Tim Rutten: Tea Partiers Are Just Angry White Males
Today at the L.A. Times, Tim Rutten has a column that well embodies the typical media misunderstandings of the Tea Party movement. Rutten says: “The group is conventionally portrayed as a burgeoning populist expression of discontent that sprouted spontaneously from the grass-roots and cuts in new ways across sectional, class and gender lines.” Not so, claims Rutten, relying on a recent NYT/CBS recent poll to drive his entire column:
If all this is beginning to have a familiar ring, it’s because you’ve met these guys before: They’re the “angry white males” we’ve been reading about since political strategist-turned-analyst Kevin Phillips first identified them as an electoral presence during Richard Nixon’s successful presidential campaign in 1968.
. . . .
They aren’t, however, implacable foes of “big government” or even of taxes. More than half (52%) told the pollsters they think their own “income taxes this year are fair,” just 10% less than all American adults. Moreover, a majority told follow-up interviewers that, though they wanted “smaller government,” they didn’t want cuts in our largest social programs, Social Security and Medicare.
So much for the surge of a new anti-government populism.
Allahpundit has the correct analysis, which Rutten doesn’t seem to understand:
They’re not some fanatic “zero tax” movement, in other words. They’re willing to pay what they’re paying now; what they want is a government small enough to make ends meet with what they’re paying. By The One’s logic, if he lowered the top marginal income tax bracket to one percent, we should expect tea partiers to fall on their knees and shout hallelujah even though it would mean annual deficits many times the trillion-dollar leviathans we’re currently saddled with. Anyone think that would happen? Anyone except Obama not yet grasp that conservatives want fiscal responsibility, not lower taxes at any and all costs?
Yes, Allahpundit. Tim Rutten does not grasp it.
It’s true that the numbers on Social Security and Medicare are disquieting to us foes of Big Government — but (as Allahpundit again explains) the responses are easily explained by the age of the tea partiers:
Most tea partiers are older, which doubtless helps explain those numbers on Medicare and Social Security. Among the general population, 50 percent of the Times’s sample was 45 or older; among tea partiers, it was 75 percent, with 29 percent 65 or older. Still, the point remains — even among the most devoutly fiscally conservative populist movement in America, self-interest trumps ideology when it comes to entitlements.
Mr. Rutten, it’s not that taxes have gone up immediately. And (however much some of us might wish otherwise) it’s not that all Tea Partiers think all government entitlements are too large.
It’s that projected deficits like this:
mean that we are robbing from our children’s future. Income taxes may not be higher now — but that is guaranteed to change.
Don’t dismiss us as Angry White Males, Mr. Rutten. We’re people who care about our country’s future — and who don’t want our children to have to pay for our excesses.
Is that really so difficult to understand?
Call us what you will but we are the people that pay the bills.
By the way, what did they call the angry people when Bush was president? MSLSD!
Alta Bob (e8af2b) — 4/18/2010 @ 1:04 pmPaleolefties like Rutten, who long ago gave up any pretense of serious journalism, will never change. His whole career depends on distorting what folks like the Tea Partiers say to reassure other paleolibs. Anything involving actual thought is beyond him.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (9eb641) — 4/18/2010 @ 1:20 pmIt is no wonder that the msm is going down the tubes. With characters like this guy writing, it is more unbelievable than comic books.
Jim (582155) — 4/18/2010 @ 1:31 pmThe headline and associated content in today’s Sun – Times (regarding the Tea Party rallies in Chicago) in today’s Sun – Times report pretty much said it all – this is the just the first paragraph:
The Tea Party movement is driven by disdain for deficit-riddled government, a love for Fox Television personality Glenn Beck and a hatred of President Obama,
Un – freaking believable.
Dmac (21311c) — 4/18/2010 @ 2:01 pmTim Rutten will never get it. He’s got a script in his head and the whole world is supposed to act in accordance with his script.
The left–and make no mistake about it, Rutten is a moron of the left–first claimed that folks who appeared at Town Halls and at Tea Parties were “Nazis”. Then they said “Racists”. Then they sniggered about “tea baggers”. Hearty Har Har. But mostly they ignored them or diminished the numbers at the rallies.
Next step, still trying to figure out what to do about them; take polls and discover gasp! They’re older people,solidly middle class, a bit whiter and a bit richer than the average. Gasp, now they’re fat cats unwilling to share. And Rutten, struggling to understand something as to which he lacks a single clue, has now discovered that these are just “the angry white people” repackaged in a different bag. And of course he takes a shot saying that they are dupes and that money is being made by those who “manage them”.
