Liberal Groups seeks to defame Tea Party

[jryan]

We have all heard about Crashtheteaparty.org by now.

 

The most famous of these supposed racist outbursts happened at the steps of the Capitol where Tea Party activists supposedly shouted racial and sexual slurs at Congressman as they went to sign the health care bill. These accusations quickly vanished into the ether after CNN reviewed all the tape they had and found no such slurs hurled, and the spitting to be accidental.

 

Given that this group exists, and claims to have operatives at all events, and major accusations have been found to be baseless, how reliable do you consider the evidence to be out there of racist signs and shouts at the Tea Party rallies?

[Pangloss]

Some of the behavior is pretty outlandish. But in my opinion the main point here is not that there's ANOTHER group of crazies out there, but rather that the left is just as happy riling people up as the right is.

 

Take a look at this guy -- he's hardly the model of crazy wingnut conspiracy theorist. He's a TEACHER.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/16/teacher-sought-demolish-tea-party-placed-leave-school/

 

Levin has said he would seek to embarrass Tea Partiers by attending their rallies dressed as Adolf Hitler, carrying signs bearing racist, sexist and anti-gay epithets and acting as offensively as possible -- anything short of throwing punches.

 

Kudos to him for not throwing punches, but doesn't that support the notion that BOTH ideological camps are riling up the masses to do bad things? I think it does.

 

In a now deleted post on his "Crash the Tea Party" Web site, he called on his supporters to collect the Social Security numbers -- among other personal identifying information -- about as many Tea Party supporters as possible at the numerous rallies that took place on Thursday, Tax Day.

 

"Some other thoughts are to ask people at the rally to sign a petition renouncing socialism. See just how much info you can get from these folks (name address, DOB, Social Security

#). The more data we can mine from the Tea Partiers, the more mayhem we can cause with it!!!!" he wrote.

 

The state agency is investigating whether this is a hint at identity theft, and whether it is appropriate behavior for a public school teacher. It also will investigate charges that Levin used school computers during school hours to work on his Web site. Levin teaches 6th, 7th and 8th graders about computers and technology.

 

And that's just one guy -- there are tons of articles about the crashers at Google News.

 

Politico ran a piece today saying that it "fizzled out", but I think that ignores the point -- the fact that people were willing to do that indicates that BOTH sides are hard at work stirring people up to hate one another.

[bascule]

We have all heard about Crashtheteaparty.org by now.

 

Crashtheteaparty.org appears to be the web site of a single guy, Jason Levin, who has since removed the original site and is now hawking t-shirts in self-support after getting fired from his job for creating the site.

 

So... it's a guy?

 

The most famous of these supposed racist outbursts happened at the steps of the Capitol where Tea Party activists supposedly shouted racial and sexual slurs at Congressman as they went to sign the health care bill. These accusations quickly vanished into the ether after CNN reviewed all the tape they had and found no such slurs hurled, and the spitting to be accidental.

 

Am I supposed to interpret that any other way than "move on folks, nothing to see here"?

 

Given that this group exists, and claims to have operatives at all events, and major accusations have been found to be baseless, how reliable do you consider the evidence to be out there of racist signs and shouts at the Tea Party rallies?

 

As far as I can tell "this group" is Jason Levin. The entire web presence for this "group" vanished after the guy got fired.

 

The sheer amount of hyperbole in this post is ridiculous. One guy => a group => "Liberal Groups seeks to defame Tea Party"? What?

 

Although to be fair, given the grammar of the statement, perhaps it was supposed to be "Liberal Group seeks...". The site did claim they were a large group, but anyone can put up a site on the Internet claiming they're a large organization.

 

Granted there were tea party crashers but I'm not really seeing any evidence they're organized in any manner, or that they really accomplished anything at all.

 

And it's not like conservatives haven't crashed liberal protests...

Edited April 16, 2010 by bascule

[padren]

Politico ran a piece today saying that it "fizzled out", but I think that ignores the point -- the fact that people were willing to do that indicates that BOTH sides are hard at work stirring people up to hate one another.

 

I don't think it's being ignored, it just isn't relevant. It's pretty much always a given there will be people on both sides stirring things up - the times it doesn't happen it's remarkable.

