So I clicked on this
from BlogNetNews and noticed the hullabaloo over CNN yanking their copyrighted content from YouTube. It appears as if some folks are taking this as a bit of cover for the reporter’s clear bias against the “Tea Party” protests last week.
Fair enough. Given some of the vitriol and invective that many bloggers with original content would spew (and rightly) at MSM reporters who steal their breaking stories or content, I can’t blame CNN for wanting to protect their intellectual property one bit.
What kills me is this — a blogger on site was able to get some of the aftermath of CNN’s reporting and some of the questions hurled… this is worth four minutes of your life to watch:
Now you tell me whether this reporter was harassed or not? You tell me whether this is precisely the sort of vitriol we rejected in 2003 during the liberation of Iraq?
I’m not entirely opposed to the idea of “tea parties” to protest what most would accurately view as the mortgaging of our future. $50 billion dollars in stimulus for Illinois is little more than the federal government whipping out the credit card and cranking up the printers at the Federal Reserve.
It’s money from thin air, collateral against our children’s future. OK — be angry about that.
But the way it is taken out on this reporter… this doesn’t help the cause of limited government, does it?
If this represents the mood, approach, and tenor of the liberty movement, count me out. Doug Mataconis over at Below the Beltway has splendidly criticized the movement to describe not only what precisely they are for, but the outright hypocrisy of not opposing the massive expansion of government under President George W. Bush over the last eight years.
Where were the tea parties for Medicare expansion? The Ag Bill? When federal spending on education increased by over 50%? When property taxes in localities in Virginia skyrocketed year after year?
Not only is the false vigilance disturbing, but the approach and tenor kills me. For instance, get to about 2:00:
Woman: [Shouts] “Burn the books!” [applause]
Man: “I don’t think you were serious about that, were you?”
Woman: “I am too.”
Man: “Burn all the books?!”
Woman: “The ones in college, those, those brainwashing books.”Man: “[laughs] Brainwashing books?”
Woman: “Yes.”Man: “Which ones are those?”
Woman: “Like, the evolution crap, and, yeah…”
Burn the books? C’mon… what kind of false intellectualism is that? Not to mention this whole “this is a non-partisan movement” meme that has now infiltrated the movement. Really? All this energy, and you want to change NOTHING?!?
Gimme a break.
Today’s Free Lance-Star published a letter to the editor that, while from the opposing side of the political spectrum, fairly encapsulates the open criticism one should hear about a tea party high on saccharine but low on content:
Let’s remember, it was Bush who created a huge deficit with the war in Iraq and money policies designed to aid those who have ruined the economy, like the subsidies for companies that sent jobs overseas.
Why would working people complain about a tax cut they are receiving? Or about rebuilding American infrastructure and schools?
The tea party is fomented by whom? By those who cannot read history and learn the truth but are blinded by an ideology never followed?
Blinded by an ideology never followed. Couldn’t have said it better myself.
In the meantime, until activists get serious not just about reducing and limiting the power and size of their government, but find a manner in which to share their ideals and principles without swearing at reporters (no matter what their bias), the wilderness is precisely what they deserve. I’m quite certain we’ll see some oscillation — a brief victory here and there from time to time — but the steady march of socialism will remain quite unimpeded until they discover the backbone to do more than protest.
I found it truly hilarious to hear folks on medicaid and social security criticizing government programs… bit of myopia there.
I was wondering what you were doing in the post-Musgrave era!
Shaun, I totally disagree. The arrogance is the reporter’s. The “reporter” picked out people who would go off, she rudely confronted them and antagonized them, and when they responded in kind, threw a “see what these people are like” attitude. And the last lady called her on it.
I never remember seeing a CNN reporter antagonize a SINGLE protester at some Iraq War protest.
I think if anyone wants to give the media their two cents, they should. The greatest day in American history is when television viewing became so segmented that the left can’t control information anymore.
Brian — keep in mind that the post-interview types who challenged her on the quality of the reporting were not exactly charitable (if that’s the best word).
Shaun,
A couple of things. First, you are pretty broad-brushed on some of the kook reactions you get in these meetings. I would say that 95% of the people involved in this are not espousing some of the more extreme views like “burning books” or “brainwashing devices”. That’s not to say that I don’t have some serious problems with the bias I see in our educational institutions, but I’m not one for burning books or seeing conspiracies everywhere. You’re going to get your share of this though anytime you get more than 100 people in a room. YouTube just allows this to be magnified.
I will agree that it’s frustrating that this was not going on under the spending sprees under Bush. However it takes time for people to reach their boiling point and I think the double or quadrupling-down actions on spending of the Obama administration and Congress has brought about this tipping point.
Finally, the treatment of the reporter. Notice the reporter is very arrogant during the interview and once the camera is off she becomes more defensive and “reasoned” in her approach. I for one think the crowd was fairly mild considering the way she tried to sand-bag them all. I heard the first gentleman on a radio show after this situation ended. He had some very reasonable things to say. Unfortunately in her effort to spin this event the way she wanted, the CNN reporter never let this man get to his point. That would have angered me tremendously. Consider this, had a Fox reporter engaged an anti-war, anarchist, or pro gay marriage rally similarly to the way this reporter treated these “Tea Party” activists, what do you think the result would have been? I suspect the reporter would have been lucky to get out alive.
RtWng — You are correct; I am using a broad brush. Nonetheless, while the vast majority of the participants are great Americans, the unwillingness of the leaders of this movement to become either political or “partisan” (and I don’t care what party, just get involved!) leave the soapbox to the lunatic fringe… and CNN is putting microphones in their face while we fiddle our fingers. This movement MUST become political IMO or all this effort and expression is for naught.
RtWng — And by correct, I mean totally right — your corrections are spot-on and I agree entirely.
Pingback: The Tea Parties: What Next? « On the Western Banks of the Shenandoah