Showing posts with label Gina Loudon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gina Loudon. Show all posts

12.08.2011

A look at Dana Loesch and the STLTP split-up

The St. Louis Activist Hub has reported extensively on Dana Loesch and Jim Hoft's exit from the astroturfed St. Louis Tea Party group. And now, RFT's Chad Garrison broke this news yesterday:
The co-founder of the St. Louis Tea Party has officially left the organization.

In a tweet this morning Dana Loesch writes: "Yes, I am finished with the St. Louis Tea Party. Not keen on grassroots organizing under a candidate, even unofficially. Never will be."

The St. Louis Tea Party this morning issued its own press release this morning, confirming the split. "The St. Louis Tea Party certainly benefited from Dana's rising stardom and talent," wrote St. Louis Tea Party board president, Bill Hennessy, who founded the organization along with Loesch in 2009. "And we can't help but think our energetic and effective grass roots have propelled Dana's career."

 Since helping to found the Tea Party, Loesch has had a meteoric rise on the political landscape, getting a job as a CNN pundit and editor of the right-wing website Big Journalism.

Daily RFT has messages out with Hennessy and Loesch for comment. At this point it's unclear exactly why Loesch left the organization, but Hennessy suggests in today's press release that the two leaders had different opinions on conservative candidates.


 Progressive blogger Adam Shriver, who often chronicles the goings-on the Tea Party, reported yesterday that Loesch and Hennessy disagreed on which Republican to support in Missouri's Second Congressional District, with Loesch backing the establishment candidate of Ann Wagner and Hennessy favoring Ed Martin.

Shriver also reported yesterday that Loesch's husband, Chris Loesch, demanded that the St. Louis Tea Party quit using the logo that he designed. That logo (right) no longer appears on the Tea Party site.

Loesch will do anything to further her career, even if that means abandoning her principles and throwing her friends under the bus. She is a GOP shill, while supposedly pretending to "hate all political parties equally." For this reason, she's known as Dana The Diva.

 The St. Louis Tea Party put out a press release today confirming what I reported yesterday: they broke up with Dana Loesch. Loesch, naturally, is convinced this proves how heroically principled she is:

 And, of course, there's the fact that the St. Louis tea party appeared to have violated their 501(c)4 by using their money to support Ed Martin's candidacy with advertisements. Oh, and by systematically putting their logos on "Taypayers for Ed Martin" signs. Did Loesch complain then about organizing for a candidate? Sure didn't.

It's funny. Loesch threw the St. Louis Bloggers Guild under the bus when she no longer needed them. She threw her former website designer under the bus when she no longer needed him. She pushed Gina Loudon out of the tea party. And now she's throwing the tea party under the bus cause they're a drag on her minor celebrity status. Amazingly, it's always someone else's fault.
 Dr. Gina Loudon still has a radio show on KJSL from 4-6 in St. Louis, and is a big-time Evangelical Conservative homophobic racist bigoted buttmunch kook.

Back to Loesch. Proof that she will do anything to gain influence in the conservative movement at large:
 This was a result of a fight between two different factions in the St. Louis Tea Party. One group (the Loeschs, Gateway Pundit, and Jen Ennenbach) supported GOP establishment candidate Ann Wagner (a candidate for the head of the RNC and the campaign chairman for Roy Blunt) and another group (John Burns, Ben Evans, Michelle Moore, Bill Hennessy, and Darin Morley) supporting nutty Ed Martin.

 For the record:
  • Dana Loesch voted for Mitt Romney in the 2008 Republican primary.
  • She explicitly said that she liked RomneyCare.
  • She supported Roy Blunt over the more conservative Chuck Purgason for the U.S. Senate.
  • She supported Ed Martin over John Wayne Tucker, and in fact attacked Tucker on her show after Ed Martin paid her husband to make a commercial for him.
  • Now's she's supporting the ultimate GOP establishment candidate Ann Wagner over the comparably more conservative Ed Martin.
  • Oh, and she's "edgy" for some reason.
 Her BFF, Jim Hoft, also decided to side with the establishment.
 Obviously, I have no love for Ed Martin. And I'm on record as being critical of the St. Louis Tea Party for claiming to be principled while supporting Roy Blunt over Chuck Purgason and Ed Martin over John Wayne Tucker. But I have to say I actually do have some sympathy for the core group that, unlike Dana Loesch and Jim Hoft, is at least attempting to move forward by holding true to their ideals and opposing the GOP establishment. Though I think they're wrong in believing that Ed Martin is a principled conservative, it is at least clear that they felt like voting for Blunt was merely an imperfect step towards their ultimate goal, and that they would have to try to more actively oppose the crony capitalism of the modern Republican party in the future if they really wanted to live up to their ideals.

