

    *I* on the other hand, being a parent, have always wondered, Who started it?

    Well, it turns out, the Jews did:
    Says Gottfried, Jewish himself:

    “The Rabbinic attacks against Christian beliefs [in the Talmud] were not a response to Christian persecution since they were produced in Babylonia, in what was then a predominantly Zoroastrian society. The only Christians whom the authors of the Talmud were likely to have encountered were Monophysites, who rejected the Trinitarian statement formulated at Chalcedon and who were living in Babylonia as a powerless minority.”


  17. This is one of the findings reported by Media Research Center on how the JMSM has treated the Tea Party:

    How ABC, CBS and NBC Have Dismissed and Disparaged the Tea Party Movement

    “Overall, 44 percent of network stories on the Tea Party (27 out of 61) suggested the movement reflected a fringe or dangerous quality. ABC’s John Berman was distressed by “a tone of anger and confrontation” he claimed to find at the Tea Party convention in early February. In September, NBC’s Brian Williams trumpeted Jimmy Carter’s charge that the Tea Party was motivated by race: “Signs and images at last weekend’s big Tea Party march in Washington and at other recent events have featured racial and other violent themes, and President Carter today said he is extremely worried by it.”



  18. At the immigration rally, you saw a wide spectrum of races and ethnicities. Those attending were mostly Latino, but the rally also welcomed the participation of Whites, Asians, and Blacks who support a path to citizenship, reuniting families, and providing opportunities to students and veterans.

    At the Teabagger rally, the monochromatic masses were spitting and yelling racial and homophobic slurs at Black, Latino, and openly gay congressional reps.

    Notice the anti-white logic at work here:

    When whites join immivasionist causes, the immivationists get the credit as “inclusive.”

    When non-whites avoid joining the Tea Parties, whites get the blame as “racists.”

    That leftism is the only game in town as far as non-whites are concerned is somehow the fault of whites; that whites are split more or less evenly between right and left is somehow proof of white racism. Insane, simply insane.

    Same thing with voting patterns. Whites voting 45-55 (or whatever it was) for a “black” candidate means whites are racist. But blacks voting 95-5 for the same “black” candidate means, well, I don’t know because this is ignored in this context.

  19. And note the anti-American attitude in pretending the term “Tea Party” is properly referred with a term faggots use amongst themselves for their deviance.

  20. “In which case, embrace it!”

    Yeah, I keep wondering why they’re playing with fire like this. If you keep calling a man a racist when you mean “person I don’t like,” eventually he’s going to catch on and there goes the Pavlovian reaction so carefully cultivated over the decades, at the cost of billions of dollars.

    Call a man an “anti-Semite” when he refuses to be swindled, and eventually he’ll catch on to that, too.

  21. That link ending doesn’t show. After 4120, it continues:


    A Blogspot quirk, but double-clicking the text before copying works for me.

  22. University Lumps Tea Parties in With Nazis

    “From Brandeis University’s website (for April 28):

    Interdisciplinary Conference

    New Right-Wing Radicalism.
    A Transatlantic Perspective

    The U.S. Perspective
    Moderator: David Cunningham, Associate Professor of Sociology, Brandeis University
    4:15 Kathleen Blee, Distinguished Professor and Chair of Sociology, University of Pittsburgh: “Which Comes First: Thinking Like a Racist or Acting Like a Racist?”
    4:25 Pete Simi, Associate Professor, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Nebraska, Omaha: “Cycles of Right-Wing Terror”
    4:35 Chip Berlet, Senior Analyst, Political Research Associates, Boston: “From Tea Parties to Armed Militias”



    Wikipedia on Brandeis:


    Names associated with the conception of Brandeis include Israel Goldstein, George Alpert, C. Ruggles Smith, Albert Einstein, and Abram L. Sachar.
    Ruggles Smith was the son of Dr. John Hall Smith, founder of Middlesex University, who had died in 1944. In 1946, the university was on the brink of financial collapse. At the time, it was one of the few medical schools in the U. S. that did not impose a Jewish quota; but it had never been able to secure AMA accreditation—in part, its founder believed, due to institutional antisemitism in the AMA[9]—and, as a result, Massachusetts had all but shut it down.

    Israel Goldstein was a prominent rabbi in New York from 1918 until 1960 (when he immigrated to Israel), and an influential Zionist. Before 1946, he had headed the New York Board of Rabbis, the Jewish National Fund, and the Zionist Organization of America, and helped found the National Conference of Christians and Jews. On his eightieth birthday, in Israel, Yitzhak Rabin and other leaders of the government, the parliament, and the Zionist movement assembled at his house to pay him tribute.[10] But among all his accomplishments, the one chosen by the New York Times to headline his obituary was: “Rabbi Israel Goldstein, A Founder of Brandeis.”


  23. Svi – I’ve long sinced stopped bleating that I’m not a racist. It never does any good, once the accusation is made thats that. Also once you’ve bought into the concept of racism you’re being led by the nose into anti-white positions.

    I always respond now by stating that I reject the concept of racism itself. I instead point out that what is called racism is a merely a manifestation of inter-group conflict and usually its only deployed to delegitimise white interests.

    Something like that anyway.

  24. Hey Anonymous: you have absolutely hit the nail!

    The word “racist” is not a descriptive word, but a dispositive one. It roughly equals “heretic” in Christendom: language used as a semantic cudgel or baton.

    Do you know? I am extremely aggressive when someone calls me racist. I reply:

    “Are you plugged in the Matrix? Don’t you know that only doubleplusgood duckpeakers babble that word? Don’t you know that the real America was built without the introduction of that anti-white word in the 1920s?”

    Those who use that word are unaware of what Orwell called a black-white use of language. As Tom Szasz put it, “The ritual murder of people has always been preceded by the ritual murder of truth—and, indeed, by the ritual murder of language itself.” Some linguists have argued that language is rhetorical, and that we commit a great mistake in believing that, if a group of individuals use a word in all seriousness, it means that something real exists behind it. According to Orwell, the rhetorical objective of Newspeak is social control. Neologism, and the abuse of language characterize it. For that very reason all discourse must start with a cleansing in our vocabulary. Only the semantic hygiene can prevent us from ideological and political contamination.

    In other words, the stupid Tea Party people (“No: I’m no racist, I’m no racist!”) are placing themselves on the defensive. Every time I’m confronted by a liberal I immediately put him/her on the defensive with my italicized words above. Since I accompany my words with great emotions, they shut up.

  25. The “Tea Party” should be tried for treason and criminal negligence. The damage they have done to this country is horrendous and unacceptable. What goes around comes around. They got voted in, they can be voted out. Especially after what they’ve done. Traitors!

  26. Who’s being betrayed? Bankers? Self-obsessed “people of color” who hate the Tea Partiers and everything they stand for? It is to laugh.

Comments are closed.