Will You Restore Sanity or Keep Fear Alive?

BY  |  Tuesday, Oct 12, 2010 9:06am  |  COMMENTS (114)

Raise your hand if you’re planning a trip to Washington on Halloween weekend to hang out with the Comedy Central boys, including our own hometown favorite Stephen Colbert. Have you bought your Glenn Beck mask yet?

If you’re on the fence, maybe a bus ride from the heart of Baristaville will propel you. BlueWaveNJ is sending a bus from Montclair and Ellen Greenfield is organizing a bus trip out of SOMA (email her here). Cost $50. Scroll down for Montclair info:

Meanwhile take our poll (in the jump). And if you missed it, here’s the link to Terry Gross’s recent interview with Jon Stewart at the 92nd Street Y.


Join the Rally to Restore Sanity and to Keep Fear Alive! Two active Montclair community institutions (Unitarian Universalist Congregation at Montclair and BlueWaveNJ) have teamed up to arrange for a bus to Washington DC for the Jon Stewart/Stephen Colbert Rallies on Saturday October 30, 2010. The Bus will be leaving from the McDonald’s Parking lot in the Brookdale Service Center (off Broad Street/off the Garden State Parkway Southbound in Bloomfield) between 6:15-6:30 am on Saturday mornning and will return the same day by 8:30 or 9:30 pm Saturday night.

Please RSVP ASAP to guarantee your seat on the Bus, by calling the Unitarian Univeralist office at 973-744-6276. Seats are limited. Cost is $50 per person. Checks payable to the “UUCAM” should be delivered to the Unitarian Universalist Congregation office at 67 Church Street, Montclair, (Tuesday through Friday, 9am – 2 pm) OR to WanderPolo Law 209 Cooper Avenue, Suite 2, Montclair, NJ (Monday through Friday 8:30 am – 6 pm) on or before October 22. Bring your own food and beverages, as well as appropriate signs, placards, and lots of enthusiasm. Any questions about the Bus, email [email protected]


  1. POSTED BY profwilliams  |  October 12, 2010 @ 9:23 am

    Perhaps it should be labeled: “We are so unoriginal and only wait for someone else to create something so we can copy it” March.

    This is just stupid.

    I hear Beck is going to hang glide off the Capital.

    THIS JUST IN: Stewart and Colbert are going to hang glide off the Capital.

    For two guys with no real ratings, it will be fun to see how few people show up compared to Beck.

    Jokes aside, what is the point of it (and the “counter” march only shows that it is a meaningless event)? You can hate Beck, but he’s on a mission and asked something from his people. What are Stewart and Colbert going to ask of theirs?

  2. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 12, 2010 @ 9:43 am

    No real ratings? And prof, the fact that it’s on Comedy Central should clue you in about their “mission”.

  3. POSTED BY waltermitty  |  October 12, 2010 @ 10:03 am

    As I see it, the point Stewart (and by association Colbert) is trying to make is that people should be less passionate about politics, that the decisions are not that consequential; that everything will be better if we just let the people in charge operate without criticism or interference.

    They are holding a rally for complacency, and complacency never accomplished anything.

    What they fail to have the ability to understand is that Beck drew crowds because lots of people are legitimately concerned with the direction they see politicians taking the country and they want it stopped. Not all of them can state it clearly, or politely. And some of them are nuts.

    But they are engaged and they are willing to put their energy in making their voice heard, and that is nothing to be mocked.

  4. POSTED BY Right of Center  |  October 12, 2010 @ 10:14 am

    The same schtick from the same jokers. A fake rally which is really a corporate commercial event for a tv show.

  5. POSTED BY Right of Center  |  October 12, 2010 @ 10:17 am

    While I agree with Walter’s comments above. I also think there is plenty to mock in Glen Beck’s activities. I think he’s a certifiable wacko. The fact that so many people showed up at his rally speaks more to the dearth of serious conservative leadership in the country than to Beck’s beliefs.

  6. POSTED BY Martta Rose  |  October 12, 2010 @ 10:32 am

    I will be doing this 5K race in Montclair, for a good cause:


    For the first time in a long time, there is no one I respect in the Republican Party who is currently running for one office or another. Nor do I respect the two wingnuts above who are merely staging these events for their own selfish publicity. I have no problem with someone being a media whore (or any other kind of whore for that matter), just be honest about it.

    I’ve asked this before: Why are all the moderates in hiding?

  7. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 12, 2010 @ 10:40 am

    ROC has it right. It’s ALL a big TV show. It’s not just Stewart and Colbert. The “wackos” are getting rich being wacko. It’s about fame and money. The crazier they are, the more famous they become.

  8. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 12, 2010 @ 10:49 am

    I fully expect
    (in vivid and telling contrast to the Beck rally and other Tea Party rallies)
    that the posters and banners will overwhelmingly display correct spelling and grammar.

  9. POSTED BY bebopgun  |  October 12, 2010 @ 10:52 am

    The moderates by definition are moderate in their tone, and unfortunately moderates don’t bring in ratings.

    The radical center has failed to materialize. It’s now ok to call anyone who disagrees with you an idiot or liar and leave it at that without adding anything of substance.

  10. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 12, 2010 @ 10:55 am

    Yeah, Beck’s on a “mission”.


    These two rallies are a pretty sad commentary on what passes for political engagement this year. They are both designed to add more cash and more “fame” to their respective leaders. Pathetic.

