Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Tom Tancredo and the right-wing mind

Tom Tancredo used to be my congressman. The large geographic swath outside of Denver that he represented included ranchers and suburban families. And though once upon a time Tancredo had a wider array of issue interests, his brain gradually was taken over by rage against immigrants.

In our moderate, land-locked state, my Republican neighbors would sometimes express puzzlement over Tancredo’s obsession. He came to sound more like a deranged border-patrolling Minuteman than a Colorado congressman.

On Thursday, Tancredo delivered the opening remarks at the national Tea Party convention, and, as I watched the clips, I was struck by two things.

First, it was oddly gratifying to see Tancredo take the next step in a long personal journey toward Crazy Land.

Second, it was interesting to see how the far right relates to “the common man.”

You see, the popular conservative meme right now is that Democrats are arrogant and condescending and think that voters are stupid. Charles Krauthammer expressed this sentiment in a column on Friday, claiming that Democrats believe, “The dim, led by the malicious, vote incorrectly.” Gerald Alexander pushes this narrative in an Outlook essay subtly headlined: “Why are liberals so condescending?

Given Democrats’ condescension, I wanted to see how a real American conservative would relate to the average voter. How would the far right express its deep belief in the power of the people?

Here is Tancredo’s opening: First, we should have a “civics literacy test” before people are allowed to vote. Second, “People who could not even spell the word vote or say it in English put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House whose name is Barack Hussein Obama.” Convention organizer Judson Phillips helpfully explained that "Tancredo doesn't feel like a lot of people who supported Barack Obama understand the basics of this country."

Oops. And this on the heels of a couple of polls showing that a surprisingly large chunk of Republicans believe that ACORN stole the 2008 election.

You know what I think? The right wing doesn’t trust the people! It believes that the dim, led by the malicious, vote incorrectly!

Actually, this mainly reinforces my firm belief about ideologues and American politics: If you travel far enough to the right, you are sure to meet the far left on the other side of the circle.

By Kevin Huffman  | February 6, 2010; 11:46 AM ET
Categories:  Huffman  | Tags:  Kevin Huffman  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: When will Washington listen to Ed Rendell?
Next: They said it


Too bad many WAPO readers missed this article. It would have been good to see in the opinion section right up under Krauthammer's post on Friday.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | February 6, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

We have some seriously demented folks in visible places that hate half of all Americans. Some are on the radio, some are in public office, some are just in the limelight..

How did Americans allow this to happen?

Posted by: dutchess2 | February 6, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

dutchess2, that is exactly the problem. We have some serious psychopatholgy in high places.

When did we start excusing profound personality disorders as normal enough that we elect these pretty obvious defectives governor or to Congress?
Is it because politics has become the quickest way to celebrity for those with borderline IQ and excessive desire for fame?

I have seen clips of American Idol where these deluded, talentless people make fools of themselves to try to become famous. We seem to elect people like this all the time.

Is it the dumbing down of education? Are basic psycholgy courses no longer required in high schools and colleges?

To get really partisan, the majority of the Republican party, all of it the South, is mentally ill. The compulsivity of the rigidity screams it. And, they have been able to persuade a goodly portion of the populace that never compromising is the way to go.

The Tea Party people want a civics test before you can vote. What's going to happen if their supporters get taught that this country came into being because the Founding Fathers were able to compromise? They have turned that most basic of democratic ideas - working together to come to a solution that everyone can live with, if not jump up and down about - into an obscenity.

Posted by: edismae | February 6, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Observation of the Tea Party Convention shows that the movement will die soon. The participants are mostly seniors that are already trying to hide their assets so they can collect government welfare for their nursing home expenses. The Tea Party is the bleating of the old, ugly, and dying America. It offers no hope and no future

Posted by: fare777 | February 6, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

A wing-nut's a wing-nut for all that.

Posted by: ThoughtfulTed | February 6, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Tancredo reveals his own ignorance about civics by even suggesting some kind of "test" for a person to be able to vote. The Supreme Court has found such a test, along with poll-taxes, to be unconstitutional.

If he doesn't know this, he is truly among the untutored. If he knows this and continues making such statements, he is a panderer.

And, yes Kevin, those on the extremes of the political spectrum -- the right and the left wings -- are holding hands, moving toward anarchy. That is where radical ideology will lead us.

Posted by: goodgovernment | February 6, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Nice piece. It's interesting how there ARE conservative memes. One often sees them ripple through the comment boards on news sites like WaPo, like some sort of un-fun football stadium wave.

How do these things get around? Does Glenn splice split-second subliminal images into his show? Does Rush play them at a frequency we thought only dogs could hear?

Lately, I've noticed that "Dims" seems to be a slur for "Dems", which was itself derived from the slur "Democrat" used as an adjective. Eventually, even the MSM pick up these slurs; now, it's quite normal to hear serious news outlets refer to the "Dems" or "Dem Party".

Posted by: Itzajob | February 6, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

I saw him say that hideous satement. In an effort to be open-minded, I actually watched the Tea Party Convention on CSPAN for several hours today. Once I got past the lack of diversity of the crown, I actually listened to every word.

The bottom line is these people are not sure where to direct their anger, but they know they don't like the Black President.

Posted by: Julescator | February 6, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Tom Tancredo's four grandparents were all immigrants from Italy. Does he have a clue about the extreme discrimination which faced Italians when they came to this country in the 18th and 19th centuries? Does he know that they were the second most likely ethnic group to be lynched?
For the grandson of immigrants to lead an anti-multicultural movement is hypocrisy of the highest order. His ancestors would be ashamed of him.

Posted by: yetanotherpassword | February 6, 2010 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Scary that this guy was elected to any office.

Does the US really want to return to being a totally racist, bigoted country where only those of EUropean origin are considered "Human".

No wonder the civilized world is passing us by.
Are any of you PROUD to be associated with narrow-minded bigots.

Posted by: kare1 | February 6, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Actually elite liberals and elite conservatives are two sides of the same coin. (And our political "debate" is mainly a demented fight between them). Both hold exactly the same view of "average" Americans (they, themselves, of course, are far above average) as dim-witted and easily manipulated. The difference between the two sides is this; conservatives believe in exploiting the ignorance of the masses, while liberals believe the ignorant masses need to be re-educated.

Posted by: mschumacher1 | February 6, 2010 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Huffman's commentary and the 2 op-ed pieces regarding the arrogance of liberals should be read carefully because we will soon be bombarded with similar examples of projection by Fox 'News' and the usual conservative blogsters. The cynical faux populism of the GOP is nauseating. The Republican Party has made a calculated decision not to engage in co-governing with the Democrats. Instead, they obstruct almost all bills and appointments while pretending to be concerned with deficits after recklessly generating a major portion of same thru 8 years of Bush mismanagement. It will take a lot more than tea parties and bubbleheads like Palin to resurrect the GOP. No one should blindly adhere to either party or any one officeholder, but lately the GOP has offered very little of substance.

