You mailed them in your first sentence, Chris. Weigel starts his article by calling these “Tea Party experts,” and the rest of the piece proves to any sensible reader that they don’t understand the Tea Party movement at all.

These lefty academics can’t handle the idea that people don’t agree with their worldview, so they fall back on antiquated ideas like “racism” to explain why Obama is failing. Or the John Birch Society! If they continue to think this way they’ll never be successful in countering the movement.

“If you look across the board here, true skeptics of the Tea Party, 49 percent agreed with the proposition that blacks ought to work their way up without any special favors,” says Parker. “But if you look at the true believers, that goes to 92 percent. This is another indicator of racism, right: Over the past few years, blacks have gotten less than they deserve. Forty-five percent of true skeptics disagree with this; almost 80 percent of true believers disagree with this.”

So, Brainiac, here asks (1) do people agree or disagree that “blacks ought to work their way up without any special favors.” People agreed with this 49% or more. Then he asks (2) have “blacks have gotten less than they deserve.” and people disagreed with this 45% or more.

And the only thing this Bozo can deduce from this is that some people are “true believers” in the Tea Party Movement? He doesn’t see that overwhelmingly Americans think that Affirmative Action has gone waaay past it’s “sell-by” date?

“I wonder if we’re likely to see a Timothy McVeigh situation,” says Nicholas Robert,” And I say, “Watch those guys that have two first names.” Some of them cheat at tennis and have way too much to drink at happy hour before they drive home in their Subaru Wagon with the “Keep Tahoe Blue” sticker on the back bumper.I worked for guys like him when I was a plumber.They insisted that we be on a first name basis. When I became a professor, guys like him told me what redneck idiots plumbers were.

They’re on to us. Time to stock up on the Pabst Blue Ribbon and buy that Dukes of Hazzard special edition DVD.

“You’re not allowed to just say no to everything the president wants,” she says.”

As Hawkeye once responded to Charles on “MASH:” – “Oh yeah? OH YEAH?”

I hereby officially and on the record say “NO” to everything NoBama has ever wanted, wants or will ever want.”

Sorry to leave, but gotta go iron my sheet for the next KKK meeting. It’s gonna be “Honor Robert Byrd, (the Democrat) Night.”

Now that you’re a Priest in a reasserter (Bible-banging, fundamentalist) Anglican church, do the two-first-namers even speak to you, Fr. Dale?

And I bet they all regard themselves as self proclaimed “Brights”

“Progressive academic douchebags study the savages”

The MCJ should just provide a trackback to this blog. And the progressive academics can study the past postings and comments on this blog to then come up with a psychoanalysis and profile of the savage and primitive neanderthals.

CSJ, Your title for this post is awesome – so many layers of meaning.

They thound really pithed off. Anger issues.

THIS oughta throw a cog in the old liberal wheel.

Not that mere constitutionality and legality are of any concern to either Obama or Shori.

Fr. Tim – Priceless!

Until we get rid of universal suffrage, we can’t risk it

Universal suffrage got us into this mess – abolishing universal suffrage will be required to get us out of it.

The original republic, as defined by the frames, certainly did not permit universal suffrage. It is not accident that most of the liberal progress has come since the US adopted the anti-constitutional universal suffrage.

Repealing the 17th Amendment, and more importantly, repealing all the other Amendments that require the States and the Union to provide universal suffrage, is required to restore the country.

NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION!

And the progressive missionaries wonder why the conservative natives are “pithed” off.

I can’t tell if:
a) the author is an idiot who cannot construct a paragraph which contains a cohesive concept;
b) all of the individuals the author references are idiots spouting incomplete, self-contradictory ideas which confuse effects with causality; or
c) all of the above.

In the absence of more evidence, I am going with c.

In essence, the problem with America is that it’s just too full of … Americans.

St. Nikao,
“Now that you’re a Priest in a reasserter (Bible-banging, fundamentalist) Anglican church, do the two-first-namers even speak to you, Fr. Dale?” No,they remain cloistered together at the only remaining TEC congregation in town.

And the only thing this Bozo can deduce from this is that some people are “true believers” in the Tea Party Movement? He doesn’t see that overwhelmingly Americans think that Affirmative Action has gone waaay past it’s “sell-by” date?

