Crashing the Crashers: Tea Party Infiltrators Outmaneuvered in S.F.

Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 1:26 am

My latest:

Crashing the Crashers: Tea Party Infiltrators Outmaneuvered in S.F.

(This is actually just the first report about the events in S.F. on April 15: More to come soon!)

Here’s a sample picture to whet your appetite:

40 Responses to “Crashing the Crashers: Tea Party Infiltrators Outmaneuvered in S.F.”

Track Responses to This Entry With the RSS Feed Send a Trackback Write a Response

1Starless on Apr 17, 2010 at 4:14 am:

Could you tell how much time and effort Tea Party organizers and participants had to spend outing crashers? Did it detract much from the protest itself?

Quote
2Ringo the Gringo on Apr 17, 2010 at 7:08 am:

I went to a Tea Party in Thousand Oaks, Ca (the suburb where the anti-Obamacare protester had his finger bitten off by a left-wing protester last year) and the only “infiltrator” I saw was one Lyndon LaRouche supporter who showed up with a Obama/Hitler sign. The amazing thing was that a small number of real Tea Partiers surrounded him and after about 20 minutes of persuasive conversation were able to convince the LaRouchie to leave. This was something I had never seen before, in fact I thought it was impossible to make LaRouchies go away.

I also saw one honest-to-goodness Tea Partier with a rifle slung over his shoulder. Interestingly hardly anyone seemed to notice, not even the police who drove right past him a number of times.

Quote
3Ringo the Gringo on Apr 17, 2010 at 7:43 am:

And check out this tea party crasher in D.C. doing his best impersonation of a crazy “teabagger”….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjhgTnfLFEw&feature=player_embedded

Quote
4Ringo the Gringo on Apr 17, 2010 at 9:35 am:

I guess the guy in the link I posted above was in Sacramento, not D.C…..And I should have read zombie’s entire PJ Media post before I linked to it, as it’s already there.

I should have my report on the Tea Party in Thousand Oaks, Ca up later today.

Quote
5Rose on Apr 17, 2010 at 11:29 am:

Some great posts coming out on the Tea Party - One of my favorites is Darryl Postell, asked “Have you ever been uncomfortable?” (as a black man at a Tea Party, Kelly O’Donnell-MSNBC)… He answers, “No, no, these are my people, Americans.”

Amen. We are one race - HUMAN. We are one people - AMERICANS.

But right now, instead of government by and for the PEOPLE, we have government by and for the PARTY.

Quote
6blangwort on Apr 17, 2010 at 1:49 pm:

Along the lines of “if a tree falls in the forest”: If the crazies decided to crash the lefties protests and demonstrations, would anyone notice?

Quote
7wolfie on Apr 17, 2010 at 2:11 pm:

Great stuff, as always, zombie!

Quote
8ProtestShooter on Apr 17, 2010 at 3:31 pm:

@starless - It was a non-issue. They hung to the back of the crowd and were obvious enough that whenever one would show up people would immediately shout “Security!” and the guys with the pink signs would come on over. Once or twice they were on the other end and couldn’t hear and somebody would walk over and let them know.

Interestingly enough nobody bothered to put a “not with us” sign near Frank Chu, who was also at the afternoon event, but there were definitely conversations explaining to non-locals that he’s a well known local eccentric.

Quote
9doubleplusundead on Apr 17, 2010 at 6:47 pm:

Saw your PJM post, the leftist’s sign is referencing some intarwebs memes, wharrrrgarbl is a reference to this motivational poster, http://i358.photobucket.com/albums/oo22/intercido_erro/motivational%20posters/Wharrgarbl.jpg you’ll frequently see leftists post that as a dismissal of people they disagree with on forums, and then here’s the other one, http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/what-is-this-i-dont-even

So, there be your answer.