On the other hand, Dana Loesch, who voted for Mitt Romney in the 2008 primary and explicitly said that she liked RomneyCare before realizing that it was more profitable to be a "tea party spokesperson" on national television, is unsurprisingly abandoning Ed Martin in favor of Roy Blunt's 2010 campaign manager, GOP insider Ann Wagner. And Jim "Gateway Pundit" Hoft, writing on Loesch's website Big Journalism, also recently launched an attack on Ed Martin. However, members of the St. Louis tea party leadership Michelle Moore, John Burns, and Ben Evans wrote a recent post dismantling Hoft's attacks on Martin. You can read the full post here, but I'll share a few highlights:
  • First, they point out that Martin didn't turn the race ugly; he was actually the target of an attack from Dan Riehl earlier in the year on Breitbart's Big sites (where Loesch is an editor).
  • They reiterate Darin Morley's point that it was ridiculous for Hoft to try to imply that Ed Martin is more connected to Roy Blunt than is Ann Wagner.
  • They criticized Hoft's attempts to pretend that Wagner's husband is no longer involved in advocating on behalf of Enterprise Rent-a-Car:
    As everyone in the Tea Party knows Ray delisted himself in preparation for Ann’s campaign; however, he is still Enterprise's Government & Public Affairs Vice-President. In that capacity, he oversees Enterprise's lobbying and he helps determine where their campaign funds go. Again, Jim knows this, but deliberately ignores it in the post.
  • They point out that Chip Gerdes, a familiar creepy scuzzbucket for readers of this blog, said that he wrote Dan Riehl's original attack on Ed Martin as a "warning shot:"
    As mentioned at the top, Hoft was quoted in the first hit piece against Ed Martin that came out last August on Big Government. That piece, supposedly written by Dan Riehl, sparked a firestorm among Tea Party conservatives in Missouri. Upon questioning, Chip Gerdes, another paid political consultant, stated that he wrote the piece as a “warning shot” to Ed Martin because of comments that Martin made on a Christian AM radio station.
  • They also question where Hoft got his data and whether he even did his own writing:
    If Gerdes is writing hit pieces for Ann Wagner and publishing them under Dan Riehl’s name, what else has he written?...We ask: Where did those figures come from? Dan Riehl and Dana Loesch have written on Twitter and in Tea Party emails that hundreds of thousands of dollars were given to Ed Martin by Ann Wagner’s Enterprise connections. This has been proven false. Who gave Jim the data and where is it? Let’s see some research.

Could this be the beginning of the end of the Loesch Crime Mafia's (aka the Breitbart/Loesch/Hoft Axis of Evil) influence on St. Louis politics or will be the beginning of national prominence for her cronies? There might've been signs of this happening back in
 September 2010.


1.27.2011

UPDATED: Loesch defends Bristol Palin's invitation to WashU to spew her anti-safe sex agenda

Today, the Bi-State Region's leading Teahadist had a raging fit over Bristol Palin being allegedly silenced for her beliefs on abstinence. Dana Loesch has defended Sarah and Bristol Palin both in the past, so naturally she would be defending her, no matter what-- similiar to yet another St. Louis Teabagger and Palin apologist "Dr." Gina Loudon, who has been linked with Conservatives4Palin (C4P).

Dana's pro-Palin falsehood-laden piece from Big Journalism:

I wasn’t even fully aware of what was happening until a number of Wash U student conservatives reached out, upset at their treatment when they would defend the student union’s decision. Protests are organized and two Facebook pages have been created. Above all else the protest against Bristol Palin stems from no other reason than her last name is Palin.

That’s it.

No one knows what sort of speaking fee Palin is collecting yet some left-leaning students immediately assumed it was eleventy frillion dollars and are attempting to use that as justification for their protest – except when you read the comments on Facebook or in the student paper it’s always followed up with some politically-charged remark about her being Palin’s daughter. Also, some in the community don’t believe in redemption or grace, thus think that once you err you are forever doomed thus, no way can Palin be an authority on abstinence, even though she has more experience than most young adults her age at the result of not practicing abstinence.

