From the Sketchbook: Tea Party Catharsis

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


Denver, Colorado—Just a quick sketch: Andrew Breitbart is midway through his keynote address at the Colorado 9/12 rally (on 9/13) when he’s interruped, loudly, by a middle-aged black man in an orange Broncos hat and a Hawaiian shirt, with a fundamental disagreement: “You Tea Partiers are racist!”

“Go back and watch television and they’ll affirm your worldview,” says Breitbart.

Breitbart continues his remarks (about ACORN—maybe you’ve heard of it?) but the focus shifts away from him for a few moments as the dissenter keeps up his charge. He’s quickly encircled, but shows no sign of relenting. “You white people out here are splittin’ the country up with your hateful views!” Now he’s surrounded, by video cameras looking to capture this moment for posterity, and a dozens faces flush with vindication. This is what we’re up against; this is what the media never show you; this is the real racist.

To his right, a man and two women are holding hands tightly and bowing their heads; they’re praying, out loud, for his soul. A Tea Partier wants to know: “Did your mother teach you to talk like that?” Answer: “Did your mother teach you to be so goddam stupid?” The situation is not defused. Finally, he unleashes a furious: “Why don’t you all go down to Mississippi and burn some goddam crosses,” and makes his exit. Throughout all of this, a woman is standing just a few feet away from the spectacle, pleading with the crowd not to encourage him. “Don’t give him an audience! Don’t give him an audience!”

It was a good bit of advice, but also kind of fruitless, considering the audience: Spend more than 10 minutes at a Tea Party rally and you’ll find that one of the galvanizing themes, from the slogans (“We surround them”), on down to the speeches (the real bigots are liberals who suggest that Tea Partiers maybe, sometimes, have darker motives) is a constant affirmation of the right-wing worldview. There’s an us-against-the-world paranoia there, that ends up casting seemingly harmless figures (Cass Sunstein?) and organizations (ACORN) as certifiable Bond villains* bent on sucking all the happiness and freedom out of the land like so many dementors. And don’t even get them started on the light bulbs. If you’re an activist who sees a threat to the Republic on every corner, you ignore the crazy counter-demonstrator at your own peril.

So I guess it’s more than a little jarring to return from a few weeks in the wilds (note to Verizon guy: I couldn’t hear you for, like, a 2,000-mile stretch of Utah) only to discover that the number-one story in America is a senate candidate from Delaware who’s going to lose in November by double-digits, but—but—used to dabble in witchcraft back in the ’80s. That’s not to say Christine O’Donnell doesn’t matter, but the odds of her ever having a tangible impact on public policy are pretty slim, so maybe someone, somewhere, might be more deserving of our attention. It’s nice to have affirmation that the other side really has gone around the bend—and Lord knows you could build a pretty good case. Sometimes, though, a nut shouting incoherently on the steps is really just that.

*ACORN is SPECTRE in this analogy.

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate