In the New York Times's Thursday Styles section, contributor Helaine Olen talked to some liberal Manhattanites who took their children to Zuccotti Park to enrich them with “teachable moments” (i.e. using them as political props) and "to enlighten them on matters ranging from income inequality to theright to protest":“For Children’s Sake, Taking to the Streets.”
On Wednesday's Early Show, CBS's Erica Hill downplayed the instances of violence and bigotry found at Occupy Wall Street protests as simply "the actions of a few," after GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich denounced the "frightening level of anti-Semitism in some of these gatherings." Hill questioned Gingrich over his supposedly "pretty outspoken words" about the left-leaning movement [audio clip available here; video available below the jump].
The anchor raised the demonstrations towards the end of her interview of the former House speaker, after Gingrich claimed that "people are pretty sick of the lack of civility...they watch Washington, they watch gridlock, [and] they watch a president who's more comfortable on [Jay] Leno than he is in trying to govern the country." Hill replied that "people, too, are fed up, as we know- we see a lot of this with the Occupy Wall Street protests. The latest CBS News/New York Times poll finds that 46% of Americans say that their views reflect a sentiment that most Americans share."
CNN's Piers Morgan claimed on Wednesday that "elements" of the Tea Party are "racist" in an interview with GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain. "You all know there are elements of the Tea Party who are racist," he insisted to Cain.
Morgan again stated it as a matter of fact, in his question to Cain: "How do you deal with that element in the Tea Party that is overtly racist?"
The CNN host also cited black liberals Harry Belafonte and Morgan Freeman as bona-fide experts about the matter, and pressed Cain to respond to them and other "leading black Americans" who think the movement is racist. [Video below the break.]
New York Times reporters Jennifer Steinhauer and Steven Yaccino unfurled a hit piece (accompanied by a severely unflattering photo) on Rep. Joe Walsh of Illinois, conservative freshman congressman and Tea Party favorite, on the front of Tuesday’s National section: “G.O.P.’s Freshman’s Fiscal Message Clashes With His Finances.” It’s not the first time the paper has gone after a Tea Party conservative on such personal terms.
There’s a diagram floating around the Internet that claims to show areas of agreement between Tea Party protesters and the Occupy Wall Street crowd. It’s an idea supported by some pundits and media types as well. Even the president chimed in foolishly on the issue.
According to Obama, Occupy Wall Street isn’t all that different from the Tea Party. “In some ways, they’re not that different from some of the protests that we saw coming from the Tea Party,” he told ABC’s Jake Tapper. But that’s like saying the Russian and American revolutions were the same, when one led to a Socialist dictatorship and the other led to more freedom than any nation has ever had. Ohio Democrat Rep. Dennis Kucinich told CNN “I met with Tea Party people from the Cleveland area. And frankly they have a lot in common with the people who are occupying Wall Street around the country.” Time magazine tried a similar approach, asking the question: “Occupy Wall Street: A Tea Party for the Left?” The anti-American, Russian state-sponsored RT even found one Tea Party person to draw a connection. But that doesn’t make it true.
Tharoor essentially argued that the "occupiers" were a global youth movement, that it was populated by the "have nots," and that, unlike the Tea Party, "Occupy Wall Street still believes in politics and government."
The MRC's director of media analysis noted that there were only "13 stories in the entire year of 2009" about the Tea Party movement while the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement has received "a dramatic amount of early coverage" with 33 network stories in the first 11 days of the protests. [MP3 audio available here; video follows page break]
New York Times media reporter Brian Stelter was in St. Petersburg, Fla., but that didn’t stop him from marking his media colleague’s burgeoning coverage of the Occupy Wall Street movement for Thursday’s “A News Story Is Growing With ‘Occupy’ Protests.” Stelter hyped the increasing media coverage that the lefty aggregation “Occupy Wall Street” has been granted as it spreads to other cities, including in Florida.
But Stelter wasn’t nearly so accomodating to the conservative Tea Party when it first broke through in early 2009.
Monday’s column by former New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller, “Is the Tea Party Over?”, indulged in the usual doomsaying for the G.O.P.’s 2012 presidential prospects (too negative, too far to the right, etc.). Keller also found the “doofus” Gov. Perry guilty of giving “a wink to the evangelicals, a nod to the executioner, and an ardent defense of personal liberties for those who are heterosexual and don’t need an abortion.”
Keller, who as editor of the paper virtually ignored the Tea Party during its first year of existence, has now turned around and said the movement is about to blow its big political opportunity:
From the editorial page to the news pages to a page of graphic design, the spreading leftist protest known as Occupy Wall Street occupied major swathes of Sunday’s New York Times, and the mood was celebratory – at last the left wing (or as the Times puts it, “populist message”) is off the mat and fighting back.
In the paper’s Sunday Review, journalism professor and veteran leftist Todd Gitlin gushed over the leftist revival on Wall Street (while attacking the Tea Party) in “The Left Declares Its Independence.”
