Last night in clicking through the channels I paused long enough to hear a female black (probably Democrat) commentator refer to the “rabid Tea Party.” No bias there. The audience had probably cheered a candidate as they are inclined to do at political events. Were Democrats "rabid" when they cheered Obama for singing 7 words of an Al Green song the other day? It's gone viral.
Tea Party members assemble peacefully, maybe they sing a hymn or patriotic song, listen to an Old Testament scripture or say the Pledge of Allegiance. They pay rent for the space they use (they don't just occupy it illegally) and clean it up. They invite candidates to speak on local and national issues--library, schools, water rights, zoning--they sponsor workshops, book clubs, and discussion groups. They are, in my opinion, the grass roots, town hall example of how to be an informed voter and good citizen. On the other hand, both political parties have arcane, obscure rules for even getting on a committee—no newcomer can hope to break through or have an influence.
So who is being rabid—that woman or the Tea Party?
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
hymn singing does not make anyone or thing harmless.
Nor does it make them rabid. They are all 100% smarter and harder working than the occupiers whom Democrats and reporters fawn over.
What should strike fear in the hearts of Democrats and Republicans who beef and whine about Tea Party, is the number of Libertarians in the movement--and those folks are bright, well educated, and wealthy. They know tax law, economics, the Constitution, and where the bodies are buried for both parties.
Post a Comment