Tacky much? Are ratings that bad? Perfume sales that low that Walsh feels the need to try to rally opposition against a teen mom? What will Katie Couric say in her next report about rhetoric? Threats against the Palins are at an all-time high for a reason, maybe because people continue to engage in these sorts of bully tactics? And the MSM is silent.
This article is proof that Loesch will do ANYTHING to defend ANY Palin, at all costs and facts be damned.



Washington University's Student Life had confirmed this article, and mentioned that student activists are against her visiting the university during Sex Week.

Bristol Palin has been selected as keynote speaker for this year’s Sexual Responsibility Week at Washington University.

Student Union Treasury on Tuesday approved a $20,000 appeal by the Student Health Advisory Committee (SHAC) to sponsor a four-person panel featuring Palin. The appeal was initially set at $25,000 and renegotiated.

The $20,000 comes from the Student Activity Fee collected from each undergraduate student at the beginning of the year. The Student Activity Fee is fixed at one percent of tuition.

While Palin has not formally agreed to the appearance yet, she is expected to do so shortly.

Students have already organized against the potential speech by Palin, organizing protests via Facebook and voicing complaints at the weekly SU Senate meeting on Jan. 26.


“I know it will fill Graham Chapel, so to me, that’s value in itself,” said Treasury representative Daniel Bernard, a junior. “It brings the student body together in a way that we usually don’t have on this campus.”

Not all Treasury members, however, supported the decision to fund Palin to speak on campus.

“One concern I do have when we fund someone like Bristol Palin is, what really are we supporting? And to me it’s someone who is famous because they got pregnant at 18,” said freshman Jacob Trunsky, chair of the Budget Committee.

Students have mixed views on the keynote address.

“I just don’t see what she could possibly contribute to an intelligent, reasonable discussion about sex,” senior Toby Shepard said.

Sophomore Sherveen Mashayekhi, president of the College Democrats, had similar sentiments.

“While she is obviously an experienced person on the matter of teen pregnancy, she is an extremely polarizing presence in social and political terms and does not provide the right type of balancing, sensitive, well-rounded force to an issue as hot as sex on campus,” Mashayekhi said.

Kate Walsh criticized Loesch for her Palin-defending, and is right on the money.

Kate Walsh
;) RT @: Don't play dumb @. Everyone's seen "John and @ plus Eight"
And of course, Loesch trashes her back.

Tacky. Some actress named @ helping rally a mob against Bristol Palin coming to Wash U.



UPDATE: per STLToday.com, Bristol Palin is NOT coming to Wash U after all.

Anger over a decision to pay Bristol Palin several thousand dollars in student fees to talk to Washington University students about abstinence led to a decision Thursday night to nix Palin's appearance on a panel here next month.

Washington University's Student Health Advisory Committee had extended an invitation to Palin, a spokeswoman to prevent teen pregnancy, to speak on abstinence as part of the university's Student Sexual Responsibility Week.

9.18.2010

Dana Loesch = DIVA!

If you want proof that Dana Loesch is an arrogant lying Diva, then look no further than this posting:

Trouble in Tea Party Land?

Is St. Louis big enough for two tea party divas? There was an extremely interesting comment the other day that read as follows: There sure was a big distance between Dana and Gina Loudon that day. Later Gina had on her Facebook wall:

Loesch bills herself as the "conservative alternative to old white dudes." Gina Loudon says she's the, "the freshest conservative, Christian voice in the St. Louis area." Hmmm, sounds kinda similar to me. Is Dana peeved that Loudon is copying her schtick? Knowing Loesch, she's probably threatened to sue for copyright infringement about 10 times by now.



Dana trying to play her "Liberals are using Obama = Hitler imagery" Card again: It's the LaRouchists and Teabaggers doing it.

