New York Times Week in Review and Book Review editor Sam Tanenhaus is discussing his recent book "The Death of Conservatism" with Reihan Salam on Slate's Book Club feature.
The tone of these Slate debates is usually civilly contentious, but in his Thursday afternoon posting, Tanenhaus leaves his lofty chambers of rhetoric to insult the conservatives he purports to be an expert on with a well-known lefty vulgarism:
Even today the right insists it is driven by ideas, even if the leading thinkers are now Limbaugh and Beck, and the shock troops are tea-baggers and anti-tax demonstrators.
In other words, the movement has thrived not as a top-down operation, nor as a bottom-up one, but as a convergence of shared prejudices and cultural enmities. Thus, the right's first great modern tribune was Joe McCarthy, whose theatrical "investigations" of "enemies within" were either endorsed or indulged by each of the intellectuals mentioned above.
As an editor with a wide field (both literature and politics), does Tanenhaus really not know the vulgar origin of the phrase "tea-baggers"?
I reviewed Tanenhaus's slim essay of a book last month on Times Watch, finding it intellectually misleading (any book where Obama is some kind of heir to the conservative tradition is suspect). I concluded:
Tanenhaus is fudging facts to portray the political landscape in a liberal-friendly manner. But the real world has shifted underneath him in the last few months, leaving Tanenhaus's elaborate painting looking more like a twisted Picasso than a realistic view of U.S. politics.
In one oft-quoted image from the book, Tanenhaus likens today's conservative movement to "the exhumed figures of Pompeii, trapped in postures of frozen flight, clenched in the rigor mortis of a defunct ideology." It's a striking image, but as dated as the rest of the book, which is itself frozen in time, a fossil of conventional wisdom that can be carbon-dated precisely to Obama's brief period of ascendancy, circa early-to-middle 2009.
—Clay Waters is the director of Times Watch, an MRC project tracking the New York Times.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
→ The Old Grey Hoe
October 2, 2009 - 11:48 ET by Cool ArrowOf course I'm referring to the paper of record that used to chop out the weeds of non-news so we could see the News.
Book Review
October 2, 2009 - 11:49 ET by merlin61Again, they use the disgusting term against American Tea Parties. We are conservative, we are against higher taxes, higher spending, too much liberalism,etc.etc. Again, what's wrong with that? Oh, we don't agree with the Dems, so we don't count.
Don't think sooooooooooooo.
Fox
October 2, 2009 - 11:54 ET by WatchesAnd to think that Fox News originated this term. Where can we turn when even Fox is taken over by liberal media bias?
Fox News
October 2, 2009 - 11:56 ET by merlin61I don't remember Fox News ever, ever, ever using that
term except to tell people what other networks are saying. I watch Fox all the time, and never heard them use that derogatory term.
There was a website that urged people to send a tea bag...
October 2, 2009 - 12:50 ET by JWF..to Congress or the White House. Griff Jenkins held up a tea bag and said to tea bag congress or the white house or something.
So since these small number of people use the term tea bag as a verb without realizing the double entendre. It is ok for CNN and MSNBC and trolls to paint millions of people with a vulgar term.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
No its not ok
October 2, 2009 - 14:34 ET by nwahsI think its highly unlikely that at this time, there is any in the media that don't know what the term means. But the author of this blog specifically asks :
As an editor with a wide field (both literature and politics), does Tanenhaus really not know the vulgar origin of the phrase "tea-baggers"?
This is a loaded question as it ignors the fact that the use of "tea bag" as an act of sending tea bags to Washington was first used on a Tea Party web site (reteaparty.com). As far as its vulgar origin - I don't know its vulgar origin. Who knows its vulgar origin? Bath houses in San Francisco? I don't know - who would, a sex historian?
So no, its not ok to keep using the term, and its not ok to misrepresent that its vulgar origins are widely known or that all people using it in todays context are purposely accusing protesters of sexual deviancy. I think at this point the few people still using it are divided between liberals playing "gotcha again- you used a stupid term" and a few people who at first adopted the term innocently and slip out of habit.
→ nwahs
October 2, 2009 - 14:47 ET by Cool ArrowYou've conceded the unlikelihood there are any in the media unaware of the term's meaning. Now you're negotiating the legitimacy of its use based on who used it first.
Not a bad angle, but it also requires your acquiescence in the matter of "Barack The Magic Negro". We both know the origin of the term.
So yeah, you may have me cornered on "tea-baggers", as I have no tax protest reference previous to the one you provide, but you've busted yourself on "Barack The Magic Negro" if you'll hold yourself to the same standard.
You've made a good point.
