#rsrh There was Tea Party ‘Rage?’

That was my first reaction to this Daily Beast post (H/T Hot Air Headlines), at least: after all, the original ‘rage’ was in point of fact a collective delusion of the progressive Left, based equally on their self-perceived (if never self-acknowledged) lack of self-worth; and progressives’ self-awareness of how badly they’d act if given the opportunity.  If you don’t believe me on the latter, look at these Wisconsin anti-reform protesters from March:

Now that there is some rage.  Hilarious rage.

But I digress.

Anyway, there are three major reasons why no rage:

  1. There wasn’t really any to begin with; people were pissed off, which is frankly a lot scarier to your average politician.  Enraged people don’t have and follow strategies: as the 2010 election handily demonstrated, pissed-off* people do.
  2. A good deal of the Tea Party’s goals have already been accomplished.  One big one?  Stopping Congress from doing something stupid, like passing another ‘stimulus.’  Another big one?  Scaring Republican politicians.
  3. Contra to a large number of pundits and observers – including the ones at the Daily Beast, come to think of it – Tea Partiers are functional, fully-socialized adults, not petulant adult-children who scream when their binkies are taken away from them.  See the video above.

Mind you, protest fatigue is real enough: but it’s a secondary issue.  Or wishful thinking on the part of the establishment.  Or both.

Moe Lane

*No, I’m not sure either why the hyphen looks right in the one case, but not the other.

1 Comment

  • Brian Swisher says:

    The hyphen thing? I think it’s because “pissed-off” is functioning as an adjective, whereas it was functioning as a verb in the earlier case.

    This is your Sunday morning dose of pointless grammatical maunderings…

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by