Well, here’s something bizarre.
On Wednesday, The New York Times published an article characterizing the Tea Party as having “unleashed the politics of anger” that lives on in this pres(id)ent darkness.
The piece was titled “The Tea Party Didn’t Get What It Wanted, but It Did Unleash the Politics of Anger.”
But some left-wing readers didn’t appreciate it — how could the Times address the Tea Party without portraying it as sufficiently villainous?
In response, the New York mainstay assured its audience of a revision which now “[included] context about attacks on President Barack Obama and racist displays at some Tea Party rallies.”
All of you who were upset, be made exceedingly glad:
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
TiGGyZTweetZ presumably felt better yet was still disgusted:
It’s embarrassing & telling that NYT just somehow accidentally missed the actual heart of Tea Party was a reaction to an African American Potus. Hire More POC NYT. pic.twitter.com/bUGawl05Tq
— TiGGyZTweetZ 🗽💙🇺🇸💙🗽 (@TiGGyZTweetZ) August 28, 2019
But that’s just ol’ TiGGyZTweetZ for ya.
At its inception, the Tea Party was, of course, a call to more limited government.
Here’s how The New York Times portrayed it:
In the late summer of 2009, as the recession-ravaged economy bled half a million jobs a month, the country seemed to lose its mind.
Lawmakers accustomed to scheduling town hall meetings where no one would show up suddenly faced shouting crowds of hundreds, some of whom brought a holstered pistol or a rifle slung over the shoulder. One demonstrator at a rally in Maryland hanged a member of Congress in effigy. A popular bumper sticker at the time captured the contempt for the federal bailout of certain homeowners. “Honk if I’m Paying Your Mortgage,” it said.
That was part of the original with which people weren’t satisfied.
Enjoy the additions:
One significant limitation to the Tea Party is the contradiction in its DNA: It was a mass uprising based on notions of small-government libertarianism that are popular with think tanks but not so popular with most Americans. And as Mr. Obama’s allies saw the movement, its outrage over the debt and deficit had another purpose: giving cover and a voice to those who wanted to attack the first black president — people who in some cases showed up at rallies waving signs with racist caricatures and references.
This isn’t the NTY’s first correction based on outrage from the Left. Witness Cory Farticus Booker’s early-August condemnation, which in part resulted in an about face:
Lives literally depend on you doing better, NYT. Please do. https://t.co/L4CpCb8zLi
— Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) August 6, 2019
Relevant RedState links in this article: here.
See 3 more pieces from me:
Find all my RedState work here.
Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below.
If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”