But TLM, don’t you see? These people don’t need to analyze your actual arguments. That would be completely irrelevant. If you disagree with them, then you must motivated by base motives. Every argument you make can be dismissed apriori as confirmation bias. Have a nice day.

@R Scott Purdyu -

This is from Slate Magazine, that bastion of liberal elitism.

But “c” is the best of your options!

Of mad dogs, Englishmen and liberals in Berkeley:

MAD DOGS AND ENGLISHMEN
(Lyrics by Noel Coward)

In tropical climes
There are certain times
Of day
When all the citizens retire
To take their clothes off and perspire.
It’s one of those rules
That the greatest fools
Obey,
Because the sun is far too sultry
And one must avoid its ultry
Violet ray.

The natives grieve
When the white men leave
Their huts.
Because they’re obviously,
Definitely
Nuts.

Mad Dogs & Englishmen
Go out in the midday sun.
The Japanese don’t care to,
The Chinese wouldn’t dare to,
Hindus and Argentines
Sleep firmly from twelve to one,
But Englishmen
Detest a
Siesta.
In the Philippines
They have lovely screens
To protect you from the glare.
In the Malay states
There are hats like plates
Which the Britishers won’t wear.
At twelve noon
The natives swoon,
And no further work is done,
But mad dogs and Englishmen
Go out in the midday sun!

Such a surprise
For the eastern eyes
To see,
That though the English are effete,
They’re quite impervious to heat.
When the white man rides
Every native hides
In glee.
Because the simple creatures hope he
Will impale his solar topee
On a tree.

It seems such a shame
When the English claim
The Earth,
That they give rise
To such hilarity
And mirth.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha,
Hoo, hoo, hoo, hoo, hoo, hoo, hoo, hoo,
He, he, he, he, he, he, he, he,
Hm, hm, hm, hm, hm, hm.

Mad dogs and Englishmen
Go out in the midday sun.
The toughest Burmese bandit
Can never understand it.
In Rangoon
The heat of noon
Is just what the natives shun,
They put their Scotch
Or Rye down
And lie down.
In a jungle town
Where the sun beats down
To the rage of man and beast,
The English garb
Of the English sahib
Merely gets a bit more creased.
In Bangkok
At twelve ‘o clock
They foam at the mouth and run,
But mad dogs and Englishmen
Go out in the midday sun.

Mad dogs and Englishmen
Go out in the midday sun.
The smallest Malay rabbit
Deplores this foolish habit.
In Hong Kong
They strike a gong
And fire off a noonday gun
To reprimand
Each inmate
Who’s in late.
In the Mangrove swamps
Where the python romps
There is peace from twelve to two,
Even caribous
Lie around and snooze,
For there’s nothing else to do.
In Bengal,
To move at all
Is seldom if ever done.
But mad dogs and Englishmen
Go out in the midday
Out in the midday
Out in the midday
Out in the midday
Out in the midday
Out in the midday
Out in the midday sun!

The reason that there is so much acrimony in political discourse these days is demonstrated by this group. They cannot grasp that opinions other than their own could possibly be rational. Nor are they capable of dispassionate engagement with differing opinions. Conservatives can’t be thoughtful opponents so they must “keep people angry” and “reinforce their fears.” The easy path is to portray conservatives as phobic, racist, or worst of all, shut them up with the Nazi accusation.

In reality it is the Left that is mush-minded. If they find a hungry man it is so much easier to give him the damn fish so the beggar will go away than to actually spend the time to teach him to fish. They know that if they engaged in honest debate they could lose and that would be their undoing.

WRF -
…”They know that if they engaged in honest debate they could lose and that would be their undoing.

When has the left ever engaged in an honest debate about anything?

I was pretty sure Juan Williams gave it a try on a couple of occasions…

” they find a hungry man it is so much easier to give him the damn fish so the beggar will go away than to actually spend the time to teach him to fish.” The sorry fact, WTF, is that they, themselves, can’t fish.

no, but they’re pretty good at raiding my livewell…

[...] PITH HELMETRY– Progressive academic douchebags study the savages …. [...]