    As was Beck’s rally. While his supporters may be “engaged”, it is a negative engagement. They are against much, but for little. They voice an inchoate rage against “government” while for the most part understanding very little about how it operates.

    Colbert and Stewart are really, in my view, 2 guys who need to hit the stand-up circuit and leave us alone.

  11. POSTED BY deadeye  |  October 12, 2010 @ 11:04 am

    I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Christine O’Donnell should top the charts with her inevitable post-election talk show based on her “wacko” quotient. Think of the range of material that could be discussed. I wonder if she has an agent?

  12. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 12, 2010 @ 11:15 am

    MM, the “moderates are in hiding” because the extremists call them RINOs.
    Apparently, whereas RHINOs have thick skins, RINOs have thin skins.

  13. POSTED BY mike 91  |  October 12, 2010 @ 11:16 am

    As I understand it, the Stewart rally is a rally for moderates, who otherwise wouldn’t be inclined to go to a rally, since their moderates. Its an interesting idea, given the recent attention paid to the looney wings of both parties.

    You can hate Beck, but he’s on a mission and asked something from his people.

    On a mission to do what? Be the 21st century Father Coughlin? See how often he can lie during an hour? Beck is an entertainer, and has admitted as much. There’s nothing more entertaining, or is more successful keeping the lemmings coming back, than rage.

  14. POSTED BY Howard Beale  |  October 12, 2010 @ 11:18 am

    “I’ve asked this before: Why are all the moderates in hiding?”

    That’s in both parties, Ms Martta.

    The “wingnuts” on both sides seem to have the center stage.

  15. POSTED BY Martta Rose  |  October 12, 2010 @ 11:20 am

    “As I understand it, the Stewart rally is a rally for moderates.”

    Moderates, by definition, don’t need to hold these type of dog and pony shows to make their point.

    And Beck is just an idiot.

  16. POSTED BY unmitigated gall  |  October 12, 2010 @ 11:28 am

    I wonder what Christine O’Donnell is doing on Halloween. “Boil, Boil, Toil and Trouble!” ;>

  17. POSTED BY unmitigated gall  |  October 12, 2010 @ 11:30 am

    I’ve asked this before: Why are all the moderates in hiding?

    They aren’t. They are in the White House.

  18. POSTED BY Martta Rose  |  October 12, 2010 @ 11:32 am

    Uh, no they’re not.

  19. POSTED BY kay  |  October 12, 2010 @ 11:35 am

    BWA-HA-hahahaha !!!

    Good one, Gall!

  20. POSTED BY Nellie  |  October 12, 2010 @ 11:48 am

    that the posters and banners will overwhelmingly display correct spelling and grammar

    So Tee Parti peeple can’t spel, Spiro?

  21. POSTED BY montclairgirl  |  October 12, 2010 @ 12:09 pm

    I like Glenn Beck. I like Sarah Palin. I like Carl Rove. I like Carl Paladino. I like Fox News. I like the Tea Party. The more it pisses off the left, the more I like them.
    Glenn Beck is pulling in the ratings. People are listening to what he has to say and they are liking it. Didn’t think I would find fans of Glenn Beck at the Barista or anywhere in Essex County but they are starting to add up! Ha!!
    As for the signs spelled right, that’s because the libs are having them mass produced to hand out to the lefties. They can’t think on their own, never mind spell.
    ROC, sorry you see Beck in a different light. He is trying to open the eyes of the sheep that are (were) following Zero. He may be a little out there but his message about the White House’s ideas slipping more and more to the far left is on the money.

  22. POSTED BY Martta Rose  |  October 12, 2010 @ 12:22 pm

    Montclairgirl: Usually you and I are kindred spirits when it comes to politics but I draw the line at Carl Paladino, especially based on his remarks as of late. I really think he has a screw loose somewhere. Outspokeness is one thing but this is political suicide.

    Glenn Beck, a little too histrionic for me. Palin and Rove, while I don’t buy them hook, line, and sinker, I respect them for speaking their minds without resorting to theatrics.

    As many posters here know, I listen to Michael Savage most nights. His commentary is refreshing because he doesn’t always talk politics; he’ll take about history, health and wellness, fine cuisine, dogs, whatever…he’s a good story teller. Plus, he has been known to bash conservatives and Republicans as well, especially if they are RINOS (Republicans In Name Only).

    I also watch O’Reilly and Hannity because I find them entertaining. Sometimes informative, but always entertaining.

    AND…I also watch Bill Maher because, while I disagree with his politics 98% of the time, he’s a funny man.

  23. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 12, 2010 @ 12:35 pm

    Well, there are all sorts of delusions.

    There is the type that leads to Beck seeing secret messages in the Rockefeller Center carvings and paintings.

    There is the type that leads Michael Savage to opine that legalizing gay marriage will result in eventually allowing marriage between humans and horses.

    And of course there is the type that causes montclairgirl to believe that “lefties” are pissed off by these clowns, and those who support them.

    On the contrary. “Lefties” want dozens of Becks, Savages, Palladinos, Hannitys, O’Donnell’s etc. The more the better.

  24. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 12, 2010 @ 12:36 pm

    Good one Nellie – I have enjoyed your correct spelling and grammar for years.

    Montclairgirl, your politics haven’t changed much, but I used to think you drank too much coffee. Apparently, you like it more than ever, and in larger cups.