The Tea Party Guide to Thoughtful Political Discussion

Dana Loesch had a post up yesterday bragging about how the tea party "polices" their rallies because they asked a guy to remove a Hitler picture from his sign:


It's pretty funny that Loesch would brag about that, considering that she defended a billboard comparing Obama to Hitler back in July, on Red Eye:



It's actually not the first time she forgot her previous ridiculous comments, claiming in August that all Hitler comparisons were from left wing plants.
More crap from @DLoesch on Twitter:
Will @debbiehalvorson condemn the behavior of her campaigners after they protested with Palin, et al. Nazi signs? http://bit.ly/9d3dOl #tcot


Dana Loesch on Good Morning America against James Carville (Carville pwns Loesch):



Loesch is playing the "Liberals = Trolls/Stalkers" Card again (which she has referred to me, Adam Shriver, and a lot of Liberals):

Guy is threatening to come to the station. This is what progressives do. This is how they act. And they will never repudiate.
Just had a hatemailer threaten my children and am contacting authorities NOW. WTF pricks?

Where are the feminists when yet another conservative female is threatened? Oh, right, heads up asses. Great job, gals.

Okay, nobody should threaten @dloesch's children, even though she habitually threatens people's jobs (which threatens THEIR children). , theboneblog



Eric Boehler of MMfA calls her on it:

Why is RW nut @DLoesch stalking me? http://su.pr/1fjfbl


Dana Loesch on Fixed and Fools:



Dana Loesch also is blaming Liberals for an assassination attempt on Jay Nixon (D).

Wow. Our prayers are with the college dean as he recovers and his family.

What’s that? Another case of leftist violence?

Can we get some folks on the left to calm down their rhetoric and CHILL OUT?
Who's the ones doing all (or most of it) the violence? The Teabaggers.

The rebuttal from Chad Garrison over at Daily RFT.

Casey Brezik: Paranoid Schizophrenic Intended to Kill Gov. Jay Nixon


The man who allegedly stabbed a community college official on Tuesday just before a scheduled appearance of Governor Jay Nixon had intended to kill the governor.

The Kansas City Star reports that 22-year-old Casey Brezik, a student at Metropolitan Community College -- Penn Vally, thought he had stabbed the governor and was disappointed when learning that the victim was actually the school's dean of instruction, Al Dimmit Jr., who survived the attack.

The paper reports that Brezik was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia several years ago and had only recently enrolled at the community college. His family says Brezik has a habit of writing anti-government rants on his Facebook page. In 2007 he was committed to mental hospitals at least four times and convicted of drug possession. He wears an anarchist symbol tattoo on his arm.


She falsely claims that Karl Rove is a RINO, when in fact Rove is nothing but a dirty huckster who belongs in jail.



The 09.15.2010 edition of Anderson Cooper 360 on CNN transcript with Loesch, Castellanos, and Spitzer segment
COOPER: Well, Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine is -- says he's loving the GOP turmoil.

He told The New York Times -- and I quote -- "Republicans thought they were embracing the Tea Party, and, at times, it turns into the Donner Party."

Despite Democratic hopes of Republican cannibalism, however, the enthusiasm and energy of Tea Party supporters should worry Democrats in November.

Joining me now is Eliot Spitzer, former New York governor and co- host of CNN's new program Parker Spitzer.

Also tonight, Republican consultant and political contributor Alex Castellanos and blogger and radio host Dana Loesch, who is also the co-organizer of the St. Louis Tea Party Coalition.

Appreciate all of you being with being us.

Eliot, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said -- and I quote -- "that shows there's a very vociferous debate going on inside the Republican Party for the hearts and minds of Republican voters." Is he right?

ELIOT SPITZER (D), FORMER NEW YORK GOVERNOR: Well, of course he's right, but he's also the victim of that debate, because that debate has created enthusiasm, energy.

The Tea Party is taking over the Republican Party in many states -- in Delaware, not so clear. But, right now, the Democrats are saying, we're no longer setting the agenda. And the fear the Democrats have is that this enthusiasm, even for candidates who Karl Rove admits are not credible, from many other perspectives, may continue through November, and this could be a tsunami that nobody could possibly have predicted.

COOPER: Dana, do you think O'Donnell is credible? Do you think she can win?

DANA LOESCH, ORGANIZER, ST. LOUIS TEA PARTY COALITION: I do think she can win. I think she can win as soon as Karl -- people like Karl Rove stop going on television and trying to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.

We haven't even begun to try yet. I liked Michael Steele's approach. And I can't believe I'm saying this, but I think Karl Rove could possibly take some notes from how Michael Steele approached this.

But that doesn't help, going on camera saying that a candidate isn't credible and just -- and talking about how, well, it took her two decades to pay off her college loans. Well, forgive her for not being rich, like you, Karl Rove, but it doesn't really -- you want to talk about winning moderates and independents, that's not the way you go about it.