 

The question really is whether this guy and those like him represent anything near qualifying as "their side" being "hard at work" stirring people up.

[Pangloss]

It's pretty much always a given there will be people on both sides stirring things up - the times it doesn't happen it's remarkable.

 

One would certainly think so. That would seem to be the most reasonable conclusion.

 

 

The question really is whether this guy and those like him represent anything near qualifying as "their side" being "hard at work" stirring people up.

 

It's not intended to indicate an entire side's activities.

[ParanoiA]

All it takes is one voice in the crowd, a couple nasty signs - out of thousands and you will successfully bait the media. It doesn't have to be huge or remotely organized to pull that off.

 

Good thread jryan.

[iNow]

In order to be DE-famed, one must first be famous.

However, I'd suggest based on available evidence that tea party-ers are more IN-famous than they are famous.

 

Given that, it would seem that the aforementioned liberal groups are seeking to make the tea party EVEN MORE infamous, not to DE-fame them.

 

 

Finally, and perhaps most important, one guy named Jason does not a liberal group make.

[Dudde]

But even the site itself plainly states that it's not affiliated with one party:

 

WHO WE ARE: A nationwide network of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents who are all sick and tired of that loose affiliation of racists, homophobes, and morons; who constitute the fake grass-roots movement which calls itself “The Tea Party.”

 

I highly doubt a majority of the tea party is made up of undercover operatives looking to defame the group - and a majority of them are the ones that are making the educated few look really bad =\

 

Those are actually the kind of antics I used to pull, and I'm definitely not affiliated with either side - I just like arguing against whoevers being the most ridiculous at any given time.

[bascule]

But even the site itself plainly states that it's not affiliated with one party

 

It also claims it's a large and diverse group of people when ostensibly it's a single person who was trying to rile people up

[Dudde]

It also claims it's a large and diverse group of people when ostensibly it's a single person who was trying to rile people up

 

Agreed - I was just having problems with the "liberals" part of it, seeing as this single guy (who realistically probably gets a few friends to join) plainly states it's not liberal or conservative, etc.

 

Although someone else brought this website to my attention today also, and I told them the same thing, and the only response I get is "that's just what they want you to think, so the lefties can run rampant on the right and look normal on the left"

 

I wish I had the luxury of debating from the standpoint where I could deny anything and not have to prove anything =c

[ParanoiA]

I highly doubt a majority of the tea party is made up of undercover operatives looking to defame the group - and a majority of them are the ones that are making the educated few look really bad =\

 

Educated few? I don't know about that...

 

They are better educated than most Americans: 37 percent are college graduates' date=' compared to 25 percent of Americans overall. They also have a higher-than-average household income, with 56 percent making more than $50,000 per year. [/quote']

 

 

 

I'd suggest based on available evidence that tea party-ers are more IN-famous than they are famous.

 

According to CBS's poll, only 18% of americans support the Tea Party, so infamous is probably right.

[Dudde]

Educated few? I don't know about that...

 

Originally Posted by cbsnews.com

They are better educated than most Americans: 37 percent are college graduates, compared to 25 percent of Americans overall. They also have a higher-than-average household income, with 56 percent making more than $50,000 per year.

 

I have no doubt there's a significant number of educated people in there - though to be fair, congress members all have college degrees and I'm sure Palin has something along those lines as well - it doesn't make what they say or do educated.

 

what I said was:

and a majority of them are the ones that are making the educated few look really bad =\

 

meaning that there are a greater number of people saying crazy stuff than the number of people actually listing facts and grievances. 63% is still a majority.

[iNow]

Educated few? I don't know about that...

Some much needed context is brought by these other stats:

 

 

Sixty-four percent believe that the president has increased taxes for most Americans, despite the fact that the vast majority of Americans got a tax cut under the Obama administration. Thirty-four percent of the general public says the president has raised taxes on most Americans.

Twenty-four percent of Tea Party supporters say it is sometimes justified to take violent action against the government. That compares to 16 percent of Americans overall who say violence against the government is sometimes justified.

Twenty-four percent of Tea Party supporters say it is sometimes justified to take violent action against the government. That compares to 16 percent of Americans overall who say violence against the government is sometimes justified.