They do seem to overlap, don't they?
October 2, 2009 - 18:28 ET by nwahsI see your point. There is a relationship . I guess it was pretty bad for Anderson Cooper to joke around at many people's expense, and infer a derogatory term on them no matter who coined the term. And it was probably bad for Rush to run with "The Magic Negro" term and buffoon it, no matter who coined it. In both cases, innocent people were probably offended. You've opened my eyes.
It is about consistency isn't it?
→ Consistency
October 2, 2009 - 18:32 ET by Cool ArrowIf we were all consistent, there would be no bias.
Wish I could say I'll always be consistent, but often the temptation is too great.
If Obama's "Safe Schools Czar", Kevin Jennings, decides to write the forward to a book "Queering Elementary Education", I'll more often than not, take the bait and run with a host of queer jokes.
Why? Because the homosexual community is obviously fine with the reference.
Help me out here, Watches.
October 2, 2009 - 12:06 ET by KarmaCan you show me where Fox News originated the term?
Hi. My name is John Q. Public, but some just call me racist.
recycled troll
October 2, 2009 - 12:10 ET by katainkenthm, who got banned recently...
____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes
kk, LOL-Which recycled troll is this??
October 2, 2009 - 23:22 ET by R D HelmAfter 3.5+ years here, it's getting a little hard to keep them straight. :-)
-Dave
The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz
watches, if that's the best
October 2, 2009 - 12:24 ET by larry on LIof your recall , i'd stick to reading only. just saying
No
October 2, 2009 - 12:41 ET by ChaitealoverAnderson Cooper doesn't work for Fox.
Chai
“When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson
Watches/Seed Planting
October 2, 2009 - 15:41 ET by Jerry MackGreat example of the strategy change by Fox News haters. Instead of Faux news and how they hate them for supposedly bised coverage they have gone to this. It is called " Seed Planting".
Anderson Cooper
October 2, 2009 - 15:50 ET by carolina09popularized the term "tea bagger."
Isn't "teabagger" a
October 2, 2009 - 12:04 ET by mangIsn't "teabagger" a derogatory term against homosexuals? Why aren't they up in arms about this?
Here is an item from reteaparty.com
October 2, 2009 - 12:20 ET by nwahsHere's an item from reteaparty.com, an organizer of the tea parties,
Tea Bag the fools in D.C.
---------------
April 1, 2009 | Tea Bag the Fools in D.C.
Our
founders have stopped rolling over in their graves. After months of
tossing and turning, we have finally taken back the banner of hope that
has been hijacked by the “do-good” saviors.
Statist sympathizers call us cynics; those who complain without
answers of our own. They call us “selfish”, implying that funding
failure is altruistic. While America was founded on those who do, they
ask us to submit to those who can’t.
ENOUGH!
On December 16, 1773, the original Patriots put their lives on the
line. With an envelope, a stamp, and a bag of tea, millions of
Americans can send a peaceful message; our lives have value.
On April 1st, our establishment will know that our freedom to succeed can no longer be sacrificed at the risk of our future.
With sincerity and respect, we ask that you join us on April 1st,
2009, in sending the Oval Office a Tea Bag, in honor of the party in
Boston on December 16, 1773, and in anticipation of its nationwide
symbolic re-enactment in the summer of 2009.
If you have had enough, please submit your pledge to send Washington
a Tea Bag on April 1st by using the pledge form in the right sidebar.
>>>FIND YOUR REPRESENTATIVE HERE <<<
Follow the links to join us in Chicago or at Tea Parties all over
the country and visit the forum to discuss and organize details with
other attendees and organizers.
Spark a Re-Revolution,
ReTeaParty.com
----------------------
Of course teabagging is slang some use to refer to a disusting sexual humiliation act. Obviously, reteaparty.com didn't mean that, when they asked people to "tea bag the fools in D.C." but meant to send tea bags to the White House as a form of protest. I think we can all agree on that. I also think most who use the term tea baggers to describe protesters, mean those who use the tea bag as a symbol of protest and not those that perform a sexual humiliation act on the fools in D.C. Tea bag the White house =send tea bags to the White House. Tea bagger = those who are sending the tea bags to the White House.
The whole idea of referring to the tea party protests as tea bagging (i.e., "Tea bag the fools in D.C.) started at reteaparty.com
I'm surprised as much as NewsBusters hates this term, they have not once asked Chad Peace of reateaparty.com to weigh in on the matter.Only he can say if his headline was an intentional double entendre or not.
So what you're saying...
October 2, 2009 - 12:23 ET by Karma...is that reteaparty.com originated the word "teabaggee" in refering to the fools in D.C. ?