Well B.S.! I’m not a Tea Party member, although I sympathize with them. I did go to one town hall for my local lying Congresscritter (Adam Schiff, a supposed Blue Dog, but really a Pelosi Poodle). Schiff announced the meeting–the only organized groups I saw there were from the SEIU–otherwise just a bunch of white haired men and women who’d come on their own. Schiff had a panel to put on a dog and pony show for the rubes, but the rubes weren’t buying the spiel.
Mike Myers (3c9845) — 4/18/2010 @ 2:07 pmHey Tim, here is one half-white male who is sympathetic to the Tea Party Movement and what they stand for, so I guess that blows your narrative.
It is interesting that a variation of the same story has run in about four different places this week in several newspapers. The creepy Neil Steinberg had a story in the Chicago Sun Times this week about how all of the Tea Partiers ran away from him when he asked tough questions. I wish I could provide a link, but I have never figured out how to do that. Anyway, it is as if the Big Memo went out to our darlings in the main stream media to write the same story.
BT (74cbec) — 4/18/2010 @ 2:13 pmAs an addendum to the above post, questions that I would be happy to look him in the eye and answer.
BT (74cbec) — 4/18/2010 @ 2:15 pmGovernment works for us and in this economy, we want better services for less.
Sure we use roads, parks, Medicare and Social Security and we pay a lot toward those in taxes, fees.
Call us crazy if you must, but we’d like the money collected for entitlements like Social Security, and Medicare to fund those programs absolutely and completely.
No Ponzi schemes siphoning the money off into unrelated programs.
We are skeptical of new entitlement programs like Obamacare because of the absolute disregard that has been shown for the constituency over use of everything from gas taxes to postage; from Social Security to Medicare.
Finally, we can’t afford any new entitlements right now. The most cursory review of our current entitlement plans and pension plans shows we can’t pay for them. Paying for these new entitlements combined with the obligations we have assumed on the older ones will require the wealthiest Americans to go on a 50 year run of … to coin a term… unprecedented… of selfless productivity and wealth building without interruption. And that just pays off the Chinese.
I might just punt and sink everything I have in tax free munis… except who knows, the “new” courts might decide it’s OK to sell bonds and offer high tax free interest on them even with no intent to actually pay. Heck, if they can make me buy healthcare, they might now be able to require me to purchase worthless government bonds with any sordid profits I am allowed to keep.
Steve G (7d4c78) — 4/18/2010 @ 2:16 pmTim Ruttan is wrong. At TEA Party events in SW Florida it’s by and large older white couples who turn out. I’d guess married women and widows make up better than 40-45% of the total. And, they’re not angry in any active or emotional sense, nor do I hear harsh language. But, they do say what’s on their minds even if it’s contrary to Democrat Party talking points and inconsistent with Tim Ruttan’s expectations.
TEA Party people are generally mature and successful, largely retired, American citizens who have a lifetime of experience behind them and know full well the consequences of neglecting fiscal responsibility. They also know Obama has the country they love headed in the wrong direction and they’re trying to get our elected representatives to do their damned jobs, resist excessive spending, and follow the Constitution.
The Tim Ruttans of the world can say what they will, but the result of their slanders and their ignorent propaganda will be to awaken and energize this nation’s core population group and bring them into direct conflict with the governing class, their apologists, and their client populations.
ropelight (51e056) — 4/18/2010 @ 2:28 pmTim Ruttan is unable to write anything that contravenes the “Inside the Beltway” CW, and he switches on a dime each and everytime the Narrative changes –
he is a more reliable shill than the spokesholes for the CPUSA.
You just want to strip off his shirt to find out which puppeteer has his hand in his back.
BT: The Big Memo is whatever is on the front page/OpEd page, of the NYT each morning.
AD - RtR/OS! (4249dd) — 4/18/2010 @ 3:36 pmThey all read it, and they all believe it – to do less would be to risk excommunication.
Consider the source. ’nuff said.
GeneralMalaise (24d3e0) — 4/18/2010 @ 3:47 pmRecent polls, more reliable polls, are showing that a greater percentage of women are attending tea parties. In the handful that I’ve attended (and BTW, I’m female), I see that’s true. Yes, men are there, many are white and angry, but slightly more are women.
ClassicFilm (2d1875) — 4/18/2010 @ 4:38 pmPlus this ones a girl.
SarahW (af7312) — 4/18/2010 @ 5:02 pmRutten still thinks he is the big local Bin Laden expert, not John Miller, his commentary is trite
ian cormac (422538) — 4/18/2010 @ 5:06 pmand unoriginal, a bug not a feature at the LA Times
According to the left, this is what we can expect from the Tea Party ladies in the near future?
navyvet (8e1431) — 4/18/2010 @ 5:07 pmI don’t believe Rutten cares one bit about the facts or an accurate analysis of Tea Partiers grievances against the government. That is *not* what this is about. In the least…
What he cares about is now that we all know via NYT that Partiers are not the racist, knuckle-dragging neanderthals the MSM narrative led the public to believe, he has to tweak said narrative in the next best way possible in order to keep the negative image of Partiers in tact. That’s what this is about. Do whatever it takes to maintain the current level of negative imagery.