On Sunday's Reliable Sources on CNN, host Howard Kurtz and guest Erik Wemple of the Washington Post both took exception with FNC's Bill O'Reilly for recently calling some of the "Occupy Wall Street" protesters "far-left loons" and "anarchists." Kurtz noted the contrast in how MSNBC and FNC have responded to the protests:
ABC's Brian Ross on Friday investigated the alleged misdeeds of "billionaire boosters" to the Tea Party and even used a liberal documentary to attack the conservative group. Appearing on "Good Morning America," Ross touted a Bloomberg report hitting the "secret sins" of Koch Industries and whether the corporation traded with Iran.
An ABC graphic linked, "Billionaire Boosters of the Tea Party: Donors' Company Under Fire." Ross used a clip of businessman David Koch and simply added, "...A documentary filmmaker was rolling [sic], as David Koch appeared before Tea Party leaders and spoke of American values." There was no information that "(Astro)Turf Wars" is a liberal documentary trashing the Tea Party, in addition to David and Charles Koch. See video below. MP3 audio here.
In a report filed at the Los Angeles Times's Politics Now blog earlier today, Washington Bureau reporter James Oliphant relayed a number of whoppers delivered by Vice President Joe Biden without anything resembling a challenge.
Breaking Biden's bilge into three sections, they involve his claim about the historical origins of the Tea Party, which Biden characterized as a collection of "barbarians" only a month ago (and as "terrorists" two month ago); his hit at Bank of America and its $5 monthly fee for debit-card use; and the nature of the "bailouts" which followed the passage of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) in the fall of 2008. In this first part, I will go after what Biden said about the Tea Party. An excerpt from Oliphant's writeup follows the jump (bolds are mine throughout):
I am not the first to note the vast differences between the Wall Street protesters and the tea partiers. To name three: The tea partiers have jobs, showers and a point.
No one knows what the Wall Street protesters want -- as is typical of mobs. They say they want Obama re-elected, but claim to hate "Wall Street." You know, the same Wall Street that gave its largest campaign donation in history to Obama, who, in turn, bailed out the banks and made Goldman Sachs the fourth branch of government.
This would be like opposing fattening, processed foods, but cheering Michael Moore -- which the protesters also did this week.
New York Times columnists Gail Collins and David Brooks talked about “The Long Stagnation” in their weekly online chat posted Wednesday.
When Brooks, the paper’s idea of a conservative columnist, said he wasn’t impressed by the numbers participating in the Occupy Wall Street protest, compared to the figures generated at Tea Party rallies, Collins, the paper’s former editorial page editor, indignantly replied the Tea Party had no principles besides a "crazed" refusal to accept the idea of Democrats in power:
During the 1 p.m. hour of Tuesday's Newsroom, CNN's Randi Kaye touted the potential for the "Occupy Wall Street" protests around the country to morph into a "left wing Tea Party." Kaye reported that the group is "gaining momentum" and hosted one of the protestors for a soft interview.
"The scene from Wall Street as the numbers multiply and the message gets louder, it seems the 'Occupy Wall Street' protesters have the potential to grow into a political party, sort of a left wing Tea Party," Kaye hyped. [Video below the break. Click here for audio.]
While the Times’s coverage of conservative Tea Party rallies pointed out the most extreme and “fringe” elements present, the paper has thus far eschewed labels like "far-left" or even "liberal," and ignored the cadre of Communists and offensive posters decrying “Nazi bankers” in Zuccotti Park in Lower Manhattan.
Trust him--he might be young, but he's a "professional sociologist." So did Harrison Schultz, an organizer of the "Occupy Wall Street" protests, describe himself to Al Sharpton on MSNBC this evening. And he wants Al and us to know that "a lot of the people that are here are in fact anarchists, are in fact revolutionaries. . . . We don't really want to fix [the problems]. It's revolution, not reform."
There are also some amusing factoids about Harrison. When he's not out fomenting revolution, Schultz is an . . . analyst for a marketing firm. Oh yeah, and in his oh-so-bourgeois LinkedIn profile, Harrison wants people to know he worked at Bank of America providing "assistance for several investment bankers." Oh, the horror! Video after the jump.
On Monday's NBC "Today," correspondent Michelle Franzen reported on the left-wing "Occupy Wall Street" protests in New York and proclaimed: "Protesters fed up with the economy and social inequality turned out en masse over the weekend....Voicing their discontent and marching for change."
Touting the protest as "a movement that has taken off in the past few weeks with protests spreading to other cities around the country," Franzen declared: "Labor experts say uprisings overseas have empowered protesters to speak out." A sound bite was included of Columbia University's Dorian Warren arguing: "Those movements, those revolutions led by young people [in the Middle East]...I think that's another, let's say, inspiration for why they are sitting-in now."
Actress Eva Longoria appeared on Tuesday's Jimmy Kimmel Live to trash the "dangerous" "extremist movement" that opposes Barack Obama. The Desperate Housewives star became just the latest celebrity to smear Tea Partiers.
Longoria didn't directly identify the group as the target of her anger. However, she made her point clear, fuming, "...[Obama] keeps getting beat up lately because there's such an extremist movement happening and it's a very dangerous."