Interesting.
Hi. My name is John Q. Public, but some just call me racist.
What is interesting
October 2, 2009 - 12:26 ET by nwahsIts interesting that no one is asking Chad Peace whether or not "Tea bag the fools in DC" was an intentional double entendre. Teabagging is an act of humiliation. Did Chad Peace know this? Is that why he worded it that way instead of, oh I dunno "Send a tea bag to the fools in D.C."?
Did you even read what you posted?
October 2, 2009 - 12:28 ET by KarmaDid you even read what you posted?
Hi. My name is John Q. Public, but some just call me racist.
What is obvious
October 2, 2009 - 12:33 ET by CobraManWhat is obvious is that you use any excuse you can to use the degrading term "teabaggibng" as often as you can.
You know exactly what this letter was referring to, and what was meant by the use of "tea bag" , yet you just can stop using that "teabagging" term every chance you get and attempt to blame the repeated use of a sexual term by yourself and other on people who never meant that term to be even insinuated, let alone accepted for general use.
It's obvious that your doing this simply out of spite, because YOU think it's funny. You're not fooling anyone.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
Yes. It is out of spite.
October 2, 2009 - 12:49 ET by JWFHe as much as admitted it on the nwahs lies forum. He wrote an email to the admins at the site and was ignored back in November. So he thinks he can take it out on all of us and has been doing so ever since.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
What is obvious is that you
October 2, 2009 - 22:58 ET by mamabearWhat is obvious is that you use any excuse you can to use the degrading term "teabaggibng" as often as you can.
Please. How do you talk about the issue and origin of the term without using the term?
Maybe you could do it, but it would require some... *cough* mutter *cough*
What? I didn't say anything...
Any psychiatrists on NB?
October 2, 2009 - 12:33 ET by FeynmanFanI'd really like to know why Kengie is so obsessed with this tea bag thing.
"Reason and persuasion are the only practical instruments against error. To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged" - Thomas Jefferson
It's a not-so-subtle insult
October 2, 2009 - 12:42 ET by CobraManHe's doing it as a not-so-subtle insult.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
oh
October 2, 2009 - 12:52 ET by katainkentso you did read what I wrote. I got the impression you'd ignored that post. Nice gear switch. Very flexible of you.
The first time I'd even heard about sending tea bags it was phrased exactly like that "send a tea bag". I wanted to send a Costco size box. And people were like - no, that would just get caught in the mail due to the anthrax security measures. The first time I heard it used as a verb was by Anderson Cooper. At that time I didn't even know he was gay. I assumed it he was a closet gamer or ex-military.
Months later and after much snickering and giggling on the part of several msnbc'ers -
this still continues to pop out of the mouths of people on national television. And still continues to be offensive. And every time you argue this down, you've got to know you've trod on the people who actually do attend these rallies. Some people actually spent a considerable amount of money to drive to DC to make a larger point and try to make a difference. At least we're trying. And those of us who attend these rallies keep trying to tell you that when you continue to try and discount this, its just as offensive. Every time. In my case specifically I can be absolutely certain my rage is neither 'artificial' nor 'generated'.
Nwahs - Do you care?
____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes
katainkent...
October 2, 2009 - 23:25 ET by JerSo you're saying that when Griff Jenkins of Fox News used the term, and tea party ralliers used the term, and pro-Tea Party websites used the term, it was perfectly acceptable. But when Maxine Waters used the term and Sam Tannenhaus used the term--without the slightest inflection or hint that it was intended as a sexually charged double entendre`--it was nevertheless, ipso facto, a vulgar slur.
Why not focus on the obvious, snickering and distasteful mockery by Maddow, Cooper, etc. and not reflexively impute malevolent motives to others when they may very well be absent.
Jer
belief of intent
October 3, 2009 - 14:53 ET by katainkentthe email that was posted to NB that I linked was the first and only time I'd seen the suggestion to mail a tea bag - that was March 16th-ish? Incidently it was snopes'd on the 12th and also noted as an anthrax hazard should anyone actually try it.
The item that nwahs linked for April 1st I had never seen before. If I had, it would have immediately clicked for me that they were trying to be rude and disrespectful and I would not have wanted to participate with that sort of taint on it.
For me, the bagger term is a vulgar term and has been so for years. So, for me, it is neither a 'manufactured' nor a 'generated' rage. They might as well be calling tea party attendees m-f'ing jacka**es.
