Larisa Alexandrovna: If The Teabaggers Knew Their History & Were A REAL Tea Party

[Hissyspit]

Mods, Reproduced In Entirety w/ Permission of Author:

http://www.atlargely.com/atlargely/2010/02/corporate-funded-conspiracy-sniffing-revolutionaries.html

Corporate funded, conspiracy sniffing, revolutionaries...

Yes, we really do need a third party in this country (and then some). But a party of Birthers who don't know the basics of American history?

But this past weekend in Nashville, at the first National Tea Party Convention, the Beltway press did just the opposite with regard to Sarah Palin's keynote address, which did follow a prime-time speech by "birther" nut Joseph Farah, who over the years has carved out a uniquely hateful and demented corner of the right-wing blogosphere. Because, yes, at the Tea Party convention, Farah, a proud Muslim-hater and gay-hater, did receive a standing ovation from the conservative crowd after he unfurled his thoroughly debunked birther garbage. (i.e. Obama "doesn't have a birth certificate.") And Farah did brag in the weeks leading up to the event about his chance to share the stage with Palin, to associate with Palin. ("Sold out! Palin-Farah ticket rocks tea-party convention," read the headline at Farah's discredited right-wing site, WorldNetDaily.com.)

Worst of all, though, the press played dumb about the whole thing.
Fact: Virtually nobody in the corporate media said boo about Palin helping to legitimize Farah by sharing the same stage with him. She was given a total free ride."

And they are educated on American history too:

"The tea-party movement has no leader. But it does have a face: William Temple of Brunswick, Ga. For months, the amiable middle-aged activist has been criss-crossing America, appearing at tea-party events dressed in his trademark three-cornered hat and Revolutionary garb. When journalists interview him (which is often—his outfit draws them in like a magnet), he presents himself as a human bridge between the founders' era and our own. "We fought the British over a 3 percent tea tax. We might as well bring the British back," he told NPR during a recent protest outside the Capitol."

Morons, Your Bus is Leaving

Okay class, one more time - what was the Boston Tea Party about? While it is true that the Boston Tea Party was part of a larger effort aimed at the British monarchy, the colonists knew that the real power was held in the hands of companies:

The Boston Tea Party arose from two issues confronting the British Empire in 1773: the financial problems of the British East India Company, and an ongoing dispute about the extent of Parliament's authority, if any, over the British American colonies without seating any elected representation. The North ministry's attempt to resolve these issues produced a showdown that would eventually result in revolution.

Consider the actions the colonists took against the British East India Company, which - like our corporations - had a very special status:

The East India Company (also the East India Trading Company, English East India Company, and then the British East India Company)was an early English joint-stock company that was formed initially for pursuing trade with the East Indies, but that ended up trading mainly with the Indian subcontinent and China.

- snip -

The Company long held a privileged position in relation to the English, and later the British, government. As a result, it was frequently granted special rights and privileges, including trade monopolies and exemptions. These caused resentment among its competitors, who saw unfair advantage in the Company's position. Despite this resentment, the Company remained a powerful force for over 200 years over India.

The final stand-off was the destruction of corporate property - tea - which in current times would be called terrorism. Now if this new Tea Party movement actually were like our founding fathers, they would be destroying the property of banks and so forth, and even dumping oil. I may not agree with them, but at least they would be true to the name of their movement.

Instead, the current Tea Party is a movement funded by corporations, which then use their members as protest weapons against their own interests. In other words, the current Tea Party movement is made up of the complete antithesis to the principles of our founding fathers and are stupid enough to be used as pawns by the very people they should be targeting.

If these people would protest on Wall Street instead of the idiocy we are now watching, I would easily join them. But if I showed up to protest Wall Street and demand that corporate control of our government be eliminated, I would be called a Commie, a terrorist, and all sorts of neat little non-applicable names.

[turnofffox]

1. Forgetful Tea Baggers

You might appreciate this take from Meg White at BuzzFlash

Of Course President Reagan Would Have Loved the Tea Parties. He Was a Bit Forgetful, After All

The debate over the legacy of former President Ronald Reagan has taken on a tea-colored hue over the past few weeks, but the Reagan family feud moved into top gear this morning.

It all started late last month when, in an appearance on The Joy Behar Show, Ron Reagan said that his father, the 40th president of the United States, wouldn't have supported the tea party movement if he were alive today.

"Oh, I think he would be unamused by the tea partiers, with their Hitler signs and all the rest of it. No, I don't think he'd cotton to that much at all," Reagan said...

(More at http://blog.buzzflash.com/analysis/984)

[Initech]

2. Corporate funded conspiracy theorists... sounds about right.