It's really bizarre.

SPITZER: That's not the only measure of credibility. I don't think Karl Rove is focusing -- is focusing exclusively on, can she win?

I think there's a reputational harm that he is worried about, when the Republican Party that has a Mike Castle, who has been a serious, thoughtful public servant, is defeated by somebody whose views on issues seem to be so completely disparate and far afield from normal ideas that are tethered to fact and reason.

I think that is what Karl Rove is scared about. There's a reputational hit the Republican Party will really suffer from if they embrace candidates like this.

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: Alex, are you concerned about this?

ALEX CASTELLANOS, CNN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR: No, I think it's -- I think it demonstrates a lot of energy in the Republican Party. Look, this is an anti-establishment year, anti-Washington year. People look at all these -- these qualified people we have in Washington and working together in a bipartisan way.

And in a bipartisan way they've spent the country into bankruptcy. They've put us in debt for -- that will take forever to pay. So they want it to stop.

And that's what you're seeing, I think, this year is a -- is a populist, a revolt against the establishment of both parties. And they've just eaten the Republican establishment for a snack. Now dinnertime is November, and only Democrats are going to be on the menu.

SPITZER: Well, you know, that's a great metaphor and I applaud you for it. The problem is that the closest metaphor I think many people can see historically is to the Know Nothing Party, the Know Nothing Party of the 1840s and '50s, which was a populist uprising of anger and venom against the establishment. It burned out pretty quickly when economic times returned to normal. In that case it was anti-immigrant fervor.

CASTELLANOS: I think there's another historical precedent, Governor Spitzer. I think there's a much larger -- excuse me. I think there's a much larger historical precedent, and that's a country that was founded -- founded by a group of people that didn't want to be told what to do by an elite royalty that thought it had the answer to everything.

And right now Washington is doing that. It's bankrupted the country. And people are really concerned about it. I think the Republican Party just got a wake-up call that said, "Look, we don't want to send a message out that says we're more concerned about keeping our power in Washington than to listen to Republicans."

COOPER: Dana -- Dana, do you think it's going to burn out in any way?

LOESCH: I don't think it's going to burn out. And I want to -- Mr. Spitzer said something that was very interesting, that this isn't tethered in fact or reality.

I have to point out that Mike Castle is a very incredibly -- he's a very established beltway candidate for sure, but he's also a candidate whose record differed from where the majority of Americans polled, where they fall.

The majority of people are more identifying with the grassroots movement than they are with people like Mike Castle. I mean, there was a Rasmussen poll that was taken just -- I believe it was in August, where something like 75 percent of -- or thought of the American people thought that the congressional Democrat agenda was too extreme.

And then you look at all of the tracking that has been taking place. Gallup released a poll also in August showing that the majority of independents, they are favoring the Republican Party, meaning they're favoring the grassroots conservative candidates that are really actually providing a difference in parties.

SPITZER: You're talking...

LOESCH: Mike Castle is Democrat light.

SPITZER: You're talking -- you're talking very persuasively about poll numbers. I'm not talking now about poll numbers or what might happen in a moment in one election at one moment in time.

What I'm talking about is the seriousness of confronting deficits with policies that will really do something about it. A Bill Clinton who gave us a surplus versus George Bush, whose tax cuts created this. And so I think the difference is certain objective facts that, at the end of the day, will emerge that will shed light -- I think Ron Paul is a fascinating guy, but when he says Keynesianism is dead, he just is simply fundamentally wrong. What is dead is...

LOESCH: Castle...

SPITZER: ... the procession of libertarianism that he was a proponent of that took us over the cliff in terms of an economic crisis as close to a depression as we've had in 80 years.

LOESCH: And TARP Has been supporting policies which tripled our deficits.

CASTELLANOS: I'm sorry. Excuse me, but look, there's something out there happening that's much bigger than the Tea Party. The Tea Party is certainly a part of it, but when you look around the country, there's a new generation of Republican candidates out there.

You have independent business women outsiders in California, Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina, Kelly Ayotte in New Hampshire. You have Bob McDonnell in Virginia; Chris Christi in New Jersey; Scott, Massachusetts.

All these new candidates have one thing in common. They're outsiders. They're fresh faces. And they don't want to grow Washington's economy; they want to grow America's economy. They want to stop taking money out of the American people's economy and sending it to Washington.

