I could just as easily turn around and say your defense of the Tea Party is based on circumstantial or anecdotal cases of where they're actually coherent or avoiding overtly radical or offensive rhetoric, because with a fragmented group like this there's always wiggle room for someone to do exactly as you are doing, and merely flicking your wrist to wave off the unsavory character of the party as just a fringe minimal element.
Let's put it this way PanzerJaeger... when you have to routinely conduct damage control because people who support your cause are always showing up with signs alluding to wishing for Kennedy solutions or making racially charged denouncements of the President, that says something. Of course the Tea Party isn't going to put "we have a lot of people who hate blacks" in its official charter for me to pull out and show you. So what? All you are doing is spin doctoring something that is pretty obvious to anyone who's paid the least bit of attention to the movement (and isn't a staunch supporter of it.)
I also find it interesting that you harp on anecdotal evidence and your entire handwaving of signs you can see at Tea Party events involves pointing out ONE incident where a particularly offensive sign bearer was thrown out. Like that's not defending your position about the overall Tea Party based off one cherrypicked anecdote.
Bookmarks