  25. POSTED BY herbeverschmel  |  October 12, 2010 @ 12:48 pm

    Spiro- I just love the misinformation you spread, its quite comical. In particular your incorrect observation about signs at the Beck rally.

    In your words “I fully expect
    (in vivid and telling contrast to the Beck rally and other Tea Party rallies)
    that the posters and banners will overwhelmingly display correct spelling and grammar.”

    In fact there were no signs there (maybe a few here and there). Ah, but why bother telling the truth if it doesn’t fit your agenda.


  26. POSTED BY comfortstarr  |  October 12, 2010 @ 12:52 pm

    Um… people, they’re mocking Beck et al. That’s what they do as comedians and satirists. As to the criticism that they’re doing it for their jobs/shows… well DUH! Are you, oh arch-capitalists, saying they shouldn’t do that? Also, do you really believe Beck doesn’t do what he does for his own self-serving interests? Let’s either set the faux-niavete aside or smarten up folk.

  27. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 12, 2010 @ 1:00 pm

    Oh boy Herb – as if everyone actually behaved and obeyed Beck. In any case….whether or not there were signs, the point being made is that his followers are somewhat less well educated and more gullible than the crowds that might show up at a Comedy Central sponsored rally with Stewart and Colbert. And it’s ALL about ratings and money. On both sides. As PT Barnum said, “You’ll never go broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. ” And these guys prove it daily.

  28. POSTED BY profwilliams  |  October 12, 2010 @ 1:21 pm


    You point to exactly what I HATE about Stewart and Colbert.

    They are “comedians” when they want, and using satire to make a political point when they want.

    To that, they are neither. (Wasn’t it Stewart who offered “you’re hurting” American when he supposedly brought down Crossfire on CNN? You’re “hurting” us? Deep! But then again, he’s just a comedian.)

    So we get the embarrassment of Colbert at Congress– he’s unfunny- but he wasn’t “trying” to be funny. He made no real political point, but he was just a comedian doing schtick.

    As for Beck, who cares. Loads of folks like the guy- I wouldn’t waste my time. But I don’t think he had Huffington “donating” 250k for buses to his rally…..

    Paying folks to attend the rally. Bow down to Zod!!!

  29. POSTED BY hrhppg  |  October 12, 2010 @ 1:22 pm

    The fact that they’ve generated this much attention means they’ve succeded in whatever they were doing. I don’t like the talking heads on my Sunday morning tv, that’s why I don’t post about them. If you don’t like these guys why waste the effort on them ?

    I do have friends going to this, not me as I’m in the carving pumpkin group, and they think it will be fun. They don’t think it will change the landscape of American politics.

  30. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 12, 2010 @ 1:22 pm

    Come to think of it, Herb, Beck did ban signs, you are right. But, cmon Herb, the low level of ability in spelling and grammar among Tea Party signs is extremely well documented. No need for me to make that one up.
    Some of my favorites:


  31. POSTED BY PAZ  |  October 12, 2010 @ 1:40 pm

    I’d go to a rally for Gary Null.

  32. POSTED BY hrhppg  |  October 12, 2010 @ 1:46 pm

    Wow Spiro – The first two made me laugh, but that last one was bone chilling. I don’t care how it is spelled that word is horrible. I’m stunned that in the past few years it seems on a come back, and not just in rap music.

  33. POSTED BY Martta Rose  |  October 12, 2010 @ 2:04 pm

    Spelling aside, I like the philosophy of sign #2.

  34. POSTED BY profwilliams  |  October 12, 2010 @ 2:04 pm

    Give me a few mins. with Photoshop and I’ll have each of those photos featuring “Obama is the Best” on them.

    Not to say they are fake, but I rarely believe picture I stumble upon. Manipulating a photo is way to easy to simply offer one as proof.

  35. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 12, 2010 @ 2:17 pm

    Need I post videos, prof?

  36. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 12, 2010 @ 2:27 pm

    To your point, Professor, this one was definitely photoshopped, and available on line for free.
    It was a big hit, I suspect.


  37. POSTED BY nick danger  |  October 12, 2010 @ 2:30 pm

    I’m not sure certain of you are seeing the irony of this. Yes, they are comedians. I don’t like Mr. Colbert’s act so I’ll stick with Mr. Stewart.

    When a comedy show presents events more clearly than the mainstream media something is wrong. When a comedian sees things more clearly than our elected officials there’s something wrong.

    And not with the comedians.

  38. POSTED BY bebopgun  |  October 12, 2010 @ 2:39 pm

    Montclair girl likes Fox because it pisses off lefties. This is what I’ve often thought about many on the right. They like republican talking points because it pisses off the left. What kind of politics is that? Fine to like an ideology if you believe in it, but to say you like it because it pisses someone off is pretty dumb.

    Did you get hurt by a left leaning liberal in college Montclair Girl?

  39. POSTED BY tondalayo  |  October 12, 2010 @ 2:50 pm

    “A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant and the crazy crazier.”
    H. L. Mencken

    Just substitute “newspaper” with “cable news” and it’s sure spot on.

  40. POSTED BY Nellie  |  October 12, 2010 @ 3:20 pm

    And lefties are never smug about things that piss off righties, bebopgun? Let’s be realistic, here…We’re talking politics.