Posted by: wilsonjmichael | February 6, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

"The difference between the two sides is this; conservatives believe in exploiting the ignorance of the masses, while liberals believe the ignorant masses need to be re-educated."

You cannot "re-educate" the ignorant, because ignorance by definition means uneducated, that they were never educated in the first place.

Posted by: paulflorez | February 6, 2010 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Illegal immigrants are still "illegal" but you dems can rest assure that Pelosi and Reid are working on a Green Card Bill for all 20 million and their entire families.
So soon they will NOT be illegal anymore!
But we will have 20 million plus in the cheap labor pool. Thanks Dems

Posted by: usmc1969 | February 6, 2010 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin----> Merchant of hate with an ooh gosh smile...

Posted by: ODDOWL | February 6, 2010 10:11 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin ----> Il Duce in drag...

Posted by: ODDOWL | February 6, 2010 10:14 PM | Report abuse

I'm a white, conservative Republican. I think both political parties have failed us. The Democrats are not the saviors you believe them to be. Nor are the Republicans the devil you believe them to be. There is plenty of blame to go around. No one group has all the answers. What troubles me is that we can't talk about serious issues without having to trash people who disagree with us.

We are a country in decline. From our inner cities, our infrastructure, our outsourcing of jobs, our deficit and lack of clear consensus on how to go forward. The solution currently being displayed is to bash anyone who is in disagreement. I always thought we were supposed to put our ideas in the market place and sift through them to find a solution we all could live with, even if it wasn't everything we wanted.

Blame the right-wing conservatives if you must, but look in the mirror and make sure you are pure beforehand.

Posted by: rs824407 | February 6, 2010 10:42 PM | Report abuse

The teabagger convention should be used as a teaching tool for every talking head on T.V. and in every college classroom. Tom Tancredo was absolutely off his rocker and his meds. He is the lunatic my mother warned me about. Then came Palin. Notice her big hair? She knows the south. Revolution? She wants another revolution? HShe and her husband should move to Texas and they can all secede from the union. Where are the real republicans? You know, the ones with brains. Tom and Sarah ought to scare every American watching.

Posted by: mombo44200 | February 7, 2010 12:02 AM | Report abuse

Well, I can see why people think liberals are condescending...I guess its because we have the ideas and the intelligence to think up great ideas. We are humanists who believe that people are basically good and want to be good and are willing to help them. We think the government is a helpful entity and while it does get bogged down in bureaucracy, for the most part, America does a good job helping people. We don't believe in corporations but in people. We don't think in the terms of America only, but in people first. We don't fear monger, we tell the truth. So yes, I'm proud to be a bleeding heart liberal and I'm proud to acknowledge my enlightened, intelligent place in the world.

Posted by: myersdonihoo | February 7, 2010 12:28 AM | Report abuse

The thinkers on the GOP side are few and far between, instead getting elected by preying on people's prejudice. I generally pay close attention to anything a Lugar, Snowe or Powell has to say, while expecting the Tancredos, Inhofes types to prey on prejudice (illegals, gays) and am rarely wrong. Both parties are filled with millionaires whom have their "blind trusts" average a return of 20%. A larger bone is thrown to the poor and middle class by the Democrats, but they still are a party of the connected (Pelosi Guam min. wage waiver to help her husband's business as an example). With few exceptions, I say throw the 2 term incumbents out regardless of party and start with new blood.

Posted by: jameschirico | February 7, 2010 1:18 AM | Report abuse

Sounds liker the tea baggers want to go back to the good old days when the only people who got to vote were white land owners.
How nice.

Posted by: jeffc6578 | February 7, 2010 1:41 AM | Report abuse

"Well, I can see why people think liberals are condescending...I guess its because we have the ideas and the intelligence to think up great ideas."

Yeah, the stimulus, trial for KSM in lower Manhattan, the Democratic House & Senate's health care "reform", Cap & Trade, the Martha Coakley debacle, the pending Scott Lee Cohen debacle...

Your brillance is dazzling.

Posted by: Bjartur | February 7, 2010 1:48 AM | Report abuse

you notice that this thread is open for comments for all the right wing crazies (yes, it isn't condescending if it's the truth - conservatives can't be bothered to be civil and polite, so why should liberals?) - yet the thread for comments on the "liberals are condescending" article has been closed all day.

Typical Washington Post.

Posted by: hohandy1 | February 7, 2010 2:01 AM | Report abuse

Well, so what? Half of the country regards the other half as dimwits and dupes? And the other half thinks the same of that half. That's not too bad for a country in which everyone above the age of five has mastered a vocabulary that excludes 99% of the human race.

Posted by: morphex | February 7, 2010 2:59 AM | Report abuse

The majority of Americans disapprove of Obama. He hit his record low in the polls today.

Obama describes Americans as "bitter people who cling to guns and religion."

Tancredo dislikes immigrants, but Obama dislikes Americans.

Posted by: pkhenry | February 7, 2010 3:16 AM | Report abuse

Obama to Seek Up to $4 Billion Boost for Education, Get your share Get a Medical Assistant Degree from

Posted by: mathewthomas07 | February 7, 2010 3:34 AM | Report abuse

I've often said, too, that the wingnut left and the wingnut right more or less come full circle and meet one another, and except for disagreement on a few issues like abortion and maybe guns, they do.

Honestly, though, I am surprised that the Tea Party invited Tancredo to speak. Even a lot of conservatives try to distance themselves from him because his rhetoric on immigration is so caustic and, in many cases, so removed from reality.

If the Tea Party wants to legitimize itself as a movement and wants to have significance in American politics beyond the 2012 elections, they need to watch more closely the company they keep because Tancredo will earn them little credit in mainstream America, and even among a lot of conservatives.

Posted by: blert | February 7, 2010 3:45 AM | Report abuse

Hooray for fighting dumb with dumb.

Posted by: charlesbakerharris | February 7, 2010 4:33 AM | Report abuse

If you travel far enough to the right you meet "the left"?

What in the world is that supposed to mean?

That Krauthammer and the other pundits on the extreme right are correct, that progressive or leftist voters think Americans are illiterate immigrants who don't know how to vote?

The critique of the dangerous, insane rantings of the extreme right wing that's taken over the thinking of so many Republicans like Tancredo is a welcome warning.

