“The Tea Party is very different,” said Cantor. “The Tea Party were individuals that were attempting to address their grievances, seeking redress of their grievances, from the government they elected. It’s different, from what I see, of the protesters on Wall Street and elsewhere, that are pitting themselves against others outside of government in America. That’s the difference. As far as what Steny said… all I can tell you is, folks who were involved and continued, and continue to be so, in the Tea Party, are worried about government and its policies. It’s not pitting one part of our country against another. And you didn’t hear most of [Republicans] us encouraging any type of violent behavior, or whatever, when that was occuring. Everyone in this country has the right to speak out. That’s the beauty of our system. But when elected leaders come in, and condone attacks on others in our country, that’s not how it was [with us], it’s not leadership.”
A short while later, Politico’s David Rogers pressed on part of the answer.
“Do you not see the government as part of the people?” asked Rogers. “You said before, the Tea Party was asking for redress against the government. Do you regret using the word mob? I mean, You say these people are divisive against other Americans.”
“I did not say that,” said Cantor.
“You said they were pitting themselves against other Americans,” said Rogers.
“I said they are aiming their ire at others in our society,” said Cantor.
“You made a distinction between that and aiming their ire against the government,” said Rogers.
“Right,” said Cantor. “The ire, from the Tea Party standpoint, is at Washington. It’s at the government and its policies.”
“And do you not see the government as representing the people?” asked Rogers.
“Sure,” said Cantor, “it’s of the people…
Again, can anyone make any sense of this blather? I can’t(or), except to the extent that this petulant, nasty, smarmy little man-child with the IQ of an eggplant but an ambition level that knows no bounds, is working to position himself politically as the leader of the teahadists and their corporate (Koch, etc.) puppetmasters. Even if it requires him to make statements that are patently absurd, laughable, self contradictory, and just plain idiotic. What’s any of that to someone like Eric Can’tor, an individual who has betrayed all the values his faith teaches him (e.g., “tikkun olam”), and who has even shown himself willing to destroy the American economy – or whatever else it takes – to advance his own political agenda. The question is, why would anyone listen to this creep?
Sign up for the Blue Virginia weekly newsletter