An overwhelming majority of Tea Party supporters, 84 percent, say the views of the Tea Party movement reflect the views of most Americans. But Americans overall disagree: Just 25 percent say the Tea Party movement reflects their beliefs, while 36 percent say it does not.

Thirty percent of Tea Party supporters believe Mr. Obama was born in another country, despite ample evidence to the contrary. Another 29 percent say they don't know.

Fifty-three percent say the Roe v. Wade decision was a bad thing (compared to 34 percent of Americans overall), 40 percent oppose same-sex marriage and civil unions (compared to 30 percent overall) and 30 percent want gun control laws eased (compared to 16 percent overall).

Fifty-two percent believe too much has been made of the problems facing black people. Far fewer Americans overall -- 28 percent -- believe as much. Among non-Tea Party whites, the percentage who say too much attention has been paid to the problems of black people is 23 percent.

One in four believe the administration favors blacks over whites, an opinion shared by just 11 percent of Americans overall and seven percent of non-Tea Party whites.

 

 

You're right... This group just OOZES well educated.

[Mr Skeptic]

Well there's a simple solution for when people crash your party: kick them out, and disavow their actions.

[Pangloss]

It also claims it's a large and diverse group of people when ostensibly it's a single person who was trying to rile people up

 

Again, beside the point. Also false, according to Politico.

Edited April 17, 2010 by Pangloss

[iNow]

Again, beside the point. Also false, according to Politico.

 

Except, your link, Pangloss, primarily shows that people have gone to tea party rallies to show a voice of disagreement, not to pretend to be tea party-ers and smear their otherwise "good name."

 

 

To be sure, a handful of obvious crashers engaged in some mostly non-confrontational back-and-forth with tea party activists at a Thursday evening rally that drew thousands to Washington’s National Mall near the Washington Monument. And some less overt crashers subtly mocked activists from amidst their ranks at both the evening rally on the Mall and an earlier event at Freedom Plaza near the White House. And there could have been other infiltrators who evaded immediate detection.

 

But activists and organizers interviewed by POLITICO said the mischief was nowhere near as widespread or disruptive as they feared earlier in the week, when a wave of attention focused on a website called CrashtheTeaParty.org that encouraged liberals to pretend to be tea partiers, attend rallies and voice fringe sentiments to marginalize the movement (the website appears to have been stripped of most of its content Thursday).

 

The group that organized the Thursday evening rally, the small-government non-profit FreedomWorks had devised plans to deal with any infiltrators who mixed among the crowd and expressed racist, homophobic, threatening or otherwise offensive rhetoric through chants, signs or t-shirts. FreedomWorks distributed signs reading “Leftist Infiltrator” to be used to identify alleged impostors and FreedomWorks president Matt Kibbe urged the thousands who gathered for the evening event to take photos of offenders to be posted online to embarrass them.

 

“We had like tornado drills” to practice responding to suspected infiltrators, said FreedomWorks spokesman Adam Brandon. But as the last of the speakers took the stage Thursday night, Brandon said

“it turned out to be really much ado about nothing.”

He [Kurt Beyer, student in PA] attended with two of classmates and held aloft a sign reading “Palin 2010. One people. One Nation. One Leader.” Not only is Palin not running for anything in 2010 (she’s rumored to be considering a presidential bid in 2012), but the slogan is a translation of one used by Adolph Hitler in 1938.

 

“I’m just trying to mess with people,” he said, though few bothered him, perhaps because he was less confrontational than the Bollerman crew.

 

And a self-described infiltrator at the afternoon rally, who dressed as a monk and carried a sign reading “God Hates Taxes,” said many tea partiers lauded him for his sign.

 

“I thought I’d be getting drummed out of here by somebody who just thought I was here to agitate and start trouble,” he told a POLITICO videographer. “In fact, it turns out it’s very empowering. People really love this sign,” he said, adding “the whole idea that God hates taxes is an absolute absurdity, however it’s always good to know that God is on your side.”

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Your link also shows that these people largely acted on their own, and were not part of some group, as the conservative meme pushers continue to imply.

[bascule]

Again, beside the point.

