Is the Tea Party Over?

By Scarborough, Joe | Newsweek, February 1, 2010 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Is the Tea Party Over?

Scarborough, Joe, Newsweek

Byline: Joe Scarborough

The anti-Obama anger that helped fuel the 'Massachusetts miracle' is now threatening to tear the movement apart.

As the election results began reaching the White House, the young president found himself shaken. How could this unknown Republican win election in one of the last great bastions of progressive politics? How could it be that not so long before, it was the president's own party that had been carried to power by a wave of public discontent similar to the one that now threatened to destroy his ambitious health-care plans?

Those questions surely haunted Bill Clinton throughout the long night of Nov. 8, 1994, when the same Minnesota voters who had given the 42nd president a landslide victory in 1992 decided to send a hard-charging conservative named Rod Grams to the U.S. Senate just two years later. Scores of Republicans across the country shared Grams's good political fortune by promising--like Massachusetts miracle man Scott Brown--to stop a White House that voters believed to be too liberal, too out of touch, and too obsessed with Washington-run health care.

The political coalition that carried Republicans to victory over Clinton's Democratic Party was a collection of restless voters inspired by one of the most mercurial presidential campaigns in U.S. history. H. Ross Perot's "United We Stand" organization was formed as a result of the Texas billionaire's 1992 campaign. The quirky populist cobbled together an unlikely confederation of blue-collar workers, disaffected union members, devout Christians, gun-rights activists, talk-radio fans, retired military veterans, pro-life families, nervous deficit hawks, aging John Birchers, and an eclectic assortment of disaffected voters who saw the federal government as the enemy.

While reporting on last summer's health-care town-hall meetings, I recognized many of those familiar faces in the crowds. Among the protesters were veterans, deeply suspicious of the young liberal president and embittered, ironically, by Congress's failure to keep its promise to give them government-run health care for life. Also in attendance were gun-rights activists, who believed that their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms was being put at risk by Barack Obama. And in those throngs I also saw the faces of talk-show fans, pushed into action by the apocalyptic warnings of personalities like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. Those two right-wing talkers had spent the past year telling listeners that the Democratic president was a racist who somehow managed to find the time also to be a Nazi and a communist.

But if the tea-party protests produced their share of histrionics from the right, they also brought out the worst in progressive elites. As the grassroots movement was gaining traction across America, liberal columnists and commentators ridiculed the new political movement as a collection of racists, reactionaries, and uneducated buffoons. Instead of recognizing these nationwide protests for what they were--a potent sign of public discontent--too many liberals became more contemptuous as the tea-party movement grew. On ABC's This Week, The Nation's editor Katrina vanden Heuvel dismissed the movement's members as clueless "teabaggers," even as tea-party members were skillfully organizing a winning Senate campaign in Massachusetts.

A few Democrats understood the importance of the tea-party groups long before the Obama White House or its allies in the media. San Francisco's mayor, Gavin Newsom, issued a warning to fellow Democrats before Martha Coakley's loss in Massachusetts.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Is the Tea Party Over?


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?