Quote
10zombie on Apr 17, 2010 at 10:04 pm:

doubleplusundead:

Thanks. Several people have now pointed out the same thing. As a result, I’ve added this update to the caption:

Some of her messages, frankly, didn’t make any sense, either as faux-extremism or as sarcasm. [Update: Turns out "What is this I don't even" is a reference to some Internet in-joke slang not very well-known outside of certain cliques on the Web; Whargarbl is also Internet slang, which the counter-protester must have mistakenly assumed was widely enough known to serve as effective signage.]

Quote
11Starless on Apr 18, 2010 at 3:55 am:

blangwort: Along the lines of “if a tree falls in the forest”: If the crazies decided to crash the lefties protests and demonstrations, would anyone notice?

I think that question is redundant.

ProtestShooter: @starless - It was a non-issue. They hung to the back of the crowd and were obvious enough that whenever one would show up people would immediately shout “Security!” and the guys with the pink signs would come on over.

That’s good, Hopefully it will remain a non-issue.

The utter FAIL which has been the Left’s attempt to subvert Tea Parties makes me wonder if they’ve forgotten the meaning of the word.

ProtestShooter: Interestingly enough nobody bothered to put a “not with us” sign near Frank Chu, who was also at the afternoon event, but there were definitely conversations explaining to non-locals that he’s a well known local eccentric.

Frank Chu probably needs a custom, “So obviously not with us that we’re not going to even bother with a ‘not with us’ sign,” sign.

Quote
12Ringo the Gringo on Apr 18, 2010 at 11:46 pm:

Sorry it took me forever to get it finished, but here are my pictures from the Tea Party in Thousand Oaks, Ca….

Tax Day Tea Party, Thousand Oaks, Ca

Quote
13Starless on Apr 19, 2010 at 4:17 am:

Good going, Ringo.

The MSM will conflate the neo-Nazi rally this weekend with Tea Party protests in 3…2…

Oh, wait, Bill Clinton already did it for them.

[Yes, Bill, that's right, McVeigh blew up the Alfred P. Murrah building because Rush Limbaugh said critical things about you and your administration, not because Janet Reno's bungling led women and children to be burned to death in Waco.]

Quote
14Ringo the Gringo on Apr 19, 2010 at 7:31 am:

Starless,

I wish I had gone to that neo-Nazi rally. I had planned to go but then totally forgot about it. Interestingly, from what I’ve read It was the “anti-racist” who caused all the trouble. First they threw rocks and bottles at the Nazis, then after the Nazis left, they threw rocks and bottles at the police.

LAist has some good pictures: http://laist.com/2010/04/18/nazi_rally_notes_quotes.php?gallery0Pic=4#gallery

The “anti-racists” were largely comprised of groups from the extreme Left-wing, anarchists and black nationalists. I’m sure it would have made for more interesting photographs than the group of seniors, small business owners and suburban moms that I photographed in Thousand Oaks.

Quote
15Starless on Apr 19, 2010 at 8:40 am:

Ringo the Gringo: I wish I had gone to that neo-Nazi rally. I had planned to go but then totally forgot about it. Interestingly, from what I’ve read It was the “anti-racist” who caused all the trouble. First they threw rocks and bottles at the Nazis

I’m usually inclined to begin any statement re: people throwing things at neo-Nazis with, “Normally I wouldn’t advocate violence, but…” OTOH, no matter how horribly despicable and downright sub-human neo-Nazis’ belief system is, if they are demonstrating peaceably, the only things you achieve by abusing them (physically or verbally) is to make them into victims and galvanize them in their sick and twisted beliefs. Better to laugh at them. Better to do what Mel Brooks and Monty Python did (”Mr. Hilter”, “Springtime for Hitler” — hehe). Leftists have lost their capacity to understanding the power of humor.

Quote
16Bakunin on Apr 19, 2010 at 9:25 am:

Oh boo hoo, a bunch of nazi’s got things thrown at them. Our entire post-WWII culture is based on the moral legitimacy of murdering nazis, they deserve allot worse then a couple bottles and rocks thrown at them.