 

I thought the point was that "Liberal Groups seeks to defame Tea Party". So far I've only seen evidence of one such "group", and not much evidence that this "group" was anything more than a single guy.

 

Also false, according to Politico.

 

False? According to what? This?

 

But activists and organizers interviewed by POLITICO said the mischief was nowhere near as widespread or disruptive as they feared earlier in the week, when a wave of attention focused on a website called CrashtheTeaParty.org that encouraged liberals to pretend to be tea partiers, attend rallies and voice fringe sentiments to marginalize the movement (the website appears to have been stripped of most of its content Thursday).

 

A small group of folks from CrashtheTeaParty were rumored to be in the crowd on the Mall Thursday night with a sign disparaging lower income people.

 

So according to rumors, the web site encouraged a few people to attend a protest on the mall, allegedly affiliated with the site somehow?

 

Not really sure what you're seeing here that adds up to "false", Pangloss.

 

Sounds to me like some guy made a web site, it generated buzz, and some people decided to do what the web site told them to.

 

You want to talk about false? How about jryan's claims...

 

Given that this group exists, and claims to have operatives at all events

 

jryan is purporting that we give all of the Tea Partiers a bye on the exact sort of signs and other materials you were chastising "the left" for in the other thread because a massive liberal conspiracy has operatives at all major Tea Party events who are holding up fake signs to make the Tea Party look bad.

 

You have anything to say to jryan about that?

[Mr Skeptic]

Here's the bits I liked:

And a self-described infiltrator at the afternoon rally, who dressed as a monk and carried a sign reading “God Hates Taxes,” said many tea partiers lauded him for his sign.

 

“I thought I’d be getting drummed out of here by somebody who just thought I was here to agitate and start trouble,” he told a POLITICO videographer. “In fact, it turns out it’s very empowering. People really love this sign,” he said, adding “the whole idea that God hates taxes is an absolute absurdity, however it’s always good to know that God is on your side.”

 

Which shows that some of the complaints are well-funded. It's always cool when the folks you're mocking love the sign you're mocking them with.

 

Brooks Alexander, a 23-year-old Olney, Md., hotel worker and Obama supporter who wore an Obama t-shirt to the evening rally, said infiltrators were being disrespectful.

 

“They’re doing a disservice not only to themselves, but to the people who are here trying to express their views,” said Alexander, who is African American and said he traveled to the rally to verify for himself liberal accounts blasting the tea party as racist.

 

“All my friends told me I was crazy to come down here in an Obama shirt,” he said. “Obviously I have political disagreements [with the tea party], but I cannot lie. I cannot say that people have been anything but nice to me. They have been shaking my hand. One guy told me I had a lot of [guts] for coming down here. I will definitely walk away from this with a new understanding of the tea party.”

 

It's also clear that there's a lot of exaggeration about the Tea Party folks.

[pioneer]

When Bush was in office, the liberal activism groups had all the fun, since they could all rally against a common philosophical enemy. Now, the liberal activists are less active, due to disappointment with own party. For example, they fought against war. However, they can't fight against their own party who expanded the war; lost their consistent principles. They are tied up like a pretzel due to conflicting loyalty.

 

The Tea Party members are now having their activism turn, since they have their own common enemy, which is clear cut to them. The liberal groups are not organized against the tea party, like they were against Bush, because of their own inner party conflict. Why put your butt on the line, for a bunch of democrats who ignored many of your own concerns. There was a call to arms, by the liberal media, but they don't have the same steam.

[ParanoiA]

It's also clear that there's a lot of exaggeration about the Tea Party folks.

 

How do we know he's not an infiltrator of the infiltrators? He could be a token minority tea partier used by the tea party to make believe he's actually an Obama supporter, so he can therefore pretend that the Tea Party were stand up folks.

 

Jus' sayin

 

They are tied up like a pretzel due to conflicting loyalty.

 

This could be the fate of many tea partiers too. While they are still largely republican over libertarian (inferred from the 28% support for Ron Paul per the CBS Poll here), there are enough actual, small government folks in the movement that will be disappointed when Newt Gingrich (I'm calling it now...), or some other big government conservative wins the presidency. They too could find themselves tied up like a pretzel in that aftermath.