Here is where I would point out some of stratman's reasoning regarding the either, intentional disregard, or complete oblivious nature of our press and congress. Neither of which is an appealing choice. And then there is belief of intent - from looking at the body of work from Maxine Waters and Sam Tannenhous I have no basis on which to think that they have anything but contempt for conservative minded people. Its difficult for me to believe its accidental for Tannenhous. Maxine Waters, on the other hand tends to be oblivious about nearly everything. A problem all on its own.
What I have focused here on, though, is nwahs constantly trying to make the conservatives the bad person here. Some of us have attended tea parties with genuine desire to help affect change and I doubt anyone that does any surfing at all has any illusions as to the meaning of that word so blatantly coined by Anderson Cooper. I am asking, as politely as I can, to stop doing it.
Finally, I have to ask, how could people who are supposed to be the best and brightest not have a clue.
____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes
Still disagree, kata...
October 3, 2009 - 18:44 ET by JerFor me, the bagger term is a vulgar term and has been so for years. So, for me, it is neither a 'manufactured' nor a 'generated' rage. They might as well be calling tea party attendees m-f'ing jacka**es.
The term may have been around for years, but the "vulgar" connotation hasn't been widely known or used until more recently. And, as I've mentioned a couple of times, a recent internet poll I came across indicated nearly half of the respondents still were unfamiliar with the sexual association.
And then there is belief of intent - from looking at the body of work from Maxine Waters and Sam Tannenhous I have no basis on which to think that they have anything but contempt for conservative minded people. Its difficult for me to believe its accidental for Tannenhous. Maxine Waters, on the other hand tends to be oblivious about nearly everything.
I tend to agree about Waters, but strongly disagree about Tanenhous. He is a liberal without a doubt. He is also an admirer of Bill Buckley (as am I), a serious scholar and a brilliant writer. His biography of Whittaker Chambers was a tour de force. No way he was deliberately engaging in a cheap, gratuitous, and insulting smearing of Tea Partiers.
Jer
Where do you find teabagging?"
October 2, 2009 - 12:24 ET by CobraManWhere do you find the term 'teabagging" in the letter you cite? I see Tea Bag, not "tea bagging" or even "tea bagger ( a term YOU made up!)."
Can you spin this any faster?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
Well unless English is your second language
October 2, 2009 - 12:29 ET by nwahsWhen you tea bag something you are tea bagging something just as when you peel something you are peeling something, paint something, you are painting, smell something, smelling. Get it?
Bla bla bla
October 2, 2009 - 12:34 ET by CobraManKeep spinning, buddy. One day you just might strike oil.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
→ Thanks nwahs
October 2, 2009 - 12:23 ET by Cool ArrowI've never heard of that group.
Just wanted to answer your post before you bump it up again.
Your lure just snagged.
Cooper??
October 2, 2009 - 12:55 ET by slickwillie2001Is he saying that the TEA protesters are a bunch of 'Anderson Coopers'? That makes no sense.
Influential you say...
October 2, 2009 - 12:26 ET by JPR1Must be the downside of living as an ordinary guy in the midwest.
Never heard of the Jac***s.
Is he a good friend of Roger Ebert and/or Garison Keillor. I know who those jac***es are and I've often been amused but never influenced.
Clay, are you sure that "twisted Picasso" isn't just a paint-by-numbers effort, picked up at the Hobby Lobby?
Just Askin'
October 2, 2009 - 12:39 ET by okiehawk44I've always wondered if those who routinely use homosexuals as the brunts of their many jokes and sitcom plots are deemed homophobes by their homosexual friends or are just given an eye roll like Hollywood does Letterman's on-the-job sexual harassment or Roman Polanski's pedophilia?
"Influential?" For whom? Idiots?
October 2, 2009 - 13:08 ET by wnaegeleSigh!
That's not so bad.
October 2, 2009 - 13:27 ET by viluzionI use a much more offensive term to describe liberals. It helps me take them less seriously. I won't mention it here, but you can make up your own.
TEA BAGGER
October 2, 2009 - 13:58 ET by ptsonThis guy looks like he has first hand knowledge, as a tea bagger. It is amazing how the liberals knew what this meant. Are they All perverts?
To be technically Accurate about Tea-Baggers ...
October 2, 2009 - 14:12 ET by MCLANTIERETo be technically Accurate ... Barney Frank is a Tea-BAGGER (and I have my suspicions about this NYT guy Sam Tanerhaus, too) ... Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein are TWO-Baggers.
Now I've been to 3 Tea-PARTIES ... so just the interest of technical clarification ... I am a TEA Party-ER.
Is that too confusing for these Snooze-paper guys?
mclantiere
"Influential NY Times
October 2, 2009 - 14:21 ET by celator"Influential NY Times Editor"?