SPITZER: Let me make something very clear.

CASTELLANOS: The Tea Party is the easiest part to focus on, because it's got the brightest feathers and is the most colorful, but it's much bigger than that. That's why Republicans are probably going to gain something like 52, 53 seats.

SPITZER: Alex, I could not agree with you more.

CASTELLANOS: Ask Americans about Keynesianism being dead. They're voting on it this election. SPITZER: Well, I could not agree with you more about growing the private sector and private sector job creation versus government. And in fact, that is what smart politics is all about.

What I'm saying is the policies coming out of the Tea Party are simply so disassociated from reality in terms of what it takes to do it. And if you sit down with a Meg Whitman; you sit down with business leaders who have grown business, who have run businesses, they will tell you that what the Tea Party is talking about and what Ron Paul is talking about is simply contrary to good economics.

And I would suggest to you the nations right now whose growth is outstripping us by huge margins, whether it's India, Vietnam, Japan, even France and Germany, you look at what they're doing, in fact I think you would find out that your perspective is being proven dead wrong by what economics is working.

COOPER: I want to give Dana the last thought.

CASTELLANOS: The Democrats...

LOESCH: Excuse me, with all due respect, though, you can't -- you can't say that economic policy which talks about spending billions of dollars for yet another stimulus after we spent 11 frillion [SIC] dollars for yet another stimulus that contributed to the deficit, that contributed to high unemployment. You can't say that that's good economic policy. And those are all things which the grassroots movement is vehemently against.

SPITZER: The underlying -- if I could just...

LOESCH: That's not good economics, that's irresponsible and that's fact.

SPITZER: I know Anderson -- The reason that was necessary, unfortunately, was because of the deregulatory policies, libertarian policies that were put in place by Tea Party-like false regulators like Alan Greenspan and Larry...

LOESCH: You mean like Chris Dodd? Because he was...

SPITZER: Absolutely. Yes, absolutely.

LOESCH: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and things like that.

SPITZER: I agree with that. That was not genuine government smart policy. I agree with that critique.

CASTELLANOS: Spitzer, advice to Democrats, spend more. I love it.

SPITZER: It's not spending. It took years to do it. What you're saying simply doesn't work.

LOESCH: ... to keep going.

COOPER: Good to have you on. Alex Castellanos, Eliot Spitzer, thanks very much.

A quick reminder. Don't miss Parker Spitzer right here on CNN, 8 Eastern Time October 4, every weekday thereafter until the competition cries uncle, I guess.

Still ahead on 360, a revelation that has Pennsylvania's governor fuming. It's one thing to keep an eye on potential terrorists but another to conduct surveillance on ordinary Americans. We're going to tell you what this is all about and the fallout that's followed.

Plus BP back on the hot seat. Tony Hayward grilled in London, insisting that short cuts were not taken to save money. Back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

9.12.2010

9/12 Teabagger Rally in STL: The STL Teabagger Hate Cabal's run-up + Tony Perkins claims that "Christian Television will be off the air"

The STL Teabagger Hate Cabal is leading the charge on that the "rallies aren't political," when fact they are really nothing more than anti-Democrat/Obama rallies, because they can't stand the fact that we have a duly elected Black Democratic president in office.

First, the Ultimate Satan of the St. Louis Area has this piece, intercepted by Adam Shriver.

Unintentional Irony Alert: The Astroturf St. Louis Tea Party

Dana Loesch was angry about the fact that singer Kim Massie backed out of the 9/12 tea party rally because she didn't want to be used as a political pawn, and had the following to say on her blog:
Something to note: Massie was invited by the Lt. Governor of Missouri and was reportedly excited to debut her song about 9/11 at the 9/12 event. It was never marketed as anything but a tea party event.

Sad that the left is so uncomfortable with the idea of a huge grassroots movement which isn’t under the sway of a political party.
So Loesch says that the tea party "isn't under the sway of a political party," just two sentences after noting that the Republican Lt. Governor was helping to book guests for the rally! When Republican politicians are scheduling your guests for you, yes you are under the sway of a political party!

The St. Louis tea party has been astroturf from the very start, and their support of Republican insiders like Roy Blunt and Ed Martin only reinforces that fact.