  41. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  October 12, 2010 @ 3:43 pm

    Both sides are doing quite well as far as pissing each other off. Hence, we have a pissing match and not a real, intelligent political battle.

  42. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 12, 2010 @ 5:00 pm

    All this pissing, MM, suggests that both sides are spending way too much time at keggers and tailgate festivities.

  43. POSTED BY montclairgirl  |  October 12, 2010 @ 5:08 pm

    Mr. Gun, Please get the name right…montclairgirl, all one word, lower case.
    The reason the lefties are so effective in hating all the aforementioned is because all the hate from the left fires up the right and makes the Glenn Becks of the world more popular. Remember when the libs were really, really hating Palin. Well, thanks for helping her along in her popularity. That would include SNL and lousy Letterman. The Tea Party movement has the Dems by the b*lls! They are where they are now because of the left.
    As for Paladino, yes, he kinda sunk himself with those outrageous comments. He did have a point with the flamboyant Gay Pride parade. I mean, who can bring their kids to a parade with blow up penises parading in the wind or the way some of them dress, who’s sights need to be confined to their bedrooms, among adults. Please, if hetero’s had a parade and had to prance down Broadway in what they wear in the bedroom, it would be just as much as an eyesore.
    I love gays as much as the next guy or girl. Especially the gay men. Love them!! (so, now the left will demonize them?)

  44. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 12, 2010 @ 5:15 pm

    Yes, montclairgirl. The “left” will now demonize gay men having learned that YOU like them. Because, you see, what YOU think is really, REALLY important to them!!

    Palin has a national approval rating in the mid 20s, and even among Republicans its below 40. So, your insistence that she has been “helped along” in her popularity is laughable. She has managed to help herself become the epitome of a partisan hack hypocrite with zero credentials to lead the country.

  45. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 12, 2010 @ 5:15 pm

    It’s actually the Becks and Palins that get the haters on their side all fired up. The hate mongering is pretty one sided.

  46. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 12, 2010 @ 5:45 pm
  47. POSTED BY comfortstarr  |  October 12, 2010 @ 5:59 pm

    Professor, I’m unclear on what bothers you about them. You say, “They are “comedians” when they want, and using satire to make a political point when they want.” So? What’s the problem? What code (moral, ethical, journalistic) are they breaking?

  48. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 12, 2010 @ 6:27 pm

    No doubt, due to the use of satire to make a political point, the Prof. would have an equal problem with Mark Twain’s contributions.

  49. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 12, 2010 @ 6:37 pm

    …and the Prof, Herb, and montclairgirl may enjoy watching the dawn of the current sickness…


  50. POSTED BY fussyhostess  |  October 12, 2010 @ 6:47 pm

    Spiro, thanks for all your image and film research here! And let’s not forget, in the annals of spelling prowess how your fine brethren, former VP Dan Quayle, so eagerly “corrected” a child’s spelling of potato by saying, “I think you’ll find there’s an ‘e’ at the end of that.” Yup, and ketchup is a vegetable.

  51. POSTED BY montclairgirl  |  October 12, 2010 @ 7:11 pm

    fuzzyhostess, don’t forget zero saying “57 states” and “my Muslim faith, er Christian faith…”

  52. POSTED BY Martta Rose  |  October 12, 2010 @ 7:17 pm

    Well, if you want to talk about the most popular kids at the lunch table:


    Obama’s popularity has fallen considerably. When even the liberal comedians start making fun of him, you know he’s had it.

  53. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 12, 2010 @ 7:41 pm

    Obama’s numbers are right where Reagan’s were at this point in his first term. And Reagan, as we know, was reelected and remains one of the most popular presidents of modern times. So, I doubt that Obama’s “had it”.

    Comedians, liberal or conservative, are supposed to make fun of presidents. Bob Hope, one of the most conservative folks around, had a field day with Nixon. Letterman lampoons Obama all of the time. It is hardly indicative of anything other than the nature of comedy — make fun of people in the public eye.

  54. POSTED BY Nellie  |  October 12, 2010 @ 8:36 pm

    Can you imagine what the late night talk show hosts would do with the Montclair Council? Talk about a comedian’s dream come true.

  55. POSTED BY DagT  |  October 12, 2010 @ 9:05 pm

    I’m a Jon Stewart fan. I like his humor. His politics are not generally mine but he is often insightful. Beck on the other hand strikes me as a phony crybaby who might be closer to my own political positions but annoys me to no end. Both are acting in the grand tradition of court jesters. The real pity is so many viewers get their news from these guys.

    I have to agree with montclairgirl and in fact Mr. Paladino regarding the overt sexuality on display during some Gay parades and the appropriateness of such for children. It does not bode well for us as a civilization if we in general approve of exposing young people who themselves are not fully emotionally developed to overt sexuality be it by homosexual or heterosexual people.

  56. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 13, 2010 @ 5:43 am

    Interesting, Martta Rose, this ascent in Hillary’s popularity.
    Based on the nasty and vulgar things said about her in the past, we can surely expect some really repulsive Tea Party rallies against her in 2016, should she run for president.

  57. POSTED BY walleroo  |  October 13, 2010 @ 8:10 am

    My feeling about the gay pride parade is that gays, lesbians, transgenders, hybrids, chimeras etc etc have the “right” to act like fools and flaunt their sexuality in a grand public display, just as we heteros have the right to point out how childish they are.