Edited April 17, 2010 by ParanoiA

[Dudde]

Now, the liberal activists are less active, due to disappointment with own party.

 

This is highly opinionated and false.

See

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/63191

 

They're just rallying against other things, why would they protest against something that's slowly trending in their direction

[ParanoiA]

Sixty-four percent believe that the president has increased taxes for most Americans, despite the fact that the vast majority of Americans got a tax cut under the Obama administration. Thirty-four percent of the general public says the president has raised taxes on most Americans.

 

So can I assume 36% did *not* believe the president has increased taxes for most americans? That certainly covers more than a "few" in my book.

 

Twenty-four percent of Tea Party supporters say it is sometimes justified to take violent action against the government. That compares to 16 percent of Americans overall who say violence against the government is sometimes justified.

 

That's not a measurement of "well educated". Or are you saying our forefathers were too uneducated to realize we should be under English rule leading to a revolution based on ignorance? Hell, that may be true come to think of it...

 

An overwhelming majority of Tea Party supporters, 84 percent, say the views of the Tea Party movement reflect the views of most Americans. But Americans overall disagree: Just 25 percent say the Tea Party movement reflects their beliefs, while 36 percent say it does not.

 

I'm not sure statistical trivia is a proper measurement of education. How well educated are that 36% on Tea Party views? Surely media reports of racism and violence wouldn't effect such answers now would it?

 

Maybe they were considering the 59% of americans that think we're headed in the wrong direction. And 36% disavowing agreement still leaves 64% out there - and still doesn't mean their views aren't shared by the tea partiers. You've yet to prove them wrong.

 

I know a couple of people here at work that distance themselves from the tea party movement, yet are small government (so they say) conservatives. It would be accurate to say their views are shared. I wonder how much of that is responsible for that 36%, or the remaining 39% that apparently "didn't know".

 

Thirty percent of Tea Party supporters believe Mr. Obama was born in another country, despite ample evidence to the contrary. Another 29 percent say they don't know.

 

Another stat that really doesn't measure education. Contrast that to how much of the general public believes the assassination of JFK was a conspiracy, and that 9/11 was an inside job, and that we never landed on the moon. There's ample evidence there too.

 

Fifty-three percent say the Roe v. Wade decision was a bad thing (compared to 34 percent of Americans overall), 40 percent oppose same-sex marriage and civil unions (compared to 30 percent overall) and 30 percent want gun control laws eased (compared to 16 percent overall).

 

Another statement that says nothing about "well educated".

 

Fifty-two percent believe too much has been made of the problems facing black people. Far fewer Americans overall -- 28 percent -- believe as much. Among non-Tea Party whites, the percentage who say too much attention has been paid to the problems of black people is 23 percent.

 

Another statement that says nothing about "well educated".

 

One in four believe the administration favors blacks over whites, an opinion shared by just 11 percent of Americans overall and seven percent of non-Tea Party whites.

 

Now that's effin stupid, and not very intelligent. But it says nothing about "well educated" or not.

 

You're right... This group just OOZES well educated.

 

Sorry, your point fails. You only have 2 out of 8 accusations, one repeated for redundancy I guess, that even speak to "well educated" and aren't very impressive at that.

 

Of course, it's also a strawman since my injection was that there are more than just a few educated tea partiers. I don't think those numbers prove anything either way.

 

Now, on intelligence...I could write a whole post on it. Some would say I already did..

Edited April 17, 2010 by ParanoiA

[Mr Skeptic]

I'm pretty sure he (and you earlier) were talking of "well educated" not of "intelligence". Why the switch to "intelligence" now?

[bascule]

Yeah, there's a big difference between intelligence and knowledge/wisdom. For example, the city I used to live in was full of highly intelligent people, many of whom believed in things like magic crystals and psychic powers.

[ParanoiA]

I'm pretty sure he (and you earlier) were talking of "well educated" not of "intelligence". Why the switch to "intelligence" now?

 

Because I'm not very damn intelligent this morning?

 

I don't know how I jumped off the reservation on that one. I'll start all over, if I can edit that post.

 

My apologies to iNow.