Gasp...lack of oxygen to brain...can't express..
Ye GODS and little fishes - the irony.

I see the right has once again dug up the corpses of both irony and parody so it could kill them one more time.

You just can't make stuff like this up.

Group protesting government programs complains that they were inconvenienced by the government-run metro not being up to par to carry them to their protest about government-run programs.

I wonder what it feels like to be immune to irony. Do you ever notice it, or just get used to it, like being born blind?

I could be wrong about this, and welcome correction, but having lived in DC for 7 years, I believe that while the Metro does add service for really large special events, like the inauguration or 4th of July, if it is for a special private event they tend to charge the organizers a hefty fee for it. Now this could be for earlier or later services, for example I know to get runners to the start of the Marine Corps Marathon, the race organizers had to pay Metro. If it is to add cars during normal hours I am less sure. But considering it was a weekend, I'll bet the organizers would have had to have paid, and I'll bet they knew this, but chose not to.

Anyone know more about this? Like i said, I'll be happy to be corrected.

These people are living in a different reality and should not be negotiated with.

Thanks for this post. There is a rational argument to be had over what services government should and should not provide. But you can't have that argument with people to whom government is just invisible. Government programs that they like--police and fire protection, good roads, Medicare, public transit--are just part of the natural order. They dont realize that taxes and public employees are essential to make these programs operate. Services that other people like just as much, but that don't benefit them, are socialism and an existential threat. The tea baggers aren't making a principled objection to the encroachment of government, they are just throwing a childish fit--give me what I want when I want it, but don't give anything to anyone else. Reminds me of the farmers and cattle ranchers who make up the "patriot movement" in the West, who dutifully file for their Ag subsidies.

Why stop at transit service? What about the potholes the protesters encountered on the Interstate highways driving to DC? What about waiting in an airport for hours?

Are these same protestors refusing to pay (or receive) Social Security?

Are they whining about the military and the vast waste of tax-dollars it consumes?

Do they even comprehend what government is?

I say we are in an insane moment in our country's history. Nobody believes in veracity anymore, just ranting and raving in a rather rabid fashion.

It's as if being un-hinged is the new "for god and country" rallying cry.

I just think these loonies have absolutely no idea what principles they believe in. In fact, they have no principles other than "everyone else is liberal".

GOP: Public transportation is so not socialism, its a right.

'Read that sentence again and replace "transit" with "health care coverage."'

Or perhaps replace it with "anything". The new Democratic logic goes: since government runs some things, it should have the right to run anything (or at least whatever Democratic special interests desire it to run).

Government, according to the Democrats, has just as legitimate a role in running car companies as it does in providing public transportation. And if you do not think government should run car companies, yet you use the metro, you must be a hypocrite.

To the Democratic, one can either support an unlimited government or anarchy. Any sort of middle-ground is "hypocrisy".

"To the Democratic, one can either support an unlimited government or anarchy. Any sort of middle-ground is "hypocrisy"."

Could you please provide three examples of the claim that you just plucked out of your ass? Thank in advance.

Mike Malloy exposes the tea baggers as frauds. A thing of beauty.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x372751

I think you meant: "They were disappointed to discover, however, that the government had NOT done more to satisfy their public-transportation expectations..."

Imagine the reaction if, expecting a million people on the Mall, Metro HAD charged 'em in advance.

Just one more thing to make these people seem idiotic, but its another story that could very well get picked up by the news media and treated with grave seriousness.

Meanwhile...this is getting no coverage at all:

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/poll-big-majorities-dismiss-leading-right-wing-health-care-attacks-as-scare-tactics/

So a pol shows that conservative tactics to derail healthcare reform are flopping with the American public, and still these people and their toxic antics are being given vast amounts of attention and credibility by the media day after day.

Subways?
Cabs?
If these people were at all consistent, they would have marched on Washington barefoot, like Stonewall Jacksons troops ran around the Shenedoah Valley.
Now that would have make a statement!

Of course these stout-hearted patriots will all demand that the government send none of that socialistic relief when their states get hit by a natural disaster.

I would love to see someone introduce a bill in Congress to increase funding for the D.C. metro, citing the complaints of the teabaggers. It would be priceless. In fact, call some of them in to testify!

Raheem,

And if you do not think government should run car > companies, yet you use the metro, you must be a hypocrite.

Where do you get this corelation. It has nothing to do with "Car companies" but the fact you dont like govt part of their life. Conservatives are staunchly against public transportation.

To the Democratic, one can either support an unlimited government or anarchy. Any sort of middle-ground is "hypocrisy".

Again, you are imagining things. Of course you hae no proof.

