WTF, the "paper of record"?
Oh, God. Are we still pretending that the Tea Party was about small government and concern about budget deficits? It was always, from the beginning, about racial anger; opposition to big government only to the extent that it helps Those People 1/ https://t.co/TI90hLoMsQ— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) August 28, 2019
How do you write a 10 years later piece on the Tea Party and not mention - not once, not even in passing - the fact that it was essentially a hysterical grassroots tantrum about the fact that a black guy was president? Journalistic malpractice https://t.co/bdw3ToSmqq— Wesley (@WesleyLowery) August 28, 2019
This is...un-good history. https://t.co/JjLU3kW8V9— Charles P. Pierce (@CharlesPPierce) August 28, 2019
I remember. pic.twitter.com/IWdZJ08ihO— Max Liberty (@LibertasMaxwell) August 28, 2019
The author of the Times article, Jeremy Peters, has a history of sloppy reporting that leans over backwards to cosset right- wing knuckle draggers and their "Chosen One." You don't miss something as blatant as Tea Party racism by accident.
BONUS: Steve M. at No More Mister Nice Blog has the historical receipts (and pics).
UPDATE: The blowback must've been strong (thank you, Paul Krugman) --
We have updated this story assessing the policy failures of the Tea Party movement 10 years after its rise to include context about attacks on President Barack Obama and racist displays at some Tea Party rallies. https://t.co/r4k0qZCQlH— NYT Politics (@nytpolitics) August 28, 2019
Still, their updated "context" is very weak, um, "tea." Racism was at the core of the movement, not about "displays at some Tea Party rallies." WTF, you gutless assholes.