No such thing.
No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.
Hack at NY Times
October 2, 2009 - 14:28 ET by even stevenIf that narrow-shouldered, wimpy little hack called me a tea bagger, I'd give him a nice knuckle sandwich. These hateful leftist dweebs deserve the ire of those they constantly denigrate.
My question would be...
October 2, 2009 - 15:31 ET by stage9How is it that liberals are so familiar with this term? Maybe I'm getting old, but I had no idea what this even WAS before the term was used by the MSM. Yet again, liberals are on the wrong side of the moral divide. It just exposes their lust for perversion.
"If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will
be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for
pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner."
— Malcolm Muggeridge
Test
October 2, 2009 - 15:39 ET by TrickletownJust checking to see if am able to post.....
Who's Homophobic now?
October 2, 2009 - 17:54 ET by RedGuyBlueStateWith all this Tea-bagger talk, couldn't this be misconstrued as an insult to gay men?
...not that it's only gay men that, uh, ahem, you know...
On to the next article...
→ Yes, it could
October 2, 2009 - 18:09 ET by Cool ArrowBut it seems gays are too giddy about conservatives being referred to in a homosexual term.
No surprise. I don't see a lot of outcry from them any time a stereotypical gay movie is made either.
disgusted
October 2, 2009 - 18:38 ET by jazz_fanI'm disgusted with what I hear of the MSM but fortunately it's mostly second-hand as the only clips I see of network news are the ones recycled by the local tv stations. Of course every user of that term in the MSM is fully aware of the meaning of tea-bagger and they grin openly sometimes as they utter it. This is good news however since it shows they still lack anything in the way of ideas or arguments and prefer to just try to trash the opposition. According to polls, that's backfiring and hopefully the NYT and some alphabet networks will soon be gone.
As for McCarthy, Joe's main fault was underestimating the number of moles, spies and stooges the USSR had at the time. KGB records prove his suspicions were far too limited, not just in terms of numbers but as to how exalted the positions some "sympathizers" and spies held. Slamming a patriot had never worked for me and hopefully McCarthy will be vindicated in textbooks and not just Ann Coulter's books.
Tea-bagged leftists just can't let it go
October 3, 2009 - 03:13 ET by FauxToesHopperThose tea-bagees just can't accept that demonstrations and dissents don't belong to them and them alone. They have to try to ridicule the protest or like the Teabagee-in-Chief does, freeze it, personalize it and destroy it.
"shock troops", eh? Be
October 3, 2009 - 05:00 ET by RR GOP"shock troops", eh? Be damn grateful that most truly aren't or else that building you work at would be a burned out shell by now and at the very least you and your pals would be tarred and feathered for conspiring to:
1. Enslave the American citizenry at large, African-Americans/Hispanics in particular.
2. Supporting the Communists around the world who have tortured, raped, killed and enslaved millions.
3. Stealing our hard-earned property and that of our children.
4. Disgracing the one country on earth that can and has made a positive difference to Mankind's lot and has served as a shining beacon of Hope and Liberty.
5. Insulting our God.
6. Murdering millions of the unborn.
7. Allowing thugs and degenerates of all types to rape our women and children, steal, murder and deal their poisons with little fear of real punishment.
8. Fostering the creation of a huge underclass of the lazy and the ignorant.
9. Endangering the entire planet by encouraging mad men and fanatics to develop nuclear weapons.
10. Insulting, exploiting, and politicizing the sacrifices of our brave men and women fighting for us.
11. Stealing the few years that children can enjoy true innocence and safety with your insistence that kids be inundated with your belief that they should be exposed to every sexual perversion imaginable and things that only adults need to be concerned with.
12. Encouraging our youth to experiment with drugs and sex so they can lead miserable lives as adults.
13. Fostering the belief that social engineering and political activism is more important than real learning as the means to advancing Mankind's lot.
14. Excusing the violence and crimes of Leftist terrorists in our own country and dismissing the suffering inflicted on their victims and their families.
Fortunately for these Communists and their Liberal suckers, most of these "tea baggers" have a lot more patience than some of us and are better Christians.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.
Who are you talking to?
October 3, 2009 - 07:08 ET by mamabearWho are you talking to?
I thought the elite leftists don't "engage in name calling"?
October 3, 2009 - 07:28 ET by Crash... but I guess it's all part of the Vast Left Wing Vacuum. Or a cabal known as the confederacy of dunces.
Crash
October 3, 2009 - 07:31 ET by FeynmanFanName calling is about all the elite leftists have got to work with.
"Reason and persuasion are the only practical instruments against error. To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged" - Thomas Jefferson