You are a perfect example of what represents a Republican now a days: muddy thinkers.

You ought to know better, Raheem is a name/pseudo that right would love to ban.

Raheem: Government, according to the Democrats, has just as legitimate a role in running car companies as it does in providing public transportation.

You're joking, right? Government has been supporting the auto industry since it's inception. They're called "roads", duh. The biggest giveaway to the car companies was by a REPUBLICAN president, some guy named Eisenhower who spent your grandpappies tax dollars to start building the largest infrastructure project in US history, the interstate highway system.

Get a clue.

The Texas Republican on Wednesday released a letter he sent to Washington's Metro system complaining that the taxpayer-funded subway system was unable to properly transport protesters to the rally to protest government spending and expansion.

What, these people from Texas didn't bring their horses for transportation? Can't have been real 'muricans.

If a Tea Partier takes public transit to a Tea Party, are they really a Tea Partier?

I found this video only reinforced my impression of the Becker-Heads attending this event. I still found it scary & amusing at the same time.

http://www.mahablog.com/2009/09/14/reverse-evolution/#comments

Yo, Teabaggers: If you don't like the Government run RIDE, you have the FREEDOM to WALK. . .

Yet another example of the twisted pants crowd! To live in such a confused world is to live in fear! -Kevo

Ask the teabaggers if it's their position that taxpayer-funded transportation should be ramped up to provide additional service (overtime for drivers, extra maintenance crews, additional transit cops, etc.) for unofficial, corporate-sponsored events.

And watch their teeny-tiny, so-small-you-can-drown-them-in-the-bathtub brains explode.

If the government would just get out of the way, I could build my OWN interstate highway system!

Consider, too, that this is the demographic that most favors home schooling. In a few years we're going to have to add "Crippling Ignorance" to the conditions covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Steve, really, thanks for this post. It highlights more than anything I've seen lately of the level of cognitive dissonance suffered by these folks. It is simply a case of being insufferably stupid and incapable of making reasoned argument, because there is no capacity for reasoned, logical thought. Knownothingness has plagued America for centuries. If I was still a practicing historian, an excellent book would be the study of this phenomenon in American culture and politics. Anyone aware of a good read on this topic?

They want the trains to run on time? Where's Benito Mussolini when you really need him?

Conservatroll: If the government would just get out of the way, I could build my OWN interstate highway system!

Yeah, and you could underwrite your own insurance too, at least until you had to have one operation, went bankrupt and then went on Medicaid.

Teabaggers were upset with the lack of "Whites Only" subway cars.

Oh, come on, their logic in complaining about service while opposing funding is perfectly consistent. They don't object to the government providing services as long as no tax money goes to pay for them.

(Seriously, they probably believe that Metro should be able to handle a crowd and give them a pony with only they money they paid in fares.)

To the Democratic, one can either support an unlimited government or anarchy. Any sort of middle-ground is "hypocrisy".

And there we have conservative opposite-logic in a nutshell. The evidence-free assumption that if conservatives believe something strongly, liberals must believe the opposite strongly. So if conservatives believe in always cutting taxes (even if they have government projects, like wars, that they want to pay for) then liberals must like raising taxes for its own sake, not just as a sometimes necessary means to accomplish other goals.

Guess what, Raheem -- Democrats don't care about every conservative issue with an equal and opposite passion. There's a lot that you guys care about and we don't (and vice versa), and others (a lot) that we just disagree with what you want to do, not that we want to do the opposite, and more beyond that where we don't have philosophical objections, but have practical objections that doing what you want will prevent us from doing what we want.

I know it's complicated, but in the real world there are more colors than just white and black. Maybe some day there will be a cure for conservative color blindness.

I think the D.C. metro did admirably given that that were eleventy billion people in attendance.

I should add, as someone who rode the D.C. metro every day for seven years, that the system has some fairly dramatic flaws -- in large part because it has no dedicated source of revenue. Without real investment, the system makes desperate pleas for funds, some of which go unheeded. The result is dramatic deficits, which in turn lead to cutbacks in services.

I've lived near DC for over 20 years, and for a system that lacks a permanent source of funding, I think Washington Metro is a great system.

Agreed, there are some dense population areas that desperately need Metro, such as eastern Prince William County. Planners need to run more trains to the stadium when the Nationals are playing in town. There have also been a couple of serious accidents in the last few months due to aging equipment -- which is evidence of the funding problem.

Still, I think the system is a nice one, and teabaggers ought to be happy that us DC suburbanites "make do" on the imperfect system of funding we have.

Furthermore, I think they should just take some of their "can-do" spirit, park their cars in Virginia, and walk across the river if the Metro doesn't run to their pleasing. I can show them several bridges they can use.

