At a recent news conference, President Obama called for unity over divisive rhetoric in the aftermath of the Tuscon shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and several other innocents. But no sooner spoken was the President’s impassioned plea than did Charlottesville Mayor Dave Norris fire a bellicose shot-across-the-bow of the entire Tea Party movement.

The collectivist Democrat is known popularly as “Norrishood” for his propensity to rob wage earners through excessive taxation and oppressive government regulation—this, in order to fuel his own political power and advance a progressive, anti-liberty agenda.

In the January 16 edition of Charlottesville’s Daily Progress, Norris made various uninformed, inflammatory statements to writer, Brandon Shulleeta. Responding to news of the Jefferson Area Tea Party expanding their purview to local government, Norris said he “welcomes” Tea Party involvement in Charlottesville politics. Not content with a simple statement of acceptance, though, the imperious mayor then parlayed his remarks into a deliberate demonization of the “national” Tea Party movement as a bastion of greed:

“Seems like their interest is in helping the moderately wealthy members of American society to become fabulously wealthy.”

Mayor Norris, who offered no substantiation for his flagrant allegation, apparently did not receive the Obama “moderation” memo.

Norris’s astounding ignorance of Tea Party principles is without excuse, as local and national Tea Party coverage has dominated American media over the past year. If paying even cursory attention, Norris would know that the “T-E-A” in Tea Party stands for “taxed enough already.” While people will be better off if allowed to keep more of what they have earned, no one becomes “fabulously wealthy” from receiving permission to retain a pittance more of his own income. Ultimately, the Tea Party promotes Constitutionalism, self-governance, and personal and fiscal responsibility.

Further, Tea Party members encompass a broad socio-economic diversity, from impoverished taxi drivers to successful physicians, and all points in-between. The common thread is a love for liberty as expressed in the Declaration of Independence and codified in the United States Constitution. Had Norrishood ever attended a local Tea Party gathering, this would not be news.

While the Tea Party demonstrably is NOT centered on making the wealthy richer, the Norris-progressive agenda provably is about making all people poorer by stripping individual wealth and siphoning it into government coffers. Redistribution schemes of the left have devastated the country—increasing generational poverty and destroying the American nuclear family.

In the Democratic Socialist Republic of Charlottesville, Norris has built a meretricious political career on promulgating class warfare and advocating for expanded government power. Expressed disdain of prosperity and covetous desire of others’ affluence has been a hallmark of the Norris mayoral reign.

The mayor’s nescience over the objectives and purpose of the Tea Party—both local and national—may or may not be feigned. But, in either event, Norrishood is wise to smell a threat to his heretofore-unmolested socialist agenda. The Tea Party is a harsh mistress, and Mayor Norris rightfully fears accountability.

11 COMMENTS

  1. Ultimately, the Tea Party promotes Constitutionalism,

    How many Tea Party members do you think had even read the Constitution since they were assigned to do so in school before Glenn Beck began pontificating about it? How many do you think have read Stephen Breyer’s book “Active Liberty: Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution,” or any other progressive view of the document? Tea Partiers promote their political goals and proof text the Constitution to support them. It’s bad enough to be ignorant, but worse not to know you’re ignorant and start preaching.

    The mayor’s nescience over the objectives and purpose of the Tea Party

    If you’re going to use words so obscure that the only reason to use them is to impress yourself and your readers that you know them in the first place, I wish you’d at least learn to use prepositions correctly. One does not have nescience over something, but of it. And by the way, to state or assert something is not to reference it.

  2. Of course Mayor Norris is antagonistic toward the TEA Party. The mayor opposes the US Constitution. When did he say this? Never. His actions speak for him on a daily basis. His defense is that a court or the people have ruled that violating the Constitution is not a Constitutional violation, or that a grant absolves of the wrongdoing the funds finance.

    Sometimes I’m asked to sum up in one sentence my greatest contribution to Cville and USA over the past decade. Here is the insight:

    Urban Renewal = Housing Authority = Redevelopment = Public Housing = Eminent Domain Abuse = Due Process Violation = Civil Right Violation = Felony

    Norris is a consistent supporter of public housing (private housing paid and sometimes owned by the public). Therefore he opposes civil rights…not for everybody, just the owners of private property needed for a greater good, for the commons.

    So when Norris advocates selling the Levy Avenue Parking Lot, he is trying to sell stolen property, fruits of a due process violation, a civil rights abuse. So it’s no surprise he also opposes allowing the uncensored Housing Archives to be published, if they still exist.

    My blog goes on and on with these unassailable truisms with court documents that record the history of the crimes. I was TEA Party before there was a TEA Party. The Orwellian feel of modern-day society reflects how words are turned on their head and used to describe the opposite.

    In a normal world one or two of these anti-Constitution positions would disqualify Mr. Norris. But we’re living in an Orwellian world. The truth does not set you free. Freedom requires action and exercise to avoid atrophy and tyranny. And prosperity requires freedom.

    If TEA Party is enriching the wealthy, and Norris is impoverishing the poor and middle class, isn’t Norris also enriching the wealthy? Most of the anti-conservative rhetoric I hear is projection, more true of the critics, in other words: hypocrisy.

  3. Well, it doesn’t sound like you’ve read Breyer’s book either, blair.

    His defense is that a court or the people have ruled that violating the Constitution is not a Constitutional violation

    Who needs the Supreme Court anyhow? Let’s just run all constitutional issues by you.

    Norris is impoverishing the poor and middle class

    By subsidizing their housing, you mean?

  4. “Let’s just run all constitutional issues by you.”

    That’s it? No thoughts people can use? A book reference? I try to have content and want to get it right while provoking some thought. Please let me know which piece I’m missing or not quite right.

    “By subsidizing their housing, you mean?”

    Here I was trying to link back to the article. Yes, by seizing, selling, subsidizing their housing. You got it.

  5. “Let’s just run all constitutional issues by you.”

    That’s it? No thoughts people can use? A book reference? I try to have content and want to get it right while provoking some thought. Please let me know which piece I’m missing or not quite right.

    What’s missing is any indication that you and the rest of the Tea Party movement have actually given serious thought to interpreting the Constitution, which would mean grappling with your opponent’s views instead of just taking classes where you’re fed mindbogglingly simplistic notions like “conservatives worship God and liberals worship the state.” And this intellectual laziness in turn strongly suggests that it isn’t the Constitution you really care about, it’s your political aims.

    “By subsidizing their housing, you mean?”

    Here I was trying to link back to the article. Yes, by seizing, selling, subsidizing their housing. You got it.

    So your argument is that Norris is impoverishing not just the middle class but the poor by subsidizing housing. If I pay half your mortgage, and I impoverishing you?

  6. Actually, Dave is correct. History is clear that by limiting government and expanding freedom, many middle income people will become wealthy, along with many of the poor.

  7. History is clear that by limiting government and expanding freedom, many middle income people will become wealthy, along with many of the poor.

    That’s the educated opinion of some conservatives and an article of faith among many intellectually lazy others. Liberals believe that government aid can help many people to succeed financially, and in the case of subsidized housing for the poor, it’s self-evidently true that reduced housing costs allows the motivated among them to put money aside, to go to school, etc. It is self-evident nonsense that subsidized housing impoverishes its beneficiaries, but ideological rigidity makes people say a lot of dumb things.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here