On to the tea party:

I don’t support the tactic of trying to discredit the teabaggers by infiltrating them. Why infiltrate a group of already paranoid people? I think counter-protesting is a better tactic, because it attacks a false rhetorical device that the teabaggers use: they are speaking for the “Marjoity of Americans”. When teabaggers and Republicans (one in the same?) talk about how the majority of Americans are agienst the healthcare bill, they are being disengenous, as all polls indicate the american public is pretty evenly divided on the issue.

Anyways, the teabaggers will discredit themselves. Zombie is limited based on scope; she/he is in SanFran, where the democratic party is considered “right-wing”. Now, if she was in South Carolina, she could hear Former Colorado Representative Tom Tancredo say that they should send the President “back to Kenya”, Pastor Stan Craig of the Choice Hills Baptist Church say he “was trained to defend the liberties of this nation” and he was prepared to “suit up, get my gun, go to Washington, and do what they trained me to do” and Dan Gonzales, who Chairs the Constitution Party in Florida, asserted that “this is the end of America right here,” and if the Tea Partiers “don’t get to work we’re going to be fighting in the streets.”

What Violence/racism?

Quote
17Ringo the Gringo on Apr 19, 2010 at 9:30 am:

Bakunin,

“Oh boo hoo, a bunch of nazi’s got things thrown at them. Our entire post-WWII culture is based on the moral legitimacy of murdering nazis, they deserve allot worse then a couple bottles and rocks thrown at them.”

Nobody here is crying because Nazis had rocks thrown at them.

Are you an idiot?

Quote
18Starless on Apr 19, 2010 at 10:01 am:

Ringo the Gringo: Are you an idiot?

Compare and contrast:

Bakunin: they deserve allot worse then a couple bottles and rocks thrown at them.

Bakunin: What Violence/racism?

Quote
19Bakunin on Apr 19, 2010 at 11:02 am:

Well, totally ignore the substance of my post…

Ringo The Gringo’s post laid blame on “the left” and made them the “bad guys” for “creating trouble”. Starless argues “hey, they where peaceably assembled”. Your anti-leftism always puts the blame on the left while excusing those opposed to them.

An assembly of Nazi’s isn’t a peaceable assembly. There is a limit on Free Speech. You can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater and you shouldn’t be allowed to yell “Kill the N***er” to a group of angry white youth looking for violence.

Quote
20Ringo the Gringo on Apr 19, 2010 at 12:06 pm:

Bakunin,

An assembly of Nazi’s isn’t a peaceable assembly. There is a limit on Free Speech. You can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater and you shouldn’t be allowed to yell “Kill the N***er” to a group of angry white youth looking for violence.

You are a very silly person.

I hate Nazis. You hate Nazis….99.9999% of Americans hates Nazis.

Nevertheless, no one has a right to throw rocks and bottles at people - or to attack people - even if they are stupid Nazi assholes….Or do you think it’s alright for dumb punk anarchists and New Black Panthers Party thugs to fight with Nazis on a public street?…And then proceed to throw rocks at the police after the Nazis have run off?

C’mon.

Quote
21Starless on Apr 19, 2010 at 2:41 pm:

Bakunin: Starless argues “hey, they where [sic] peaceably assembled”. Your anti-leftism always puts the blame on the left while excusing those opposed to them.

To paraphrase Dan Aykroyd, “Bakunin, you ignorant slut”. If they’re not causing physical violence and making direct threats, you lose more than you gain by directly threatening them and being physically violent. Such action also proves to the world that your “anti-hate” position is a pile of horseshit.

Bakunin: An assembly of Nazi’s isn’t a peaceable assembly. There is a limit on Free Speech. You can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater and you shouldn’t be allowed to yell “Kill the N***er” to a group of angry white youth looking for violence.