Hence, he has attacked the least popular part of the population these days: white middle-class males. Now everyone can still hate the Tea Partiers because white males are despised because we all know they are at the root of every social calamity the world has ever experienced. This narrative will get some mileage.
What I find amusing is Rutten himself a white middle-classed male, so I’m wondering about the self-loathing.
Dana (1e5ad4) — 4/18/2010 @ 5:08 pmThere very well could be angry white males at the Tea Party gatherings, but from the one I’ve attended in the heart-&-soul of Conservative Orange County (Yorba Linda), they are very much outnumbered by the females, both in numbers and attitude –
AD - RtR/OS! (4249dd) — 4/18/2010 @ 5:24 pmProbably something like a she-bear protecting her cubs.
What I find amusing is Rutten himself a white middle-classless male, so I’m wondering about the self-loathing.
FTFY!
AD - RtR/OS! (4249dd) — 4/18/2010 @ 5:24 pmIt just “outside agitators” riling up our local white folk.
Kevin Murphy (5ae73e) — 4/18/2010 @ 6:22 pmCheney to Treasury: “Deficits don’t matter”
Former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill was told “deficits don’t matter” when he warned of a looming fiscal crisis.
O’Neill, fired in a shakeup of Bush’s economic team in December 2002, raised objections to a new round of tax cuts and said the president balked at his more aggressive plan to combat corporate crime after a string of accounting scandals because of opposition from “the corporate crowd,” a key constituency.
O’Neill said he tried to warn [Conservative Republican] Vice President Dick Cheney that growing budget deficits-expected to top $500 billion this fiscal year alone-posed a threat to the economy. Cheney cut him off. “You know, Paul, [conservative Republican President] Reagan proved deficits don’t matter,” he said, according to excerpts. Cheney continued: “We won the midterms (congressional elections). This is our due.” A month later, Cheney told the Treasury secretary he was fired.
The vice president’s office had no immediate comment, but John Snow, who replaced O’Neill, insisted that deficits “do matter” to the administration. – source. Reuters, 1/11/04
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 4/18/2010 @ 8:01 pmRuten does not misunderstand the Tea Party movement. He is afraid of them so he deliberately paints them in the poorest light possible in order to affect us, his readers and voters. He is not a reporter, he is a propagandist serving in the long tradition of Goebels, the PolitBureau, and all the other government mouthpieces throughout history.
Howard Veit (d0000b) — 4/19/2010 @ 2:45 amNot surprisingly, Von Braun’s assistant, O’Neil’s ‘recollections have been called into question, along with practically account by Ron “reality based community” Susskind, a ‘bug not a feature’ as it were
ian cormac (422538) — 4/19/2010 @ 4:49 amThe two tea party rallies I’ve attended had a median age of about 50. There were a lot of people in their 40s with children. At the Mission Viejo rallies, I saw at least 30 children at each in a crowd of 650 to 750.
It’s interesting to see a community evolve. When I moved here in 1972, it was a middle class family community with a large proportion of workers commuting to LA. Now, the jobs are more local and only about 20% commute north of Irvine (about 15 miles). Many of those go by train to downtown LA.
The community aged as kids grew up and school populations declined. Now, it is turning again. I sat on the planning commission five years ago as that trend reached its peak. The fools in local government are closing schools and, I fear, may sell off a couple, just as the new wave of young marrieds arrive. Those with grandiose dreams of mansions, bought into the bubble and lost their shirts. The upscale community east of Mission Viejo has a large share of bank-owned repos. In some neighborhoods, it’s a third. Naturally, home values have tanked.
However, the more prudent young families seem to be OK. I had an open house yesterday. I have my house for sale for about $250,000 less than I would have asked five years ago. Fortunately, I have lived here 20 years and am not upside down. We had quite a few people looking and at least three were serious buyers. One had made an offer on another house that is not as nice as mine and he was waiting to see if the owners countered. If so, he was going to make an offer on mine. They saw it before mine was shown.
These people are all about 40. I don’t think one person was over 50. They are the ones showing up at tea party rallies. They are finally ready to buy their lifetime house and raise their kids in a safe and clean neighborhood and Obama is going to screw it up.
I’m pretty much immune. My kids are grown.
Mike K (2cf494) — 4/19/2010 @ 6:09 amWhat is Time Rutten’s problem with white males?
Secret Squirrel (6a1582) — 4/19/2010 @ 8:07 pm