The temper tantrum that all too many on left-wing blogs and even in some precincts of the MSM have been throwing in recent days as the “Tea Party movement gains greater steam has become yet another defining moment for the “netroots” and their media allies.
They can’t seem to fathom that there could be such a thing as a grassroots movement that is not only not of their making, but opposed to their ideology. So, it must be “astroturf” (i.e., fake grassroots), in the words of one New York Times columnist.
Can you imagine how they would react if all conservative blogs repeated in unison that same mantra about the anti-Iraq War rallies, that they were not legitimate, merely made-to-order rallies orchestrated from the top down, that these people really didn’t oppose the war, they were merely goose-stepping to the instructions of the left-wing masters?
Maybe the netroots are just upset because conservatives (& libertarians) are finally using the Internet (& other new technologies) to promote our ideas.
I think it’s that –and more. It goes to something I’ve been noticing since I defended the Gipper as an undergraduate that all too many (but fortunately not all) on the left refuse to grant any legitimacy to conservative ideas. As Allahpundit put it, “Nothing the right does is legitimate in liberal eyes, so there must be a disqualifying factor hidden somewhere here.”
Check out this left-winger on the growing grassroots phenomenon:
This gets to the basic issue with the whole Tea Party movement. It’s a group of f***nuts joining other groups of marginally related f***nuts to protest something or other, in a hugely f***nutty way. The point of the Tea Party movement, besides the largest thrusting of testicles to America’s collective face since the Soviets launched Sputnik, is to protest.
Wow, sounds like someone had a bad day! (Interesting side note: Andrew Sullivan linked that unhappy left-winger when he derided Ann Althouse’s pending nuptials.)
What makes these people so unhappy? Why do they resort to a string of expletives to describe a grassroots movement?
Look, it’s too soon to tell whether or not we represent a majority of the American people (I happen to think we do). There have been numerous grassroots movements throughout U.S. History which did not find success at the ballot box. But, just because William Jennings Bryan lost three bids for the White House doesn’t mean he didn’t tap into the concerns of a certain segment of the population.
Can’t they at least acknowledge the legitimacy of our grievances?
Instead, we’re seeing is yet another example of the left’s intolerance for conservative ideas and their insensitivity to political grievances which do not fit their idea of what a political grievance should be.
Note their attempts to “crash” our rallies so as to discredit our movement. They’ll feature the most extreme protesters (maybe even leftists in disguise) and define them as representative of our movement, much as social conservatives use pictures of the men clad only in leather harnesses to show what went on at a Gay Pride Parade. They seek to define us by our most extreme elements.
Yep, that’s just what these folks are like, though they are loath to admit it. They’re no different than the most extreme social conservatives eager to badmouth anything those “homosexual heathens” are doing.
Neither the netroots nor the anti-gay extremists can see the objects of their bile for what they are. They’d rather define us by their own prejudices.