    Personally I just wish they would grow up, get on with it and take their places as responsible members of our civic body. I would be more impressed if they marched in suit and tie during lunch hour from their jobs as teachers, firefighters, police officers, lawyers, doctors etc.

  58. POSTED BY DagT  |  October 13, 2010 @ 9:11 am

    Well said Mr. Roo

  59. POSTED BY mike 91  |  October 13, 2010 @ 9:19 am

    Let’s not pretend that the gay pride parade is Paladino’s only issue with gays. He also said a lot of other things, including that homosexuality is “not a valid choice.” He’s effectively lost most of the city; I don’t know how much that damages his already slim hopes.

    That would include SNL and lousy Letterman

    SNL and Letterman made fun of Palin because she put a target on her back as large as the great outdoors, especially with that hilarious interview with Katie Couric. “Q: What kind of newspapers do you read?” “A: Uh?”

    The only people she’s “popular” with enjoy incoherent speeches and deep thoughts that can be expressed entirely on Twitter.

  60. POSTED BY profwilliams  |  October 13, 2010 @ 9:30 am

    Obama is no Reagan.

    Obama would find the “Morning in America” ad too jingoistic. He’d settle for “It’s Lunchtime on Planet Earth.”

    I do hope though, that Obama finds it in him to speak of America’s “Better Angels” again and lose his newly found (or at least shown) partisanship. IF he does that, he could win back any number of Independents- including the prof.

    But I fear the “There’s only one America” Obama is lost forever. Because of that:

    Obama is no Reagan.

  61. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 13, 2010 @ 9:30 am

    Mike91, to be fair to Sarah Palin, we need to also mention that she is very popular among people who, like her (until recently) were certain Africa was a country, and who enjoy words like “reload”.

  62. POSTED BY montclairgirl  |  October 13, 2010 @ 10:06 am

    So, Sarah is stupid and all the Tea Party people are just as dumb? Please explain her popularity and zero’s fall from grace. Please? Let’s not forget my previous post of zero’s gaffe’s. Would you like a few more example? I have lot’s for you. Oh, I forgot, libs only demonize and get nasty when it’s a female conservative or perhaps just a conservative.
    walleroo, brilliant!

  63. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 13, 2010 @ 10:47 am

    “Please explain her popularity”.

    What “popularity”?

    She has an approval rating of 22% among all Americans, and only 44% even among Republicans. 71% of Americans view her as “unfit” to be president.

    So she may be popular with you and yours, but that’s it. She is entertaining, though. I’ll give you that. And she has shown great ability in self-promotion. Not just anyone can quit a job and hit the cash trail like she did.

    Obama is no Reagan. He’s also no Martin Van Buren, William Taft or Dwight Eisenhower. However, as I stated in my post, his numbers are where Reagan’s were at this point in his first term. Whether he will rebound as Reagan did remains to be seen, but it is foolish to dismiss him as “done” at this point.

  64. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  October 13, 2010 @ 11:35 am

    If the gay pride parade offends you–or you don’t want your kids to see, stay home. Problem solved.

    I have no feelings one way or the other about the parade but as long as they aren’t crossing any legal lines (nudity, sexual acts), then they have the right to express themselves, just as any other group who applies for and receives a permit to march.

    I don’t profess to be an expert on gay culture but I DO know that gays probably aren’t thrilled with straight folks asking them to put on a suit and tie for the parade.

  65. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 13, 2010 @ 11:42 am

    montclairgirl, your theory of a double standard is preposterous. If it were the case, people would be trashing Olympia Snowe or perhaps Huckabee’s wife. (actually, Ms. Snowe is getting trashed from your Tea Party affiliates, not, as your theory posits, from nasty lefties)

    But instead, we see your kinfolk crafting and getting off on images like this. I think you’ll like it too.


  66. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 13, 2010 @ 11:53 am

    I would say look at the demographics of the Tea Baggers – it certainly ain’t the smartest group of people out there. Angry, sure. Gullible, sure. Intelligent, not so much.

  67. POSTED BY mike 91  |  October 13, 2010 @ 11:55 am

    So, Sarah is stupid and all the Tea Party people are just as dumb?

    Well, she’s certainly not smart enough to be president, that’s for sure. Also, she’s a liar. Remember the ‘death panels.’ Speaking of “lot’s,” there’s lots more of those, too.

    And maybe Obama misspoke a few times. He also has a couple more things on his resume to suggest that these are aberrations, such as attending Harvard. What school did Sister Sarah graduate from again? Was that the fourth or fifth school she attended?

  68. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  October 13, 2010 @ 12:04 pm

    “Angry, sure. Gullible, sure. Intelligent, not so much.”

    That’s funny…I think the same thing about about the far-left patchouli partiers.

  69. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 13, 2010 @ 12:06 pm

    I’m sure that there are a great many gay folks who do not participate in the Pride Parade because they fear the consequences that might accompany an appearance in public. Despite laws designed to prevent discrimination, many of the lawyers, doctors, businesspeople, teachers, etc. might find that their lives become a whole lot more difficult once it is known that they are gay.

    I have gone to a few parades in the city. I think they’re very entertaining and I believe in the freedom of all to live as they wish. I would not take young children to it, but I wouldn’t take them to a wet T-shirt contest either. That’s just common sense.

    I also don’t feel that the small percentage of gays who engage in provocative or lewd behaviour at these parades are any more representative of the community as a whole than the green-hatted dopes I see vomiting or urinating in public, and staggering drunk out of bars every March 17 are representative of the Irish community.

