H4 People Who
Live In Glass
Houses…The New
York Times & The
Tea Partiers tag
Brian Birdnow
Monday, April 05,
2010 The Democratic
victory in the protracted
health care debate
has brought the
expected rejoicing
from the liberals
in government, the
universities, and
in the prestige
media. The current
slant on the story
follows the idea
that America has
now climbed aboard
the progressive
express, joining
enlightened lands
such as Britain,
Cuba and North Korea
in guaranteeing
health care for
all. The triumphalism
extends now to the
next few tiles in
the liberal mosaic,
namely amnesty for
illegal aliens,
a comprehensive
energy bill, and
a staggering tax
increase to start
paying for these
goodies. At
the nation’s newspaper
of record, the venerable
New York Times,
the columnists are
not content to merely
celebrate their
victory and bask
in the afterglow.
Frank Rich, Bob
Herbert, Paul Krugman
and Maureen Dowd
have worked themselves
into a fine lather
about the throngs
of Americans who
protested this monstrosity,
known collectively
as the “Tea Partiers”.
The Times folks
show the full diversity
of liberal opinion
when they condemn
the Tea Partiers.
Bob Herbert sees
them as bigots,
racists and haters.
Paul Krugman denounces
the Tea Partiers
as economic illiterates,
racists and haters.
Maureen Dowd charges
that the Tea Partiers
were scaremongers,
racists and haters.
Finally, the estimable
Frank Rich claimed
that Tea Partiers
resembled Nazis,
and threw in “racists”
and “haters” as
general afterthoughts.
When one reads the
New York Times one
finds that those
who protested the
health care takeover
were hateful, racist,
rabble-rousers,
who were intent
on violence and
mayhem. How do we
know this? If the
New York Times columnists
say it, then it
must be true!
In order to buttress
their arguments
the Times fabulous
four cited the examples
of Tea Partiers
allegedly peppering
black Congressman
John Lewis with
racial epithets,
and supposedly expectorating
on Congressman Emmanuel
Cleaver of Missouri.
In addition, protesters
allegedly taunted
openly gay Congressman
Barney Frank with
anti-gay slurs.
What is the reality
of this regrettable
situation? The Tea
Partiers strenuously
deny all of the
charges. No one
has produced any
footage of these
supposed incidents
even though official
media coverage and
citizens with cameras
and picture phones
saturated Capitol
Hill on March 21st.
The police records
for the day show
no arrests during
the demonstrations.
So, in contrast
to the riotous mob
described by the
Times, the Tea Partiers
seem to have been
a generally decorous
and well-behaved
crowd. We may
never find out the
entire truth. But
let us return to
the theme of this
column. A quick
perusal of the Times
columnists on this
subject reveals
a level of hate
and antipathy seldom
seen since the media
savaged Barry Goldwater
in 1964. To wit:
Maureen Dowd argued,
“Some base members
of the Republican
base showed themselves
as the racist Neanderthals
that they are.”
Racist Neanderthals?
That is pretty incendiary
language and not
the type of prose
a reader would expect
from a Pulitzer
Prize winning columnist.
Paul Krugman chimed
in, “It was racial
hate-mongering…a
vicious unprincipled
fear offensive failed
to block reform.”
This is hardly the
type of detached
and restrained analysis
one would expect
from a Nobel Laureate
in economics. Frank
Rich compared the
Tea Partiers to
the Nazi brownshirts
who attacked Jews
on the infamous
Kristallnacht of
November 10, 1938.
Bob Herbert outdid
all of his office
mates when he referred
to Tea Partiers
as, “A group of
lowlifes” and “foaming-at-the-mouth
protesters…” He
charged the Republican
Party with “encouraging
foul, mean-spirited
and bigoted behavior
in its ranks and
among its strongest
reporters.” He further
stated “For decades
the GOP has been
the Party of fear,
ignorance, and divisiveness”
and that “This is
the Party that genuflects
at the altar of
right-wing talk
radio with its insane,
nauseating, nonstop
commitment to hatred
and bigotry.” Someone
had better try to
calm Mr. Herbert
down before he hurts
himself. What
should readers make
of this sampling
of New York Times
opinions? First
of all, the newspaper
and its columnists
are completely contemptuous
of Middle America,
as their commentary
clearly shows. Secondly,
the newspaper will
not endorse a Republican
candidate in 2012,
although that comes
as no surprise.
Finally, a sampling
of NYT columnists
reveals a bottomless
reservoir of bitterness
and vitriol, churlishness
and spite. Comparing
ones opponents to
Hitler’s thugs,
charging everyone
on the other side
with racism and
bigotry, and questioning
the mental acuity
and even the sanity
of those who disagree
with your position
are the hallmarks
of the demagogue
at work. Who are
the real haters
here? The Tea Partiers
or Frank Rich, Paul
Krugman, Bob Herbert
and Maureen Dowd?
As my dear departed
grandmother used
to say, “People
who live in glass
houses shouldn’t
throw stones”.