Yes there is a limit on free speech and that limit is specifically defined within the Constitution, but that limit doesn’t include what you or your Orwellian betters decide is “violent rhetoric”. There was a time in this country when organizations like the ACLU would defend the KKK’s right to free speech and assembly, not because they agreed with what they had to say — it was quite clear that the ACLU definitely did not agree with what they had to say — but because they understood that freedom of speech was more important than protecting some people’s delicate sensibilities from being offended. They understood that you get onto a slippery slope once you give society and gov’t an opening to clamp down on speech — a fact which played itself out in the ’90s.

Bakunin, the more you talk, the more you sound like what has been called a “liberal fascist”.

Quote
22Sandwich on Apr 19, 2010 at 5:39 pm:

I thought that the “This is a Sign” guy was making fun of Tea Party Crashers, and cleverly at that. Maybe the rank-and-file didn’t get the joke?

Quote
23Starless on Apr 20, 2010 at 4:07 am:

Sandwich, if you look farther into Zombie’s post, you’ll see that the guy is definitely a crasher and that his sign was some sort of attempt at existential humor making fun of the Tea Partiers, not the crashers.

Quote
24richb on Apr 20, 2010 at 5:08 pm:

Since the left doesn’t seem to, or more likely, want to understand what the tea party stands for they will have a hard time “infiltrating” it. The tea party knows the lamestream media is against it (when it isn’t ignoring it), so it will go to great lengths to out those who aren’t tea partiers. They came up with a great solution, that worked well and is funny to boot.

Its always seemed dumb to me when conservatives are the ones portrayed as the ones that won’t listen. In this day and age its clearly the left wing that is tone deaf and stuck on its talking points.

If you hear about the tea party from a lamestream media source it’s dead wrong for the most part.

Quote
25Don-Quixote on Apr 20, 2010 at 6:44 pm:

Bakunin,
No one here condones people who obviously way out there to the right. WHy do you continually use crazy far right extremists to tar the entire tea party movement? Are you afraid of something?
Where was your concern when zombie was filming/photo the numerious crazies calling for the head of Bush? Or does that not fit into your worldview. Based on the above posts it is pretty clear which side has the crazies. Obviously your a Marxists stooge. Why don’t you just be honest with yourself. Go complain about all us neanderthals to your daily Kossaks.
Mark my words the progressive high water mark was the vote for Obama. Americans are already hating his policies, November is going to be a blood bath for the Dems. People like you are going to be the one to blame for it.
So keep blabing on and on. Really your doing the country a favor.

Quote
26Mazz on Apr 20, 2010 at 6:44 pm:

I would still love to go to any protest with the sign:

“I Was Promised Donuts!”

Quote
27Dianna on Apr 20, 2010 at 8:01 pm:

Starless: Frank Chu probably needs a custom, “So obviously not with us that we’re not going to even bother with a ‘not with us’ sign,” sign.

Quote

Oof!

Well, if you paid him, he’d probably carry it. He’s been allowing advertising on the reverse of his sign for a while now.

Quote
28Dianna on Apr 20, 2010 at 8:03 pm:

Starless: Sandwich, if you look farther into Zombie’s post, you’ll see that the guy is definitely a crasher and that his sign was some sort of attempt at existential humor making fun of the Tea Partiers, not the crashers.

I decided that at least his sign was well-executed, so I’d give him a pass. This time, anyway.

Quote
29Dianna on Apr 20, 2010 at 8:14 pm:

Bakunin: An assembly of Nazi’s isn’t a peaceable assembly. There is a limit on Free Speech. You can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater and you shouldn’t be allowed to yell “Kill the N***er” to a group of angry white youth looking for violence.

Um…no. Sorry. Even the ACLU knows better.

I’d rather these rather sick people knew they ought to be ashamed of themselves, as well as you, but they’re not. So long as they do not call for the murder of an identifiable individual, incite a riot, or otherwise break the law, the only proper response is either to ignore them, or to refute their arguments.