The knee-jerk "fair and balanced" pandering in claiming that "the left" is somehow the same as these extremists is simply arrogant nonsense. There may be a "left" so extreme that it matches our right wingers for insanity but believe me, we have almost none of it being practiced in this country.

Case in point: Favoring a public option for health care is a far left, fringe position, right?

Wrong. 70% of voters polled said that they were in favor of a public option.

Somehow in our national discourse, this became a "far left" position however.

What you've done here is dismiss the claims of the extreme right while also accepting their premise. This isn't neccessary. You can simply call them crazy, without the bending over backwards to be fair and balanced and slam "the left" as equally insane.

Posted by: BillEPilgrim | February 7, 2010 5:20 AM | Report abuse

"Well, I can see why people think liberals are condescending...I guess its because we have the ideas and the intelligence to think up great ideas."

Yeah, the stimulus, trial for KSM in lower Manhattan, the Democratic House & Senate's health care "reform", Cap & Trade, the Martha Coakley debacle, the pending Scott Lee Cohen debacle...

Your brillance is dazzling.

Posted by: Bjartur
The invasion of Iraq. I win!

Posted by: ginabw | February 7, 2010 5:23 AM | Report abuse

Where is the logical fault in Mr. Huffman’s argument?

Krauthammer and Alexander said A.
Tancredo said non-A.
Therefore: They are all wrong.

a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter

It is certainly logically possible for Krauthammer, Alexander and Tancredo to express contradicting opinions without making all three of them wrong.

A sly method to avoid a meaningful reply to Krauthammer and Alexander.

Also disrespect to the reader’s intelligence.

Posted by: nahumkorda | February 7, 2010 6:27 AM | Report abuse

One of the notions that the Republicans pushed under Newt Gingrich's Contract with American was Term Limits. At it's basic corps value Term Limits is meaningful only if you believe that the electorate is too stupid to vote properly. You have to believe the electorate can't see through the advantages that an incumbent might have and will vote for the incumbent because their stupid.

Here's Paul Barrett founder of the American Tea Party who says 99% of the American public is ignorant of the Fed and if we abolished the Fed we would no longer need to pay Federal income tax.

From the debate between George Bush and Al Gore:

Gore: "Under the governor's plan, if you kept the same fee for service that you have now under Medicare, your premiums would go up by between 18% and 47%, and that is the study of the Congressional plan that he's modelled his proposal on by the Medicare actuaries."

Bush: "Look, this is a man who has great numbers. He talks about numbers.

"I'm beginning to think not only did he invent the internet, but he invented the calculator. It's fuzzy math. It's trying to scare people in the voting booth."


Is there any substance in the response from Bush. It's an ad hominem argument. Actually, is worse than an ad hominem argument. In an ad hominem argument he would have used an irrelevant fact. Bush uses false claims.

Frankly, I have a difficult time accepting that Bush's reply can be construed as anything but an expectation that the electorate is too stupid to recognize Bush's argument for what it is. Nonsense.

BTW. Gore NEVER claimed he invented the internet. Dick Armey changed the words of a poorly made statement by Gore to say he invented the internet and faxed it to all the news organizations who dutifully reported it as fact.

Posted by: James10 | February 7, 2010 7:43 AM | Report abuse

I am a right wing person. Let's go ahead and legalize the 20 million illegal aliens. Lincoln enslaved the blacks with the Emancipaion Proclamation. Obama could do it again. he could be world famous as much as Lincoln was. Absolutely, let's enslave them too in this tax, tax, tax time. I am 60 years old and need them to pay into the ponzi scheme we call social security. When me and the rest of the boomers die off then you can find another groupt to enslave. By the way, I love Sarah Palin and have read her book. She can never be president because she is a wonderful caring person. This is not one of the presidential qualities of the job. Obama's a one term guy and let's see who jumps to the front and continues to be for "us people". My solution is to vote out all incumbents and try it again.
God Bless America and our Troops.

Posted by: tommywestmoreland1761 | February 7, 2010 7:45 AM | Report abuse

Gridlock is sooooooo gooood!!!!!!
Sometimes doing nothing by either party is better for us all.......

Posted by: tommywestmoreland1761 | February 7, 2010 7:47 AM | Report abuse

When we have the amnesty, the day should forever be known as "Amesty Day." We can add Cinco De Mayo and Amnesty Day to our calendar as national holidays. In fact, we should have an amnesty every year on "Amnesty Day."

Posted by: hipshot | February 7, 2010 7:51 AM | Report abuse

Tom Tancredo took on an issue that few would touch. We needed to get control of our borders but few in Washington would stand up and speak out on an issue that would immediately subject them to accusations of bigotry and racism. It was an incredibly brave thing to do. Thanks, Tom.

Posted by: hipshot | February 7, 2010 7:57 AM | Report abuse

It might have been helpful to mention some facts also. When comparing our ideological position on policy with any other country we will find that our present government comes up short on its liberal or socialistic credentials. As a matter of fact we share more policy decisions with dictatorships or repressive communist regimes then with our western counterparts, at least regarding government policy on economics and security. Culturally we are still a very liberal democracy but then our Government steps in and destroys that picture. Our Democrats are further right then most western countries conservative governments. It can be argued that many countries elect conservative governments just to be able to talk to ours and be on the same planet. It appears the rest of the world has been evolving while the US has had the Supreme court and conservatives to prevent progress. The Courts packed by federalists and conservatives have been more concerned with protecting the property rights of slave holders and the wealthy then the rights of the majority. Our respite from these ideologues starting during the sixties has now ended with the Roberts court. Soon all progressive legislation will be undermined or discarded and American citizens will once again occupy two strata. The wealthy and all of the rest who do their bidding for whatever paycheck it takes to keep them placated and promotes the agenda the powerful decide on.

Posted by: tryreason | February 7, 2010 8:06 AM | Report abuse

Why don't you attack conservatism generally, rather than focusing on a single individual. You're a disgusting leftist pig and have accomplished nothing except prove the point of Krauthammer's and Alexander's essays.

2012 cannot come soon enough.

Posted by: DCer1 | February 7, 2010 8:08 AM | Report abuse

The right wing pundits get their talking points and right on cue write their similar articles over the week. This week it is "condescending liberals". Thus we have Obama not understanding the middle class and condescending liberal articles from all the WP pundits. Next week it will be Obama is a socialist, and dutifully Krauthammer and the rest of the stenographers of the right will write various articles on the same theme. I wonder when people will start catching on that these guys don't have an original thought in their head.

Posted by: barbnc | February 7, 2010 8:12 AM | Report abuse

Hey I have a question, when Obama was being his usually narcissistic self at the Dim retreat talking about the poor woman who died of breast cancer being buried in an Obama t shirt, was that counted as a shovel ready job?