  70. POSTED BY Nellie  |  October 13, 2010 @ 12:22 pm

    And old and overweight, too, right, Jerseygurl???

  71. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 13, 2010 @ 12:33 pm

    I didn’t say old and overweight. But you have to admit that as a group, it’s not full of well educated visionary thinkers. And the money is being pumped in by the Tea Party Express – now that guy is smart and laughing all the way to the bank with his special interest money.

  72. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 13, 2010 @ 12:39 pm

    Nellie, I think it’s fair to say that chunky people can be found all across the political spectrum.
    On the other hand, this map almost looks like a political preference map, but it isn’t.


  73. POSTED BY DagT  |  October 13, 2010 @ 1:00 pm

    @jerseygurl “But you have to admit that as a group, it’s not full of well educated visionary thinkers.”

    How could you possibly know that? Have you administered an IQ test, checked their report cards, evaluated their college transcripts or even attended one of their “parties”. Your own bias is showing and it doesn’t serve intelligent discourse which is much needed in these troubled times.

  74. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  October 13, 2010 @ 1:17 pm

    How come the party of tolerance is often very intolerant of others who don’t think like them?

    Unless there’s been a scientific evaluation of the Tea Partiers IQ scores, college aptitude tests, et cetera, I don’t think there’s that much credibility in your statement. The media likes to highlight the fringe element on both sides (depending on who’s doing the reporting).

  75. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 13, 2010 @ 1:20 pm

    Follow the money trail…people are being stirred up by a handful of special interest groups.

  76. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 13, 2010 @ 1:24 pm

    Intolerance? Yes, I have little tolerance for intolerant people. Homophobes, racists, people who insist Obama is a Muslim who wasn’t born here. I’m happy to entertain any REAL political ideas or points of view, just not the ones that are dumb lies.

  77. POSTED BY DagT  |  October 13, 2010 @ 1:37 pm

    @jerseygurl Follow the money trail…people are being stirred up by a handful of special interest groups.

    True — the NEA, NJEA and George Soros just to name a few.

    But that after all is the beauty of truth, justice and the American way. Everyone can speak their minds.

  78. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 13, 2010 @ 1:40 pm


    This poll suggests that Tea Partiers do not fit the stereotypes posited by both the left and the right.

    They ARE overwhelmingly Republican, male, white and over 45.
    However, they are generally wealthier and better educated than the general public.
    They believe that Social Security and Medicare are “worth the cost”.
    They believe that government favours blacks and minorities.
    They DO NOT believe that Sarah Palin is qualified to be president.
    There is a great deal of interesting stuff in these results. It is well worth the read.

  79. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  October 13, 2010 @ 1:53 pm

    This sounds a lot like me, except I’m a white female over 45 and I don’t agree with the statement that the government *favors* blacks and minorities although I am against illegal immigration. I don’t think the government *favors* any one group, though. I think people from ALL walks and classes have experienced government red tape and bureaucratic bungling. The government doesn’t know who’s waiting on line at the DMV or who’s trying to navigate their way around their pension web site, getting nowhere.

    If the (current) government discriminates anyone, I’d have to say it’s seniors. But I do agree that SS and Medicare are worth the cost. For some senior folks, it’s their only option.

  80. POSTED BY DagT  |  October 13, 2010 @ 2:01 pm

    Thanks Croi

    Yes a very interesting read and it supports the type of people I met when I went to drink some tea. The people in attendance were bright, well heeled and concerned.

    I think that it’s also interesting that while this article outlines political view points for the most part, there is a quote regarding Obama’s religious beliefs and church attendance which is extraneous information and does not support the main ideas. But more importantly this quote feeds the extremists. Pity!

  81. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 13, 2010 @ 2:36 pm

    Thanks, Cro. I’m still a little skeptical about the numbers – the sample was very small but who knows, maybe the group has spread beyond it’s original fringe element. Of course, then there’s this:

    “I just feel he’s getting away from what America is,” said Kathy Mayhugh, 67, a retired medical transcriber in Jacksonville. “He’s a socialist. And to tell you the truth, I think he’s a Muslim and trying to head us in that direction, I don’t care what he says. He’s been in office over a year and can’t find a church to go to. That doesn’t say much for him.”

    The nationwide telephone poll was conducted April 5 through April 12 with 1,580 adults. For the purposes of analysis, Tea Party supporters were oversampled, for a total of 881, and then weighted to their proper proportion in the poll. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points for all adults and for Tea Party supporters.

  82. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 13, 2010 @ 2:55 pm

    The pollsters followed standard polling protocol, but any sample is imprecise. What the results say to me is that Tea Partiers are being defined, and are allowing themselves to be defined, as racist nuts. Yahoos like Beck and Palin have hijacked genuine anger and distress about the country’s direction and co-opted the movement for their own purposes. In the same way, I’ve seen folks like Sharpton and Michael Moore do the same thing. The great majority of the American people are not nuts, regardless of what their “leaders” would have us believe.

    I do believe that a great deal of the more extreme vitriol directed at Obama is racially motivated. I’ve seen it and heard it, and no amount of trying to sweep it under the carpet will change my mind on that score.

  83. POSTED BY mike 91  |  October 13, 2010 @ 2:56 pm

    That poll just shows what anyone who’s been watching the tea party already knows: they don’t mean what they say.

