MSM Versus the Tea Parties

Excerpts from Mona Charen’s column “CNN Versus the Tea Parties” with my comments below the star line.

Cheren writes - - -

… Susan Roesgen, who "covered" the Chicago tea party for CNN, was downright confrontational with attendees she interviewed, challenging a protestor who referenced Abraham Lincoln with "What does this have to do with taxes?"

The man attempted to explain. But the reporter interrupted him. "Did you know that you are eligible for a $400 rebate? Did you know that your state, the state of Lincoln, gets $50 billion out of the stimulus? That's $50 billion for your state."

She then tossed back to the anchor noting that "This is really not family viewing."

What Ms. Roesgen and others like her do not understand is that some people are interested in more than their own narrow self-interest.

Perhaps the protestor she interviewed, who was holding his 2-year-old son, is eligible for a tax rebate. And perhaps his state will get a juicy piece of the stimulus money. It is possible, just possible, that such a bribe does not influence him.

Perhaps it doesn't buy his support because he is skeptical that his taxes can remain low when the federal government is embarked on a record-shattering spending spree. He may be offended by the bailout culture, and worried that the obligations of taxpayers cannot remain low when it seems that every irresponsible borrower, failed car company, and free spending state is being rescued by the federal government.

Additionally, he may be dubious that the government will spend the money wisely. It has been rumored that government spending has produced waste, fraud, inefficiency, and corruption.

But he also may simply believe that engorging the government and enfeebling the private sector -- no matter who is writing the checks -- is not good for the economic or spiritual health of the country.

Charen’s entire column’s here and well worth reading if you haven’t done that already.

**************************************

My comments:

On Arp. 15 I was using a computer in a library in a small rural town to get some Net work done. Over the course of about twenty minutes a dozen or so people came in and greeted one another. They were meeting to car pool and caravan to a tea party in a nearby city.

They were chatty as they waited for other folks so, as you’d expect, the librarian, who knew them all, gave them a few friendly “ssshs.” On their own accord and with smiles to the librarian, they moved outside to wait for their fellow protesters.

I decided that was a good time to stretch and get some fresh air while asking the people why they were protesting. So I went outside and told them I'd like to hear why they were protesting. They were happy to explain.

The reasons that group of protesters gave match up with the reasons Charen suggests in her column. Their reasons also match up with what other people I know who attended tea parties say motivated them.

Yet most of the MSM tea party coverage I’ve read and heard described the protesters in snarky or worse terms as “Republicans” or “conservatives” opposed to President Obama.

Reading both left and right oriented blogs this past week helped confirm my believe most of MSM got the tea party story wrong.

The way most news orgs reported the tea parties (or in many cases underreported them) told us more about news orgs’ liberal and leftist biases then it did the protesters and what motivated them to go to the parties.

Whatever motivated them, protesters at the library and others I know who want to tea parties are people who bring to mind the phrase "salt of the earth."


Hat tip: RealClearPolitics.com