Posted by: robtr | February 7, 2010 8:15 AM | Report abuse

O.B.A.M.A.----One Big A** Mistake America!

Posted by: DCer1 | February 7, 2010 8:18 AM | Report abuse

Do not throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are loons in both parties, that no one can deny. I hope Tancredo is toast after this.

Posted by: mcsquared65 | February 7, 2010 8:18 AM | Report abuse

and Krauthammer is still right.

Posted by: mcsquared65 | February 7, 2010 8:19 AM | Report abuse

After reading these comments, the (hidden) comments from Gerald and then your liberal Palin basing, what is very evident is that not only are,you elitist and condescending you are blind to the truth.

Loved the comment that tea party folks are nothing more than dirty seniors looking to hide their money and racists for not being happy with this "black president". Yep, disagree with you are we're racist bigots who are too stupid to see the light.
Keep it up - you're doing a great job of doing yourselves in.....................

Posted by: sandynh | February 7, 2010 8:38 AM | Report abuse

My high school government teacher said one thing that has remained with me to today, in substance if no longer her exact phrasing. She explained that one might think that the political spectrum is as straight as a ruler, and that the far left is the farthest you can possibly get from the far right. On the contrary! The political spectrum is really a horseshoe, and the fringes are really closer to each other than to the middle.

...Of course, that was during a lecture on the difference between fascism and communism.

Posted by: hayesap8 | February 7, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

Dr K was, as always, right on the mark. This pathetic attempt to marginalize what he wrote proves the point.

Hope and change are coming. Liberalism is in full display and the country is rejecting it.

Posted by: manbearpig4 | February 7, 2010 9:11 AM | Report abuse

A civics test before being allowed to vote? Sure - and then Sarah Palin would be the first to flunk the test! How would the tea baggers and GOP like that?

As a long-time registered Independent, I am so tired of the screeching, squealing and ranting and raving in politics - and most of it is coming from the right. Perhaps the tea baggers have some decent ideas, but they lost this Independent when they chose Palin as speaker.

Many of us know people who have only a high school education but are more cognizant of the actual government functions than those with university degrees.

Posted by: Utahreb | February 7, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse

The fact that Mr. Huffman can't bring himself to use the word 'Illegal' in front of the word 'Immigrant' to describe Tom Tancredo's concern is telling.

Posted by: gregdn | February 7, 2010 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Other than speaking from a partisan position, I fail to see how it can be said that liberals are any more elitist or condescending than conservatives. The example of Mr. Pomposity, Rush Limbaugh, is the only counter-example needed to refute the claim that conservatives are not condescending, while the haughty Mr. Wills and Mr. Krauthammer should fill the bill as conservative elitists, besides being pretty condescending. The actions of the Republican congress in opposing any and all legislation proposed by Democrats and rebuffing all concessionary approaches would seem to be condescending, i.e., the implication is that Democrats have nothing valuable to offer—that isn’t condescending?. It is in the nature of partisans and zealots to see their opinions as the revealed truth, broaching no alternative. This obsessive feeling of being the bearers of the eternal flame of political correctness can be attributed to extremists of both the right and the left. The extreme wings of both parties are wont to apply purity tests to fellow party members, willing to allow victory to the other party rather than supporting a less than orthodox member of their own party. What makes the condescension of the right receive less criticism is that the object of their derision often is the weak, e.g., the working poor, and those living alternative lifestyles, e.g., gays, i.e. those with no voice or whose voice is scorned. Any claim of Republicans to being the party of the people has to be qualified as to what group of people they are claiming as their wards; one only has to look at photos from the recent Tea Baggers rally to answer that, i.e., white, middle class and late middle aged. The fact alone indicates that conservatives also can be elitists and condescending.

Posted by: csintala79 | February 7, 2010 9:21 AM | Report abuse

The 2010 Elections are going to be a Democratic Socialist Party blood bath, because (as you can see here: Americans are now aware of what's going on.

Posted by: CommieBlaster | February 7, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Why don't we have a vibrant and competitive CENTRIST PARTY? It's only litmus tests items for membership would be these:
1) You can't be rigidly ideological.
2) You can't be insane.

Just kidding. Well, kinda . . . Actually, maybe not . . . .

Posted by: post_reader_in_wv | February 7, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse

What a joke. Like all mindlessly partisan liberals, Huffman uses the lame tactic of holding up extremists as examples of conservatives.Tancredo is no more a spokesman for conservatives than Jeremiah Wright is a spokesman for liberals.

Huffman's "response" to the Alexander article is pathetic, citing a poll from the untrustworthy partisan hack site Daily Kos. Don't know if Huffman knows this but the 21% of Republicans from that crap poll who said that ACORN stole the election is 21%, a smaller percentage than the Democrats who think that Bush was behind 9/11. (Big shocker that a partisan hack like Huffman would cite a partisan hack site like Kos).

What a surprise that the Post's new pundit is a liberal partisan hack along the lines of Dionne, Meyerson, and Robinson. What a joke.

Of course, all you have to do is look at the comment section here to know that the Alexander article was right. Count up all of the ad-hominem attacks from liberals about how stupid and evil conservatives are and you will see the thesis is correct.

Posted by: bobmoses | February 7, 2010 9:32 AM | Report abuse

Look at the red/blue map of the US. My conclusion is that there are two Americas and they each believe they represent middle America. However, the mindsets and reflexes of each set are very different.

People living in more populated areas may really not be able to understand the level of personal responsibility and self/neighbors reliance the others live every day which, in turn, makes it difficult for them to understand why such huge government agencies etc. are even needed.

On the other hand, those living in more populous areas are so used to depending on a high level of "government" intervention in their daily lives replacing personal responsibility and self reliance almost completely (health, education, housing, work, etc, etc). .

In many parts of the country people may not even cross the path of a single policeman or government official for days or weeks. They ask themselves: why should I pay for special school programs, housing, health clinics, prisons and many other services we never use or would ask for because we deal with our problems ourselves?

I may not agree with them, but I do understand that they are for the mostpart honorable, hard working and earnest, big hearted citizens who get out their tools and help their neighbors in an emergency rather than waiting for the federal government to save and take care of them.

I believe these totally opposite views have created the tea party movement and I think that no solution will be found if the establishment refuses to understand what is really motivating such a large part of the population.

Calling them names is NOT helpful for the country.

Posted by: sally62 | February 7, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

So,I guess my belief (and that of other notorious right wing extremists such as Thomas Jefferson) that less government is better government, makes me an ignorant "ist" and a "phobe" worthy of liberal disdain. I'd like to buy Mr. Huffman and his ilk a big steaming cup of SHUT THE F$%K UP.