    They say that all they want is ‘smaller government,’ yet the two of the largest government programs, Medicaid and Social Security, are just fine and dandy. Perhaps because they are older and liable to take advantage of these programs? So lets add ‘unprincipled’ to the mix.

    The tea party knows one thing for sure: they don’t like Obama. They can’t actually say with any logical reasoning why, they just don’t like him.

  84. POSTED BY bebopgun  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:04 pm

    “That’s a conundrum, isn’t it?” asked Jodine White, 62, of Rocklin, Calif. “I don’t know what to say. Maybe I don’t want smaller government. I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security.” She added, “I didn’t look at it from the perspective of losing things I need. I think I’ve changed my mind.”

    I hate socialism, just don’t touch my medicare or social security. are you sure that’s not the Green tea medical maryjane party?

  85. POSTED BY Nellie  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:05 pm

    That map is a riot, Spiro…Thank God it’s NOT political…

    Let’s do a map of the percentage of people in each state who wear Haband.

  86. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:16 pm

    How is SS socialism? You lost me there. If you have job and pay taxes, you are paying into it, therefore you are entitled to your take once you retire. And believe me, it’s a far cry from what you will need to retire on. Most of us will need to have an additional source of income besides SS in order to survive. So it’s not like we’re going to eb retrining in style.

    As for Medicaid, that is sadly what most of us will have to rely on when we retire, unless we want to pay through the nose for private insurance.

  87. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:25 pm

    Social security is “socialism” because it is a government sponsored, mandatory “retirement” system. You are not given the option to decline to participate. You cannot tell the government that you’d rather take the money and invest it yourself for your retirement. As a matter of fact, you could make the case (and Beck, Hannity et al DO), that it is a forced redistribution of wealth from the productive to the old.

    Personally, I think those arguments are ludicrous, but once people start shouting “socialism”, they ought to be prepared to face facts.

  88. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:31 pm

    This is what I love about the people who hate big gubmint. We have to fund the military, we have to keep our social security, even medicaid is not good enough but it’s all we have and we really deserve our unemployment benefits if we’re out of work. But let’s cut taxes, make government “smaller”, and balance the budget. These are the same people who hated Clinton (remember the surplus?) and think the Republicans are our fiscal saviors. It makes no sense.

  89. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:34 pm

    Well then, Cro, the same can be said about the taxes we pay, both on the local and federal levels. You or I may not like some of the “line items” our taxes are going to but we don’t have the option not to pay them unless we want to 1. be stalked by the IRS or 2. go to jail. It’s not like we can say, “Well, I’ll pay one from column A and two from column B, but the rest can go scratch.”

  90. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:35 pm

    Unless, of course, if you’re Timothy Geithner.

  91. POSTED BY bebopgun  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:38 pm

    You’re right Mrs Martha, most of us will have to rely on medicare. What’s wrong with that, though? Why do we want to have the pressure to earn beaucoup dollars to pay for private insurance? Let’s have a society where older people can live with dignity on social security, and medicare. Maybe it means people live with family longer. Instead of tearing apart medicare and SS because we are told they are too costly let’s figure out a way to make them better. Step 1 would be to have the government negotiate better prices for medicine. It’s not a world that is too difficult to imagine but it does take political will to achieve it. Too me what’s sad is so many people would rather see our elderly live in fear of poverty.

  92. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:43 pm

    Bebop, I think you’re describing the new health care legislation.

  93. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:47 pm

    I’m with you, Bebop. That’s one thing we all have in common: We’re all going to get old one day (if we’re lucky).

  94. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:48 pm

    Its not like paying “regular” taxes, MM. Those taxes provide services like armies and roads and the like. Social security is supposed to be for you, the payer. Of course in fact most of this generation will never get out what they put in, so in effect they are paying for a benefit to others. Additionally, if they die before they can collect they get nothing. In theory, it is a forced contribution to oneself and to others, the very definition of socialism.

    Of course, I come from a tradition of the dreaded “European style socialism” (I can almost hear Hannity sneering those words), and I support it wholeheartedly. The idea that all “socialist” programs are evil and un-American is just plain dumb.

  95. POSTED BY Mrs Martta  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:51 pm

    “Of course in fact most of this generation will never get out what they put in, so in effect they are paying for a benefit to others.”

    That’s because our politicians have been digging into the proverbial candy jar and using that money for things other than what it was intended for.

  96. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:52 pm


  97. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:59 pm

    Nellie, good chance it’s almost the same map.

  98. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  October 13, 2010 @ 3:59 pm

    We can all agree there. That money should have been set aside for social security instead of having been pissed away as part of the overall budget.

  99. POSTED BY montclairgirl  |  October 13, 2010 @ 5:06 pm

    Whoa Nellie! Purple lips misspoke and Palin is a dumb? Maybe through your vaseline smeared lib glasses, uh huh. Come on, 57 states? Adding an “e” on potato is worse than 57 states?????
    Zero has proclaimed “the economy is moving in the right direction” That must be his Harvard mathematics showing. What a brilliant man!
    Oh, yes and Palin quit her job half of the way through but zero on the other hand ran for president while he was senator and never completed the term he was elected to.
    Someone scrambled their brains this morning along with their eb eggs.

  100. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 13, 2010 @ 5:12 pm

    montclairgirl, always entertaining, never credible.

