Teabaggers Don't Actually Care About Health Policy, and Here's the Proof

via AlterNet's PEEK:



Teabaggers Don't Actually Care About Health Policy, and Here's the Proof

Posted by Chris Bowers, Open Left at 6:45 AM on January 6, 2010.

On Jan. 10, the far-right group will boycott companies who "employ individuals backing the leftist agenda every major city."




In the post below this one, I asked if teabaggers (and some lefties) would work to support Scott Brown in the Massachusetts Senate campaign. This is because Brown's unlikely, though not impossible, victory in the January 19th special election is pretty much the only chance left to defeat the health care reform bill.

So, what action are the teabaggers planning for that week? Why, a completely unrelated, entirely symbolic, national strike to protest President Obama's one-year anniversary in office. From The Hill:



That's very cute. From the "official" statement:



Yeah--demonstrate your power to stop socialism by completing ignoring the one chance you actually have to stop what you consider the biggest instance of socialism in the "Democratic-Socialist" agenda. Opt instead for a type of action that will have no impact except to identify yourself as someone who hates Obama:



Who cares about effectiveness? This isn't about effectiveness-this is about identifying yourself as someone who hates Obama! ..........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/144975/teabaggers_don%27t_actually_care_about_health_policy%2C_and_here%27s_the_proof/

Notice that they don't exactly tell you how they're going to do that? They're hoping that you will assume that means they're planning to bring America to its knees for one day so that when they fail spectacularly, we won't take them seriously.

We're not the target audience.

The popular media, however, won't be able to restrain themselves. They will offer full, uncritical coverage of every assemblage of three or more of these kooks, giving them free rein to spout their nonsense, and offering supportive commentary that makes their numbers or the message seem larger and more serious than it is.

They will succeed and be effective. Mostly because they will say so on their own behalf. But they will also be buttressed by fawning media coverage.

I guess this again shows, to be a conservative you have to have an ego as big as the universe. To think THEY MATTER. To think THEIR wants should be followed. At least we won't have dumb a**es roaming around the streets with stupid mis-spelled signs. We won't have people promoting hate and violence. I am so sick of the tea bags, using a name they stole from real patriots that I could puke. But it's just like em to screw stuff up, that seems to be all they are good for. I think, I am going to save up all the things I want to buy and do so on January 20th and make sure I go to the store, the gas station and online and spend away.

Back in 2002 and 2003 when just the weensiest bit of skepticism from the popular media might have made some difference, respectful coverage from the media of the anti-war side of things would have helped immensely. Instead, the only coverage we seemed to get was bickering about whether it was 100,000 or 125,000 people marching in the streets (answer: A hell of lot either way, particularly compared to the anemic tea bag turnout), and "visuals" of the ubiquitous guy in the rainbow fright wig or the kids in their Lil Anarchist uniforms. Damned little coverage was given to organizers and spokespeople who had cogent, coherent arguments to make.

I am still angry as hell that no one in the mainstream media has actually connected the dots and pointed out that the anti war protests preceeding the Iraq invasion and the turn out for the inaugeration of Obama completely swamped the idiotic astro turf tea party nutjobs.

Will they be taking a day off from work or just from consumption?

What a bunch of little toadies.