Posted by: carlbatey | February 7, 2010 9:42 AM | Report abuse

How about civics tests for our elected officials instead?

Posted by: scientist2 | February 7, 2010 9:51 AM | Report abuse

Have you ever noticed that the conservative right has to constantly reassure their base that they are smart.

Posted by: Frazil | February 7, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Notice how many on the left are homophobic? Why else would they use a anti-gay slur to describe those in the Tea Party movement?

Ooooh, don't worry libbies. Homosexuals aren't out to hurt you or recruit you. Let go of your hate. Let go of your hate.

Posted by: shecallsmemoe | February 7, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

You will not shake off the idea of being the condescending elite by accusing the other side of being patronizing while you're being patronizing.

All you get from me with this piece is laughter. Try harder.

Posted by: Geepers1 | February 7, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

The vitriol of the Left (whether directed at GWB, Cheney, Limbaugh, Fox, Southerners,Tea Parties, Palin, etc)is symbolic of their continuing rear-guard action. The liberal's need to find a bogeyman to pin their insecurities on simply confirms one simple fact: the social and political correction that has been underway for three decades is being won by those who stepped up to tell the Left that they were/are wrong. Their liberal philosphy has been judged and found wanting. The time to pay the piper has arrived.

Posted by: boomer131 | February 7, 2010 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Finally, some sanity from the Op Ed section. The two pieces of right-wing vitriol cited in this piece should not come to dominate that section. Post, PLEASE raise your standards! There are other, better conservative voices out there far more insightful than the idiots currently given voice.

Posted by: lloydamy | February 7, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

boomer131 - "The liberal's need to find a bogeyman to pin their insecurities on" ... blah blah blah ... and, who's your bogeyman, you knucklehead? Who are you pinning your own insecurities in your rant? The left is wrong? About what? The liberal philosophy has been found wanting? Really, enlighten me ... But, first do yourself a favor and look up the definition of "liberal".

dutchess2 asked "How did Americans allow this to happen?"

Dispensing with the generality of this question, the answer is very simple ... We, as a people, stopped educating ourselves. At some point, we determined that intellectual curiosity was not "important" and labeled the ability to reason as "elitist".

... and, we still don't understand, as a people, that the conservative party needs a stupid electorate ... because stupid people vote with their emotions and not their heads.

Educate your children.

Posted by: burtonpaul | February 7, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

This is an amazingly biased piece, focusing on one person's perspective, Tancredo, and generalizing that all Conservatives are the same. What struck me, in comparison to the piece by Gerard Alexander, was the utter lack of research and, therefore, a dearth of facts or hard evidence.

While we all have a personal bias, pro or con, on all issues, this article is poorly prepared and lacks any credibility. Shame on you, Washington Post, for printing this trash.

Posted by: joelhar1 | February 7, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Great article. Use their own words against them. Stick it to them. Short, sweet, to the point, and using only facts. If only more liberals could write like this, we might be doing better as a party AND as a country.

Posted by: apissedant | February 7, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Huffman, you don't prove someone wrong by doing exactly what you are accused of doing.

You fail to offer any opinion on the issues that Tancredo raises. Instead, you paint him with the "crazy" brush.

Most of us - on either side or in the middle - are tired of that. We want adults to discuss and debate issues. How those with the playground attitude have been allowed to take over our government and media outlets is beyond me. Tacrendo may have some valid points and others that could be refuted. Calling him crazy accomplishes nothing, except to let us know you are incapable of refuting his statements on the merits.

Grow up.

Posted by: CJKatl | February 7, 2010 11:18 AM | Report abuse

When I read the title of this (as worded on the WaPost home page) I thought it was going to be about how Quitter Palin is an elist who can spend $75,000 in six weeks on clothes, afford both a $4,000 private jet and a PROP tour bus to use for a "grassroots" book tour, and charge her own crowd $100,000 to speak at their convention. I guess I was wrong... oh well.

Posted by: mikebythesun | February 7, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Correction from my previous post: $4,000 an HOUR private jet.

Posted by: mikebythesun | February 7, 2010 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Great piece, Huffman. Seriously. Your column asking for a federal bailout for your underwater mortgage was pretty dubious, but this is intelligent stuff. Don't let the partisans tell you otherwise.

Posted by: simpleton1 | February 7, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Republicans seem to like short term goals and voters seem to listen to politicians when they say "LESS TAXES, LESS GOVERNMENT". Sure, the repubs say that, but they say that to just to get elected.

Why do the republicans in Congress vote like a herd of sheep? Because they get more money that way. When lobbyists 'pay' to be heard, if the repubs all vote together, the lobbyists HAVE to give money to all of them.

After the repubs get in, they then overpay the lobbyists companies back, -and why not--its not their money.

IF you like the short term benefits, and don't care if America goes bankrupt, then vote Republican.

"Public debt in dollars quadrupled during the Reagan and Bush presidencies from 1980 to 1992, and remained at about the same level by the end of the Clinton presidency in 2000. During the administration of President George W. Bush, the total debt increased from $5.6 trillion in January 2001 to $10.7 trillion by December 2008,[7]"

Republicans like spending YOUR money, because it helps them get re-elect--period.

The longer they stretch out the health bill, the more money they get from anti-health care advocates.

Republicans in Congress like less government---so there's no oversight on how fast they can spend YOUR money.

Posted by: genewebster | February 7, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Huffman, in the typical manner of a lying liberal weasel, begins his piece with a lie. Sissy boy huffman knows tancredo is against ILLEGAL immigration, but he intentionally misrepresents his position like a good little propagandist drone. Kevin's just a frustrated little coward who sees his socialist dreams coming to an end this november.

Posted by: kr1839 | February 7, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

People are more irrational to Tancredo than he is to others. Proof:

Posted by: BaltimoreRepublicanExaminer | February 7, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

As a radical moderate who thinks both major parties are intellectually and morally bankrupt, allow me to say...

The Huffman piece, which provides a single example of conservative condescion, is not, logically speaking, a serious rebuttal to the Alexander piece which provides a broad base of evidence to support its contention that condescension is predominantly a liberal malady.

A single counter-example can be found to any rule that isn't actually a law of physics.

Posted by: HumbleAuthor | February 7, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

"You know what I think? The right wing doesn’t trust the people! It believes that the dim, led by the malicious, vote incorrectly!"


Quote from President Obama's speech in Cairo: "I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America's story."