Kim Massie WILL NOT Perform at Tea Party Rally

Out of the long list of usual suspects who will be speaking at this Sunday's tea party, there was one pretty surprising guest: renowned vocalist Kim Massie. I guess we found out why: apparently, the tea party didn't inform her that this was going to be a political rally.

At least Kim Massie has the balls to say no to the hatemongers, unlike LaRussa and Pujols.



Next, the Astroturfing whacko Ed Martin had this from his blog:

I'm all for people sharing their memories of and reflections about the tragic events from September 11, 2001. It was a catastrophic loss of life and something that is indelibly imprinted on all Americans who lived through that time. Its anniversary should be an event that brings us together in mourning and contemplation, but unfortunately shameless politicians like Ed Martin try to exploit that tragedy to attack their political opponents. Check out these paragraphs from Martin's post today titled "September 11th – Nine Years Later:"
http://stlactivisthub.blogspot.com/2010/09/ed-martin-exploits-911-for-political.html
http://edmartinforcongress.com/3197/september-11th-nine-years-later/
Next up: Islamophobia at the 9/12 Teabagger Rally: They really are racist whackjobs who hate ANYTHING that isn't white, straight, Christian, Republican, and/or Conservative.

Tea Party Attendee: "Wish Me Luck and No Muslims"

A member of the Dallas tea party flying in to St. Louis for the 9/12 rally had this to say today:



Every one of these idiots is implying that ALL of Islam is evil. I have no idea how anyone could grow up in a population center like St. Louis or Dallas and be so completely ignorant about the fact that decent, hard-working, peaceful Muslims are integrated throughout American society. They have to be locking themselves in a basement 24 hours a day with a radio that only plays 97.1. And even that wouldn't work perfectly, since I heard Dave Glover on the radio making some reasonable comments as he guest hosted Glenn Beck's show. Honestly, I don't understand how people can be that clueless.

Anyway, if the tea party wants their claims to be "open-minded" and "tolerant" to be taken seriously, they need to condemn these types of comments at their rally.

http://stlactivisthub.blogspot.com/2010/09/tea-party.html



If you think that the Teabaggers are just "average Americans who are trying to save our freedoms," then you better think again with this next article in that the Astroturfed Tea Party is encouraging the use of Public Transportation after they demonized it back in April and in other past instances (St. Charles County back in the 90's, etc...)

Tea Party Asks People To Use The Light Rail They Tried to Destroy

Only a few months ago, the St. Louis tea party was screaming "SOCIALISM" and claiming that St. Louis did not have the population density to support light rail. They tried to block a sales tax increase that was needed to restore the public transportation system in St. Louis. Fortunately for them, their attempts to defeat EVIL SOCIALIST public transportation failed miserably, because they are now encouraging people to use MetroLink to get to the 9/12 rally:



http://stlactivisthub.blogspot.com/2010/09/tea-party-asks-people-to-use-light-rail.html


ThinkProgress has this dandy: Tony Perkins is falsely trying to claim that "TBN, Daystar, EWTN, INSP, TCT, the whole Right-Wing Pro-Israel Lobby Religious Networks will be shut down." In fact, that will NEVER happen, as long as greedy, Right-Wing Bible-thumping snakeoil preachers are making money. They also love to say that "The Liberals/Anti-Christians are taking our rights away to preach the 'truth' and throwing us in jail" nonsense. A preacher WON'T go to jail for preaching against abortion, homosexuality, etc...

TBN, Daystar, EWTN, TCT, CBN, and all of the countless other channels ARE aiding and abetting not only the GOP/Focus On The Family/First Things (who Hoft blogs for)-issued talking points, but also peddling the Creationist, Messianic Jewish (Daystar and TBN especially), and the Prosperity Gospel Movement.
When David Boies debated Family Research Council president Tony Perkins on Face The Nation, he pointed out that while “it’s easy to sit around and debate and throw around opinions, appeal to people’s fear and prejudice, cite studies that either don’t exist or don`t say what you say they do, in a court of law, you`ve got to come in and you`ve got to support those opinions.” “And what we saw at trial is that it`s very easy for the people who want to deprive gay and lesbian citizens the right to vote to make all sorts of statements and campaign literature, or in debates, where they can`t be cross-examined, but when they come into court and they have to support those opinions and they have to defend those opinions under oath and cross- examination, those opinions just melt away,” he said.

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/09/09/perkins-religious-belief/
Tweets by @JGibsonDem Tweets by @JPCTumblr