If you have the brains the gods gifted to your local fellow who cleans up at McDonald’s, this should not challenge your intellectual agility.

Responding with violence? That is both foolish and indicative of a lack of intellectual heft.

Sorry about that.

Quote
30Starless on Apr 21, 2010 at 5:09 am:

Dianna: Well, if you paid him, he’d probably carry it. He’s been allowing advertising on the reverse of his sign for a while now.

When I wrote, “needs a custom…sign”, I meant “needs a custom…sign pointing at him”.

As for his own advertising, what would be great would be to see “Eat at Joe’s” on the back of his sign.

Dianna: I decided that at least his sign was well-executed, so I’d give him a pass. This time, anyway.

It fell flat for me. I think the Left has really overplayed the whole existential meta-text thing. Nothing will assure I stop listening better than mentioning Jacques Derrida. (See, there I just stopped listening to myself.)

Dianna: Um…no. Sorry. Even the ACLU knows better.

Really? I thought they gave up on knowing better in the Clinton administration.

Dianna: So long as they do not call for the murder of an identifiable individual, incite a riot, or otherwise break the law, the only proper response is either to ignore them, or to refute their arguments.

Clinton again. I recall how for years the Left fought tooth-and-nail, all the way to the Supreme Court, to have the act of burning the flag of the United States of America (and pulled along in its wake, images depicting things like a man with a bullwhip where it was never intended to be, a crucifix swimming in urine, and so on) declared protected speech and yet they tried their best to have the words of their political enemies declared out-of-bounds, both in popular culture and legally through the Fairness Doctrine. The Left has long since given up on what I would call equality in public discourse and decided that quashing political and social opposition through edict is perfectly fine.

Hey, anybody remember the PMRC? Remember when shrivelled up right-wing hags (and a shrivelled up left-wing hag) wanted to use the force of federal law to make musicians do what they told them to in the name of The Children? Those sorts of tactics weren’t okay then and they’re not okay now.

Quote
31Ringo the Gringo on Apr 21, 2010 at 5:52 am:

Starless,

As for his own advertising, what would be great would be to see “Eat at Joe’s” on the back of his sign.

Like this?

Quote
32Dianna on Apr 21, 2010 at 8:06 am:

Starless: As for his own advertising, what would be great would be to see “Eat at Joe’s” on the back of his sign.

Last time I saw Frank, he was advertising some cafe…he’s been listening to you!

Quote
33Starless on Apr 23, 2010 at 4:30 am:

Ringo, Dianna:

LOL. That’s perfect.

Rush fires back.

I’ll wait for Bakunin to come in and explain to me how what Rush has written in the WSJ is coded racist, Nazi hate speech.

Quote
34Rudolf the Red on Apr 28, 2010 at 8:12 am:

I really miss the old Protest Warrior days. The liberals can’t even come close to doing what we did. Idiots.

It’s just executions for me now. The last one was quite a hoot!

Quote
35Middleoftheroader on Apr 29, 2010 at 10:44 pm:

Hahaha! It’s so amusing to watch the lefties and the righties swipe at each other. Kind of reminds me of Spy vs Spy in Mad magazine. Keep it up, very funny!

Quote
36VH on May 4, 2010 at 7:17 pm:

Great pictures and nicely done!

Quote
37Mike Kirby on Jun 8, 2010 at 10:16 pm:

Your combination of smugness and ignorance makes for supremely entertaining reading. You sure didn’t prove anything here. Cheers!

Quote
38Scott on Jul 19, 2010 at 10:20 pm:

well written……..impressed you knew about the Wobblies !

Quote
39شات كتابي on Sep 27, 2010 at 11:50 am:

Hahaha! It’s so amusing to watch the lefties and the righties swipe at each other. Kind of reminds me of Spy vs Spy in Mad magazine. Keep it up, very funny!

Quote