So, be on the lookout for Barack Obama if he ever appears on Jeopardy, because you can bet he'll run the table on the following categories:

Muslims at Plymouth Rock

Muslim Signers of the Declaration of Independence

Muslims who helped write the Constitution

Muslim Soldiers during the American Civil War

Islamic Contributions to American Democracy

Islamic-American Heroes of World War II

Islam and Women's Rights

American Muslims during the Civil Rights Movement (and please spare me the Nation of Islam nonsense)

Posted by: hofbrauhausde | February 7, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

You TeaBaggers never cease to make me chuckle. Not only is the name of your "party" freaking hilarious, your ideas are self defeating. A civics test? Go ahead TeaBaggers, have a Civics Test as a requirement for voting. Most of you wouldn't pass it anyway. You'd have to be able to read at a 5th grade level first. Also, I'm fairly certain that a large percentage of self described TeaBaggers couldn't even identify the historical metaphor from which the name of their "party" is derived. Is that condesending enough for ya? Oh, and edisme, not to get really partisan here, but I'm from the South and I might be certifiably crazy, but I damn sure ain't no Republican.

Posted by: rcupps | February 7, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Thank you to all who point out the logic fallacy of the broad data to the observable single entity. We have any number of people whose ideas are not representative of more than a few.

However, news entities continue to pursue partisan politics: republican/democrat, for explanation/vilification. It is relevant for less than half of the voters, which is decidedly less than half the population. One begins to wonder if the predominant conversation in the news is even relevant.

It is extremely sad to see that the tea parties (as a visible representation of voter disatisfaction)have been taken over by what appears to be a very extremist viewpoint, and high jacked a more fundamental issue in American politics that Americans ( the other 51%) are decidedly disgusted with either party. Disgusted with rhetoric, emotional outbursts and emotional swaying of data, as opposed to considered, thoughtful, informative debate. The 'too stupid to understand' and the 'unrighteous enough to not count' simply are unwelcome and unwarranted.

Please discontinue editorials lambasting the right and the left. The correct answer is 'does not apply', and that is where the conversation of 'where is the third party' coming from.

Posted by: CAC58 | February 7, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Liberal or Conservative,,,,40% of our Federal Budget not counting interest paid on debt, is spent on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicade. Both sides better come to together to figure out a way to control these future cost because by 2030, they will take 60% of our budget and we will not be able to sustain that.

Posted by: ddjjm | February 7, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Because for so long the Consevative White Man thought he should lead Americans. After we founded out they were 'DUMMIES" who just love the CAPITALIST of America...We decided to kick the bums out...and they can't adapt to change...none of them ever read..."Who move my cheese"



Posted by: dove369 | February 7, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

A corollary to the "Bodwin Rule". When a 'commentator' fails to use the word "illegal" in front of "immigrant", their screed is automatically worthless.

Posted by: oldno7 | February 7, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Karl Rove understood how to manipulate the masses in to voting against their best interests. Just keep repeating a lie and eventually it's the truth.

Posted by: OleLadySquawking | February 7, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Democrats should give some thought to the literacy test as a requirement for voting. That would take care of a lot of the Tea Partiers. I heard some of the most amazing misinformation from some of them. One leader said that George Bush left a deficit of 150 million and their historical imagination is astounding.

Posted by: withersb | February 7, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

"The vitriol of the Left (whether directed at Beck, Cheney, Limbaugh, Fox, Southerners, Tea Parties, Palin, etc) is symbolic of their continuing rear-guard action."

Apparently vitriol is in the eye of the beholder if the writer doesn't recognize what his so-called victims spew.

Posted by: buzzkill1 | February 7, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

If you go far enough right you will meet the left.

I remember vaguely a humanities/history/ political science (?) professor showing this by drawing a circle a listing the various political positions. Since it was near 60 years ago I can't remember the particulars. It does seem to be true and I have thought of it often.

The comment section on Alexanders piece has never been open. I suspect they feared being over whelmed by comments on that trash. Do they search out the most demented people at the American Enterprise Institute to write commentary?

Posted by: sauerkraut | February 7, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

"If you travel far enough to the right, you are sure to meet the far left on the other side of the circle." The circle with a gap concept, that opposite extremes are often much alike.

I like the concept, but today's Neo-Conservatives seem to have no ability to discern truth from lie, reality from propaganda. Worse yet they seem to accuse the Left of what the Right is and has done over the last 30 years.

The best example is the National Debt. How many Conservatives would agree that they and the Republicans are the Party of Debt? How many know that Reagan, Bush, and Bush rang up $9 trillion of America's $11 trillion Debt Pre-Obama? How many understand the 100% of the Reagan and Bush tax cuts went to debt and 100% of the cost of Bush's wars went to Debt? That the Reagan/Bush tax cuts put 100% of Americans on welfare, including every Conservative.

The Left simply points out these facts, these numbers, the truth, and Conservatives start yelling. No one from the Left is yelling today. So the propoer ending for this column describing the deranged Right is to end saying the Right is deranged. Trying to take it to the middle (again Kevin), is well, deranged.

Posted by: chucky-el | February 7, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

The Huffman piece, which provides a single example of conservative condescion, is not, logically speaking, a serious rebuttal to the Alexander piece which provides a broad base of evidence to support its contention that condescension is predominantly a liberal malady.

A single counter-example can be found to any rule that isn't actually a law of physics.

Posted by: HumbleAuthor

Apparently you failed to understand that Tancredo spoke before a well-attended Tea Party convention that bills itself as middle America.

That they would pay him so much and so many listen makes this more than an one time event.

But if you need further proof: Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Michele Malkin, Michele Bachman...

Posted by: arancia12 | February 7, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

This is a short but good read. To bad it does not have better placement against the sad fact free and hyperbole filler Gerard Alexander anti-liberal hit piece headlining the opinion section.

Posted by: rapchat1 | February 7, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Is this the guy who won the pundit contest? No matter, a far better cloumn than we usualy see from the likes of krudpounder or will.

The comment tab on the "condescending article doesn;t work, but the joke of the day is:

Liberals wonder why he is using a word that most conservatives don't understnad. -- rim shot -- I'll be here all week....

or --- drum roll --- most conservatives think condescending is something you put on a hot dog....

Certainly there are conservatives who are not mouth breeders. But just look at their what they think is a policy agenda. Just look at who leads their party -- geln boohoo beck???? sarah you betcha palin -she actually said hopey changey thingy like she is a 12 year old trying to be cute for her grandparents - which awas the bulk of the tea bagging crowd -- ayatollah "no, you're a retard" limbaugh????C'mon. If you wonder why anyone with a smidgen of educatio or even common sense thinks of conservatives as a mriobund collection of knuckle dragging trolls.....

