Opinion

Op-Ed: “Drive-by” media misses point of tax day tea parties

By Michael Craft

Posted on April 23, 2009, at 1:00 a.m.

After the coverage last week of tea parties protesting big government and the liberties and freedoms that the bureaucracy looks to take away, it is clear why the “drive-by” media doesn’t understand what real dissent is supposed to look like. And to me, that’s OK. Susan Roesgen of CNN is a great example. She asked a man why he was protesting.

“Because I hear that the president believed in what Lincoln stood for, Lincoln believed that people had the right to liberty.” Susan changed from reporter to journalist.

“What does this have to do with taxes?”

The man replied, “Lincoln believed that people should bear the fruits of their own labor.” With the stealth of Sandy Berger shoving CIA documents down his pants, Sue became a game show host.

“Do you realize that the land of Lincoln gets $50 billion out of the stimulus? That’s $50 billion, sir!” I was surprised that a door didn’t suddenly pop out in front of Sue and the man with a new car behind it. She was a chameleon, changing from a game show host to rabid Cujo.

“This crowd is anti-CNN, and this gathering has obviously been promoted by the right wing news network Fox News.” Of course Fox News was the only station willing to give any credence to the “average folk.”

Susan, we understand that you cannot possibly fathom any protest that is actually “for” something more than it is “against” something. It’s OK that you and others can’t possibly understand why people would protest something as “patriotic” as paying higher taxes. Look, it’s $50 billion for the land of Lincoln. People should be thankful, not protesting, right? Moreover, it’s OK that you and others can’t possibly intellectualize a protest that was started by average Americans. You have professional protesters like Cindy Sheehan, who the Democratic Party glamorized as she sat outside of evil George Bush’s ranch. You also have your union faithful, of which some pay homeless people to protest “the man.” And, of course, we all know that without George Soros, there would be no MoveOn.org buying half-price, full-page ads in the New York Times criminalizing one of this country’s heroes by renaming General Petreous, “General Betrayus”.

We understand that you and people like you believe that protests have to be funded by someone famous, otherwise why come out? They should also include the following Hollywood elites, at least one “lollapalooza” type affair, a burning effigy of someone infamous who is oblivious to the fact that they are responsible for everything bad in the world and at least some hostility. Someone somewhere needs to throw a rock through a bank window. At least 85 percent of the participants have to be against everything, then look dumbfounded when the question “what are you for?” is asked.

So when you covered the tea parties and none of these criteria appeared you had to be asking yourself, “why?”

You see, there are some people in the world who really can lead their own lives. They don’t require an actor to give his or her opinion in order to make up their own. They don’t need to be drawn into a protest just because Limp Bizkit might be there. They stay away from burning anything because its not productive. And they are actually intellectual, understanding that words like those of Lincoln mean something.

You might be asking yourself, Sue, “What are these people for?” These people are for America, unlike everyone else, unfortunately.

Michael Craft is a History Major and a conservative.