Metro has a weekday and a weekend schedule. On weekdays, it has peak and non-peak times, which determine the frequency and lenght of trains.

We have a lot of potantially big events here. We know that inauguration day and Fourth of July will always be a little crazy. Metro plans for that.

But if you hold a protest and demonstration on the weekend, you need to affirmatively persuade Metro (or WMATA, really) that it would be in the interests of everyone to run longer cars, more frequent cars, etc.

When I went to a protest way back in - gasp! - 1979, a union contributor simply paid Metro's estimated daily operating costs so that everyone on that day could ride free, which makes it much faster for everyone, as it reduces lines all the way around. So if whoever was planning this protest had their act together, all they had to do was contact WMATA and see what they could do. But just expecting WMATA to come up with all the money to pay drivers and others overtime because an event might have large turnout is pretty stupid and childish.

Like I said, we have events, literally, every other week that close down streets and draw crowds.

I agree with Scott F. it is the 'know nothings' all over again.

I don't know of a 'good read' on this but, I know a good joke:

A businessman was seated next to an organic farmer on an airplane. Being bored, he turned to the farmer and said, "Let's talk. I've heard that flights go quicker if you strike up a conversation with your fellow passenger."

The farmer, who was reading a book, closed it slowly and said to the guy, "What would you like to talk about?"

Oh, I don't know," said the businessman. "How about nuclear power?"

"OK," the farmer said. "That could be an interesting topic. But let me ask you a question first. A horse, a cow and a deer all eat the same stuff... grass. Yet a deer excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty, and a horse produces clumps of dried grass. Why do you suppose that is?"

The businessman thought about it and said, "Hmmm, I have no idea."

To which the farmer replied, "Do you really feel qualified to discuss nuclear power when you don't know shit?"

To adolphus: If an organizer expects Metro to enhance service, it has to pay for it. Metro's budget is simply too tight. Also, it might be questionable under various governance principles and even laws for WMATA, a public agency, to show favoritism or, essentially, give away service. (Remember, Metro charges less for non-peak fares -- I dont' hear anybody volunteering to pay more during those times).

I don't know how big the fee is now, but in the protest I went to, the union paid something like $175,000 to get Metro to run for free, and perhaps enhance service.

When I went to a protest way back in - gasp! - 1979, a union contributor simply paid Metro's estimated daily operating costs so that everyone on that day could ride free, which makes it much faster for everyone, as it reduces lines all the way around. So if whoever was planning this protest had their act together, all they had to do was contact WMATA and see what they could do. But just expecting WMATA to come up with all the money to pay drivers and others overtime because an event might have large turnout is pretty stupid and childish.

Wow. A usage fee. How Norquistian.

This will just become another example for the right wing of how government "can't do anything right." There's no point in giving government agencies more money because they'll just squander it. In the mind of conservatives, the reason that the trains don't run on time is because of incompetence, not lack of funding. They imagine office buildings full of government workers idling their way through the day on the public dime. Their's little hope of convincing them otherwise.

Hmmm . . . did you actually read what I wrote TonyB? The union paid so that no one else would have to -- It basically agreed to pay for the revenue that Metro had to forego by letting people ride for free. That's not a usage fee anymore than expecting riders to pay fares is a Norquistian usage fee (maybe it is, but it's not different).

Barbara - I did, and I was agreeing with you.

The organizers paying a usage fee (Norquist's favorite non-tax tax) to secure "adequate" service is something that they would scream about...when it is a core idea in their conservative concept of governance.

Sorry, when I see "Norquistian" I usually think of it as an insult!

I thought at the time that the union's idea was a really clever way to sponsor the event. They had signs at the front of every station explaining the deal, and everyone, protester or not, got to ride for free, so it was a great public relations coup on their part as well.

But if you hold a protest and demonstration on the weekend, you need to affirmatively persuade Metro (or WMATA, really) that it would be in the interests of everyone to run longer cars, more frequent cars, etc.

I imagine that the Teabaggers expected Metro management to increase service just because of the awesome Fox News coverage of the march - "Gosh, boss, this march is looking big! Maybe we should bring in some more guys on overtime this weekend!" - rather than at the behest of an organized group that would actually do outreach and work with them to request the increased service. People planning activities like the Inauguration or other popular events actually WORK with the agencies, you know, if they want adjusments in services.

Just like at the earlier protests this spring, where the Teabaggers were surprised that they weren't allowed to carry out some of their activities without a permit.

These people really have a sense of entitlement, and at the same time total disregard about how public agencies work.