So if pointing out that the conservatives movement has no valid ideas, at least none they have anounced publicly. If pointing out that they are deliberately condescending to the undeducated using fear and relentless repetition of bumper sticker talking points. If pointing out that conservative leaders are the most shameless hypoctritical troglodytes on earth. If those are what you count as "condescending, then fine. It just proves you do not really understand what condescending is.

Posted by: John1263 | February 7, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Actually the "civics literacy test" makes sense. That'd eliminate the lunatics who believe universal health care will bring "death panels," that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11 and that Republicans are fiscal conservatives and will support middle Americans. The only problem is that Tancredo, Palin and the FOX/right wing radio cult wouldn't pass and couldn't vote. I say we ought to go for it.

Posted by: MNUSA | February 7, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

To shecallsmemoe:

Notice how many on the left are homophobic? Why else would they use a anti-gay slur to describe those in the Tea Party movement?


Au contraire, Moe. Teabagging is not a homophobic slur -- it is a sexual position performable by both hetero and homosexuals. If you knew what position that is, you'd understand the humor found in using it to describe this "movement". That reminds me, bowels have movements too, don't they?

Don't talk with your mouth full, dear, it's not becoming.

Posted by: shavenhaircut | February 7, 2010 3:13 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: dove369 | February 7, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

You want elitism? Tune into Rush any weekday and you'll get an earful of it.

The right sells the left as elitist because it works with their own who cannot stand being thought of as just a tad bit slower than the other guy.

Sarah is the best thing for we Dems since, well, since Obama was elected. Here's hoping she gets the Repub presidential nomination. Her debates with Obama will be a riot.

Posted by: kim4 | February 7, 2010 3:42 PM | Report abuse

I hope the Chinese stop buying our debt, so conservatives can see that they have to pay as they go, and cut the foolish wars and end the tax breaks for the wealthy.

Posted by: paulnolan97 | February 7, 2010 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Sally62 -- Thank you. It's nice to see respect and a measure of humility on these boards.

Posted by: justasking3 | February 7, 2010 4:08 PM | Report abuse

If Tancredo wants people to pass in a "civics literacy test",to vote in an election, he should insist that the star of his party & potential presidential candidate, should learn enough world geography to know that Africa is a continent with many countries. The president of the US is a global figure. Being queen of the frontier state wouldn't cut. It is not enough if she claims that she can see Russia from her kitchen window or Canada from her back yard garden.
By the way, Tancredo sounds somewhat uncommon, unlike Jones or Smith. Is he secend or third generation immigrant?
We were all immigrants at some point or the other. This country is not his entitlement.

Posted by: sarvenk63 | February 7, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats are not the saviors you believe them to be. Nor are the Republicans the devil you believe them to be. There is plenty of blame to go around. through them to find a solution we all could live with, even if it wasn't everything we wanted.
Posted by: rs824407
Interesting comments but the problem with both Republicans and Democrats are that they both have agendas that have no basis in reality.

The strength of America in the 21st century is dependent upon America recapturing the world lead it had in 2000 in computer technology.

Americans will no longer enroll in the computer sciences since all of the American jobs are being sent overseas or given to foreign workers here in America. A field that should provide tens of millions of jobs for American is simply lost with neither Republicans or Democrats willing to tell American companies that you can not destroy the ability of America to survive in the 21st century.

Reality is that without the jobs of computer technology there will never be enough jobs for Americans.

Posted by: bsallamack | February 7, 2010 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Expletive removed

CBS has done the unthinkable. They have killed the ratings of a foolproof show. The SuperBowl pregame should be about football. Guess how many tv's went dead about 10 minutes ago when our President decided he had to insert himself into the lead up to the SuperBowl.

CBS - I hope you charged the WH for all the dead air he just created. OMG - can he live without being on tv every single day, every single hour. I just want to watch the Super Bowl without getting another lecture from a wannabe Constitutional Scholar. Does this guy ever, Ever, EVER SHUT the Fxxx UP!

Posted by: jhpbriton | February 7, 2010 4:51 PM | Report abuse

sarvenk63 - Absolutely agree on the civics test. This cuts out current President who cited '53', yes, that is right, '53' states in the Union during the election. The college professor who lectures everyone all the time, including during the SuperBowl pregame show (OMG), needs to learn his local geography!!!

Posted by: jhpbriton | February 7, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

A civics literary test as a requirement to vote is an interesting idea, would keep most right wingers, including some of their favorite politicians, from voting, let alone holding office. Seriously, most politicians from both parties are highly condescending to ordinary people. Bush II was and so is Obama.

There should be term limits for Senators and Representatives. Reduce terms of Senators to two years, limit of six years for both.
Have presidents limited to two terms of two years each. Frequent elections, with term limits, is the only way to reduce arrogance of politicians.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | February 7, 2010 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Excellent column. I have been saying for years that the far left partisans think the far right partisans are evil and should be ignored, and the far right partisans think the far left partisans are evil and should be ignored. They are both correct.

Posted by: steveboyington | February 7, 2010 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Tancredo can spell "socialist", but he's way too stupid to understand the definition.

Posted by: st50taw | February 7, 2010 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Tom Tancredo is a fascist Mussollini wannabe.

Posted by: demtse | February 7, 2010 6:54 PM | Report abuse

"Actually, this mainly reinforces my firm belief about ideologues and American politics: If you travel far enough to the right, you are sure to meet the far left on the other side of the circle."

Some of us have been discussing this concept for decades.

And memo to both "sides".

Americans are allowed to be family members, people who work hard at part time or full time jobs, and lots of things which don't require picking an ideology.

For the record, I am a college grad who used to be a substitute teacher. I am the granddaughter of an elected Republican politician who made a lot more sense than Tancredo.

Did I vote for Obama? Yes.
Have I agreed with every single thing he has done? No.

Does that mean I would give the time of day to those way off in right field like Trancredo and Palin? NO.

Do I think for myself and look at issues, not which "side " someone is on?


Posted by: GHDEL | February 7, 2010 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Muschmacher thinks elite liberals and elite conservatives are on a continuum of some sort.

This strikes me as curious. Professor (I presume Dr.) Alexander condemns liberals for being overeducated and presuming that their education permits them to make informed decisions which are superior to those arrived at by others. Perhaps he recognizes himself in some of us.

It seems to me that the elite conservatives, ranging from Limbaugh to Rove to Beck, repeatedly inform "liberals" (read, dirty word) that only they, the elite conservatives, actually know what the American public wants, and only they have a true understanding of what God wants in the American sphere. And we are (take your pick) socialist, degenerate, ungodly, . . .