  101. POSTED BY Tudlow  |  October 13, 2010 @ 5:27 pm

    Indeed, Spiro. Reading her posts is akin to having a neurodegenerative disease. Fortunately, it’s been found that some neurons do actually regenerate, so fear not.

  102. POSTED BY Nellie  |  October 13, 2010 @ 6:27 pm

    montclairgirl, I don’t think you meant to direct that comment at me. You know I would agree that 57 states is much worse than potato with an e.

  103. POSTED BY croiagusanam  |  October 13, 2010 @ 6:40 pm

    Of course, John McCain was a sitting US senator when he ran for president (twice) as well. But don’t tell that to montclairgirl. It will ruin whatever “point” she’s trying to make.

    Obama left the senate for a government office. Palin left to be on Fox News.

    montclairgirl’s hatred of Obama (sorry, “purple lips” ) has made her even dumber than usual.

    And that’s saying a lot.

  104. POSTED BY Spiro T. Quayle  |  October 13, 2010 @ 6:49 pm

    Still, “vaseline smeared lib glasses” has a certain bizarre flair, except that I don’t know if montclairgirl is referring to eyeglasses or drinking glasses. Sort of like that classic Charlie Weaver answer on Hollywood Squares.
    “Charlie, does President Nixon use glasses?”
    “No, he likes it straight from the bottle.”

  105. POSTED BY Tudlow  |  October 13, 2010 @ 8:16 pm

    Nellie, it’s obvious you don’t like Obama but you don’t really think that he believes there are 57 states, do you? He was trying to say that he visited all but one of the states in the contiguous US but he started out by saying 50 instead of 40.

    Although I was not a big fan of GWB, I do think he possesses above average intelligence. It’s beyond silly for anyone to insinuate or state explicitly that Obama is so dumb that he thinks there are 57 states.

  106. POSTED BY profwilliams  |  October 13, 2010 @ 9:40 pm

    To be fair, for all his supposed brilliance, Obama has yet to impress me with his “intellect”. All anyone can say is, he’s smart he went to Harvard. But his off teleprompter cadence- filled with youknow, imean, youknow, ahhhhh, ummmmm, says more than anything.

    He may be smart, but I’m still waiting for some, youknow, proof.

    To this, I heard Geithner on Charlie Rose last night, and while I disagree with him on a lot, he at least sounds like a smart guy. I’m still waiting for the Obama interview where I can say the same. Same with Robert Reich and, well I could go on– hell, even Ben Stein or Arianna Huffington sound smarter than Obama.

    But my disappointment with him has a lot to do with how little he’s done to speak and help poor Black folks, and gay folks. All his promises have amounted to nothing. And don’t forget Darfur… And what happened to that report last week that detailed how his administration “mishandled” the BP spill response? (https://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/science/earth/07spill.html)

    It was news for a day, then… nothing.

    Nice to have friends in the media.

    Oh, well. His golf game is doing well….

  107. POSTED BY profwilliams  |  October 13, 2010 @ 9:47 pm

    (LOVE how the links are hot automatically!! Nice.)

    This https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1J_mxJotkI sums Obama’s Presidency up so far.

    And who can forget when THIS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6rimJLbV4E&feature=related happened to Obama in Iraq…

  108. POSTED BY git2itgal  |  October 13, 2010 @ 10:28 pm

    I’ll be here in NJ working for two Congressional candidates – one sure thing and one hopeless case (on principle), and can’t imagine why anyone who’s serious about politics would devote their time to anything else that close to election day. What a farce.

  109. POSTED BY mike 91  |  October 14, 2010 @ 10:08 am

    But my disappointment with him has a lot to do with how little he’s done to speak and help poor Black folks,

    Except for the biggest middle-class tax cut in history. Other than that, you’re right. OH! I almost forgot health care reform, which will provide healthcare to 30 million (mostly poor) people.

    Other than those two very minor things, you’re right, he’s done nothing.

    You’re better off sticking to YouTube, prof.

  110. POSTED BY Kevin57  |  October 14, 2010 @ 11:30 am

    Are you referring to the tax credits in the stimulus plan?

  111. POSTED BY mike 91  |  October 14, 2010 @ 12:25 pm

    They were tax credits for small businesses, but tax cuts for 95% of workers. The IRS was instructed to reduce withholdings.

  112. POSTED BY Kevin57  |  October 14, 2010 @ 12:55 pm

    Yes, they reduced the withholdings but it is still a credit. Check the IRS page listed below. Sorry, I couldn’t get the link to imbed.


  113. POSTED BY Kevin57  |  October 14, 2010 @ 12:57 pm

    Oh good, it did work!

  114. POSTED BY profwilliams  |  October 15, 2010 @ 8:43 pm

    Add Oprah to the gang paying for folks to “March” as she is sending her studio audience to it AND paying for hotel rooms.

    At this rate, they might be able to buy a few hundred thousand.

    It’s like celebrity Woodstock!! Who wouldn’t want to attend? Not sure you can compare it to Beck’s, but hey, any chance to see Oprah might even make me want to go (because, you know, I can get a free bus ride).

Featured Comment

And we can get this project completed in time for Montclair's sesquicentennial when we can stick a fork into historic preservation as a public policy.

Tip, Follow, Friend, Subscribe

Links & Information

Baristanet on Flickr

Browse all photos...