Discussing the possibility of Chris Christie entering the presidential race on Wednesday's NBC "Today," Tom Brokaw praised the New Jersey Govenor as a moderate: "He's not an ideologue.... he played outside the ideological lines that have been drawn in the Republican primary."
Co-host Matt Lauer said of Christie, "...a lot of conservative Republicans, while loving the fact that he's a fiscal conservative, perhaps aren't going to like his stand on some other issues..." Brokaw saw that as a positive: "The question is, who's going to run the Republican primaries? Right now, the dialogue is being dominated by the Tea Party but there are a lot of other Republicans who say, 'We've got to play outside of the Tea Party playbook and this is a guy who can do that.'"
It wouldn't be an awards show in Hollywood if there weren't the typical cheap shots against conservatives and the 63rd Emmy Primetime Awards host Jane Lynch didn't disappoint as she mocked the Tea Party as anti-Latina. The star of the Fox hit show "Glee," during that network’s broadcast of the Emmys on Sunday, joked that her "daughter had a tea party with her little friends" where "they complained about taxes, called Obama a communist and wondered how the Latina kid got in?"
Later on in the broadcast, Lynch also went on to name check MSNBC's ultra liberal host Rachel Maddow when she listed her "gay agenda."
David Lewis is running for Congress as a Republican in Ohio's Eighth Congressional District for the seat House Speaker John Boehner currently holds. To be kind, Lewis doesn't stand a chance. To be not as kind, the establishment press is using Lewis's candidacy as an excuse to attempt to cast doubt on the ability of Tea Party activists and the GOP establishment to get along. To be clear, there's plenty of reason for the existence of such doubts, but David Lewis's candidacy is certainly not one of them.
To the chagrin of the GOP establishment, I'm a fan of serious primary efforts, especially against incumbents who may have lost their way. But Lewis's effort is not serious. It is fundamentally flawed in its premise and completely miscasts Boehner's current prolife record. It also has given the press an opportunity to distort the priorities of the Tea Party movement.
In a completely out-of-left-field smear posted on CNN.com, James Carville called the GOP presidential field "mortality-fascinated" and ripped the entire Tea Party as a bunch of bloodthirsty sadists.
The outspoken Democratic strategist, addressing Obama in a letter, wrote "This may be news to you but this is not going well. For precedent, see Russian Army 64th division at Stalingrad. There were enough deaths at Stalingrad to make the entire tea party collectively orgasm."
CNN's political analyst David Gergen remarked Monday that many Americans were "horrified" at what they heard from the Republican presidential debate, co-sponsored by the Tea Party Express and CNN. "I was getting notes about they ought to keep this people locked up and not let them out. Don't let them do anything to the country," Gergen remarked.
Gergen's comments came in the post-debate analysis and during the 10 p.m. EDT hour of Anderson Cooper 360. He mentioned that Tea Partiers "loved the debate" and pitted them in contrast with the many on Twitter who expressed their disgust with the debate.
In the last few weeks, leading Democrats in Congress have called Tea Party constituents terrorists, said they should go to hell and accused them of wanting to lynch black people. Last weekend, at an event attended by President Obama, the head of the Teamsters Union, Jimmy Hoffa Jr., attacked the Tea Party, screaming, "President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. Let's take these son of bitches (Tea Party members) out and give America back to an America where we belong." (Note: the president was not on the platform when Hoffa spoke.)
So far, neither the president, nor any prominent Democrat has condemned such remarks — even though the phrase "take out" is commonly used to describe an act of criminal homicide. Thus, Hoffa's statement might rise to the level of incitement to violence.
That civility thing which Democrats and the Left thought to be all-important earlier this year is sooooo January. Unless it changes its stripes overnight, the incivility and hostility on display today in Detroit, which hasn't been seen much in establishment press reports to this point, won't appear on the Big 3 Networks' morning shows tomorrow. The American people really need to see what has become of the labor movement, and the type of behavior its head cheerleader in the White House condones.
On Wednesday (at NewsBusters; at BizzyBlog), quoting Indiana Congressman Andre Carson's inexcusable, hateful comment at a Congressional Black Caucus event on August 22 (key sentence: "Some of them in Congress right now of this Tea Party would love to see you and me ... hanging on a tree"), I observed that "Carson was obviously accusing some of his congressional colleagues, whom he gutlessly would not name, of actually wanting (not metaphorically wishing) to see himself and his black colleagues lynched." I should also note that in an earlier segment of the quote originally cited by Matthew Balan at NewsBusters, Carson said, of Tea Party sympathizers wishes, "And this is beyond symbolic change." This is why I also wrote that "The meaning of the words Carson used is not arguable."
With a disregard for the truth and gutlessness similar to Carson's, Indianapolis Star columnist Erika D. Smith wrote today that the congressman "had the guts to stand up and say what we've all seen over the last three years," while also asserting that "I really don't care" if any congressmen actually want to lynch anyone. Here's more; brace yourself (bolds and numbered tags are mine):