Web Letters | The Nation

Loose Tea > Letters

Web Letter

I am always weary of polls, but I really don't believe a poll that says that tea partyers are well-educated. Would the well-eduated refer to Obama as a socialist, fascist and Nazi? No, because the well-educated actually know the definitions of those terms and know that they don't even remotely apply to our president. Would the educated hold up a sign that defaces and defames our president? Would the educated call our black senators "niggers"? No, only the lowest of the low of our society would, the immoral and the ignorant.

The tea party group is nothing more than the trash of our nation who are racists, whose anger is not about Obama's policies but his skin color. If they were so policy-oriented, they would have spoken up in the Bush years when all of the things the tea party claims to hate were expanded exponentially.

So their hypocrisy in criticizing a president who has been in office one year versus a monster who destroyed the world in eight years shows that they are just plain dumb and racist.

Tina Issa

Chicago, IL

Apr 26 2010 - 4:27pm

Web Letter

More bigoted bather, all too typical of Mr. Kim's amateurish rants. He describes this round of drivel best himself within this latest batch: "little lies laced with tiny truths...," though he combines his lies together to help propagate the "big lie" in service of his masters.

Ed Ford

New York, NY

Apr 24 2010 - 12:42pm

Web Letter

I have read commentaries, on both sides, in which it seems the writer cannot see the forest for the trees, but this is the first time I've been struck that the writer cannot see the trees for the twigs.

Mike Zarowitz

Cambria, CA

Apr 24 2010 - 7:40am

Web Letter

The Nation states, We are happy to hear from you--wonder why I doubt that. Richard Kim states: "Fed a steady diet of paranoia and emotional appeals to vague concepts like freedom and liberty, they appear uninterested in the details of governing, to which even the Republican Party's elite pay lip service, and unable to espouse a vision, however cramped, of collective interest."

How very sad that you enjoy the freedoms and liberties of this country but yet demonstrate no concept of what those words stand for. It is our mission to defeat this Obama socialist insanity (and people like you) through our electoral process and we will be successful in saving our country.

Terry Gannon

Palm Coast, FL

Apr 24 2010 - 6:33am

Web Letter

Richard Kim stoops into the very sins he attaches to the Tea Party people--paranoia and emotional appeals. The terms "haves and have-nots" are chosen to create an atmosphere of class warfare. Perhaps if Mr. Kim would use the proper terms--"earned assets and unearned assets"--he could actually approach the truth of the tea party movement.

When those who don't work take away the fruits of labor of those who do, then you have justification for discontent. If those who are blindly chanting "Yes we can" began sticking their hands into Mr. Kim's pockets, he might start singing a very different tune.

Tim Martin

Corona, CA

Apr 23 2010 - 6:23pm

Web Letter

Sitting at your keyboard, typing madly away to make a deadline, you imagined this sentence would advance your argument: "Fed a steady diet of paranoia and emotional appeals to vague concepts like freedom and liberty..."

Instead, I believe you've betrayed your own level of commitment to these "notions." Thus your skin-deep assessment of those who cherish freedom and liberty.

The audacity of projecting your own tendencies upon others in an attempt to denigrate them! "Thinkers" like you are whom we fear the most, but not for the reasons you might suppose.

Mark Steven Zuelke

Hollywood, CA

Apr 23 2010 - 5:02pm

Web Letter

Richard Kim, here's why your "article" isn't worth the bandwidth it takes to download it.

1. The first part, from "When tea party organizers" to "the great white whale of government," carries absolutely no attribution. Does "Dot" have a last name? Does she have an address more specific than Montgomery County, Pennsylvania? Does she have a hometown... or does she travel from place to place throughout Montgomery County, calling the whole county home?

2. Likewise, "one man told me" or "a woman in a red-and-blue pantsuit" or "tea partyers I met" likely have no demonstrable basis in fact, except as they exist in your imagination.

3. You refer to a "kaleidoscope of kookiness" yet provide absolutely no proof of its existence except unidentified sources who likely as not have been woven out of whole cloth. (See #1 and #2 above.)

4. The New York Times? That "newspaper" has been in the tank for Barack Obama since Day 1, and misses no opportunity to unabashedly boost him in an egregiously partisan way while denigrating Americans of independent thought. And you need not have a PhD in news analysis and story placement to figure that one out. Oh, and CBS... yeah, that "news" organization has a lot of credibility since Dan Rather's "gee, I thought those documents were legit" fiasco. It's ludicrous that the only polling you cite is from clearly biased sources.

The real litmus test will occur in November 2010, and--borrowing from a Democrat you may have heard of (Harry Truman)--come November, the Democrats will experience a rain of ruin the like of which never has been seen in American politics.

Look down your nose at disaffected voters all you want, but the national anger brewing includes the tea partyers and Republicans you shower with scorn, as well as Democrats and independents.

Come November, "a hard rain's a-gonna fall." Were I you, Richard, I'd waste no time getting to higher ground.

Jack Davis

Phoenix, AZ

Apr 23 2010 - 4:14pm

Web Letter

These days, it's difficult being a self-described conservative without being characterized as a closed-minded regressive. It's equally difficult to find like-minded conservatives who would prefer to walk with Teddy Roosevelt than with Ronald Reagan. However, to paraphrase good ol' Teddy, it's far better to dare to dream and fail than to live in the shallow tepidness that comes with accepting the world as it is.

In truth, a conservative ought to be appalled at the direction in which the American tight is drifting. Far from the high-minded ideals espoused by Roosevelt, the modern member of the "conservative" movement wallows in stultifying fear. Principles of opposition have been used as rallying cries without full comprehension of the context in which such statements were made. Most notably, classical economic principles--limited government interference in the economy, for instance--have been abused outside of their context, yet somehow still have the sort of strength that comes from good ol' misguided folk wisdom.

It's good that a handful of Republicans, including Mr. Cantor, have taken it upon themselves to try to guide the party in a direction that is cognizable and reasonable. It is a shame, however, that the rest of the Republican party have sold themselves out to buzz-terms and public sentiment, as it is pretty clear that the public cannot form a reasonable opinion due to the misinformation being fed to them from media outlets. The party has strayed far from the party that was an outspoken advocate for civil rights and for the dismantling of corporations that strangled the economy into stagnation; now, the party is a collection of rambling nay-sayers content on letting the country spiral into self-destruction.

That being said, there are likely many conservatives who, like me, wait quietly for leadership to emerge. It's clear that the current head of the GOP is unable to pull together the fractured base of support, and that the Republicans that ought to be listened to have been drowned out by those who are popular. Consequently, there's nothing more to do than to wait neck-deep in the quagmire.

Jonathan Hung

Beavercreek, OH

Apr 23 2010 - 11:47am