Funny, in my cosmology, the latter is a far greater hubris. Insisting that God and all true Americans are on your side and demagogue-ing anybody who disagrees with you (even it's the 60% of the American public that wanted a single-payer health insurance, for example) is beyond condescending.

Clearly, the contempt that each group holds for the other hampers us from being able to get anything concrete done. It used to be, however, that members of Congress could get beyond that, and try to work with one another. In my opinion, we have Reagan and Newt Gingrich to thank for this new poisoned atmosphere. It is really NewSpeak for Krauthammer and Alexander to blame the liberals.

Posted by: thmas | February 7, 2010 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Good job, Kevin.

Posted by: martymar123 | February 7, 2010 10:27 PM | Report abuse

"I guess its because we have the ideas and the intelligence to think up great ideas"

Yeah, like raising taxes, spending all of it, and making our children indebted to China.

What a great idea.

Just kidding of course. Liberals have great ideas like, uh.... like giving the vote to illegal immigrants?

Posted by: Ombudsman1 | February 7, 2010 10:28 PM | Report abuse

GHDEL ~ no one believes you.

Posted by: muawiyah | February 7, 2010 11:08 PM | Report abuse

Kevin Huffman's columns get better and better, and they started off excellent. I hope the Post keeps this columnist around.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | February 7, 2010 11:12 PM | Report abuse

DOING A TEST ~ Now, I do the same thing but I leave the apparently offending word out.

I use the writer's name ~ Huffman.

We have to believe that was not offensive.

Posted by: muawiyah | February 7, 2010 11:13 PM | Report abuse

I saw him say that hideous satement. In an effort to be open-minded, I actually watched the Tea Party Convention on CSPAN for several hours today. Once I got past the lack of diversity of the crown, I actually listened to every word.

The bottom line is these people are not sure where to direct their anger, but they know they don't like the Black President.

Posted by: Julescator | February 6, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse


LOL, it is funny how obvious your own racism is. "got past the lack of diversity", "they don't like the Black President"?!? Seriously? This is your analysis of the tea party movement. A group of people who lack diversity that obviously hate a black man. LOL!! This just goes to show how limited the liberal view can be. Not to mention labeling people as racists just because of their lack of diversity! LOL!!! What a joke!

Posted by: sanmateo1850 | February 7, 2010 11:26 PM | Report abuse

Tom Tancredo, a former representative from Colorado and a 2008 GOP Presidential candidate, delivered an opening speech at the teabaggers convention on Friday. His speech was an eye opener and left me in shock and awe. I could not believe what I was hearing not in this day and time. Racism and bigotry at play in all its glory. This is the party that has taken over and now led the Republican Party.
Tom opened many deep wounds in his speech especially his reference to the mandatory fees (poll tax) and that you had to be able to read and write. Tom also said that those people were responsible for the election of the Barrack Hussein Obama. He continues by asking what kind of a name was this. Those people!

His speech was insulting, degrading, and racist and shows his strong bigotry. I have long suspected that the teaparty grew out of the angry mob mentality and Tom Tancredo proved me to be correct.

And this is who Sarah Palin has chosen to support. She owes the people of Alaska an apology for mispresenting and misusing her office for self profits. Sarah is an insult to decent, hardworking women everywhere in America. This woman should have been prosecuted two (2) years ago. The Governor office is not community property and can not be divided. The Governor is an elected official by the people and must uphold the constitution by which she was elected. I am sure Alaska’s constitution does not state that the spouse of the elected official together manage the office of the governor.
Can you ask your spouse to come to your office or work place and do your work? And if she or he did come to your office and do your work- what would the people who write your pay check say?
I am so sick of her supporters making allowances for her poor judgment and unprofessional behavioral. She needs to be held accountable for her decisions and actions. Sarah Palin is vain, money hungry, selfish, self centered, mean spirited, bible toting, lying racists and a poor exercise for a mother; who’s only desire is to hold everyone in America hostage until we believe in her.
The day that she was swore Sarah placed her hand on the bible and swore to abide by the laws and constitution of Alaska for the safety of its people. But she did not do this, she allowed her husband to run the governor position. The people of Alaska did not vote Todd in as Governor. Therefore, she stole her pay check – because she never preformed the duties and responsibilities for which she swore to up hold for the citizens of Alaska. She also misused public resources for private financial gain.

Sarah is a liar, a thief and a poor exercise for a mother.

Posted by: sun52shine | February 7, 2010 11:30 PM | Report abuse

Clearly, the contempt that each group holds for the other hampers us from being able to get anything concrete done. It used to be, however, that members of Congress could get beyond that, and try to work with one another. In my opinion, we have Reagan and Newt Gingrich to thank for this new poisoned atmosphere. It is really NewSpeak for Krauthammer and Alexander to blame the liberals.

Posted by: thmas | February 7, 2010 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Serious? You blame Regan and Newt for the greater division between the parties? Obama, Pelosi and Reed, have had nothing to do with it? I find it interesting that you feel this way, but not surprising though given your political views. Of couse you must be right since you are a condescending liberal. Who are the republicans to question your views. Republicans are obviously misguided in their beliefs.

Posted by: sanmateo1850 | February 7, 2010 11:33 PM | Report abuse

thmass had it correct: the right are being led by pseudo elite conservatives. I honestly think that they are unaware of it. They listen to Linbaugh, Hannity and O'reily- all from Fox. The racism and bigotry shown at these tea party gatherings is shocking. Where were they when GWB was in office? Indeed, Cheney would have had them jailed on some pretext. They are indeed intellectually challenged and we cannot expect any thing more.

Posted by: edpjf26 | February 8, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

I met Tancredo once. Not personally, but last year, when he came to speak at American University in NW. The group that brought him to speak was maybe two dozen strong - protesters outnumbered them maybe 15 to 1. Actually, when he spoke, his views were more moderate. You still thought to yourself, "Who is this guy and how did he get elected?" but not as much as you might have expected.

Oh well. I guess he's crazy after all.

Posted by: ravensfan20008 | February 8, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Stupid Author wrote:

"You see, the popular conservative meme right now is that Democrats are arrogant and condescending and think that voters are stupid. "

Not all Republicans think alike, moron! Liberal commentators and columnists like to claim that the views of individuals, usually controversial ones, represent those of all conservatives/Republicans.

I'm a Republican and I don't like Tom Tancredo either. But ideologues like this author aren't doing any favors for the other party in terms of getting my vote next election.

Fortunately for them, they don't need any: My party WILL NOT be getting my vote in 2010, nor will they in 2012 if they continue to support fools like Tancredo, Palin, etc.

Posted by: jboogie1 | February 11, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company