Actually, Metro was scheduled to receive an extra $150 million in funding in the Transportation and HUD appropriations bill that came up for a vote in July. Guess who voted against the funding? None other than Rep. Kevin Brady.
http://singcitychronicles.blogspot.com/2009/09/more-fools.html

The agents running the metro and other public transportation should ask potential users at the door: "Do you believe in public funding of services like this?" If person answers "no", then he or she should be refused. (Can't stop liars, but at least that forces the question on them.)

And what of the land upon which the baggers protested? Was it not US government land, owned and maintained by the federal government? I'm just curious about how the place looked during and after the demonstration. Did these people pick up their trash, etc. like good responsible citizens? Or did they complain about how messy the place was. Just wondering if anyone knows.

It was the organizers' incompetence in not alerting Metro, and not shelling out the extra bucks other organizers do to get "special" service.

Also, dear Congressman Brady: please contact Sen. Coburn with your concerns about DC public transportation. Thanks!

Actually, what should've happened is they should've locked up all the public restrooms (it's the weekend, natch) and all private businesses should've charged $5 to use their bathrooms.

This is all about the 2 million tea baggers fantasy.

DC Metro ridership for Inauguration Day 2009 was 1.12 million riders; July 4, 2009 631,000;
typical Saturday 253,000;
Sept 12, 2009 437,624

That Sept 12 had one third the ridership of Jan 20 is obviously Metro's fault.

If there is anything that proves or disproves Tea Bagger crowd size it's the public transit system. Here's what it looked like on Jan. 20th.

The article starts out by saying: "Tea Party" protestors... a rejection of taxpayer-financed public services.

Which you have twisted and is wrong. Tea Party protestors are not against taxpayer funded basic public services, they are against taxpayer funded boondoggles, government inefficiency and wasteful spending. If you liberals think the government is efficient at providing all services you are clearly delusional which is sad. Put the kool aid down and recognize what the Tea Party is about: not getting carried away with 'government is the answer for everything and will help you if you fail or do not care to be a productive member of society'.

For Immediate Release Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!
April 2, 2004
Brady: Transportation Bill is Highway Robbery
Texas Roads and Transportation Priorities Lost $1.4 BILLION

Washington, D.C. - U.S. Congressman Kevin Brady (R-The Woodlands) issued this statement after casting his vote against the $275 billion highway transportation bill the Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users or TEA-LU for short.

�I was not elected to Congress to stand by and watch Texas� gas taxes end up building more roads in Massachusetts and Vermont than in Houston. Texas taxpayers sent $2.4 billion to Washington at the pump last year. We need a transportation bill that guarantees more of that money stays right here at home.

�On average, Texas taxpayers get back about 86 cents for every dollar they send to Washington in gas taxes for federal transportation funding. Under this new bill, Texas receives even less -- about 78 cents back. This makes an already unfair share more unfair,� said Brady.

Historically, Texas has always been a �donor� state, which means taxpayers send more fuel tax monies to Washington than they see back. Some states get back as much as $3 for each dollar they contribute. This bill did nothing to correct the inequity Texas and other donor states already face, and in Texas� case, actually was a step backwards in transportation funding.

�This transportation bill is a step backwards for Texas and Houston roads, bridges, and mobility priorities. It takes nearly half of the commuters in my district 30 minutes to drive to work each day, and a fourth drive more than 45 minutes to work This bill leaves us even less money to relieve the congestion our region now faces,� said Brady.

###

Which you have twisted and is wrong. Tea Party protestors are not against taxpayer funded basic public services, they are against taxpayer funded boondoggles, government inefficiency and wasteful spending.

Everyone is against wasteful government spending. Everyone! The problem is that we disagree about what is wasteful. What are the tea-partier's complaining about? Higher taxes, right? I mean, the protests were on tax day, and the original BTP was about the British tea tariffs. But let's consider reality: The tax rates across the board are lower than when Reagan was in office.

As for spending, the point of the stimulus package was to fight the recession. I know that it sounds crazy to you, but it actually is a legitimate economic theory that deficit spending is a good tool to lessen the effects of economic slumps. What finally ended the Great Depression? That's right, the massive deficit spending of World War 2, which dwarfed the New Deal. Does anyone dispute that this is how the Great Depression ended? According to the theory, decreasing spending during a slump only worsens things, since this depresses both supply and demand.

Let's put things in perspective. If there's wasteful spending to complain about, it's not the stimulus bill, but the bank bailouts, which cost three times as much as the stimulus package! I don't hear conservatives complaining nearly so much about that, even though it consists of throwing more money at failed plutocrats. Instead, they complain about the much smaller stimulus package, and Santelli complains about mortgage bailouts for the little guy. Where is the sense of priorities? Out the window.

Finally, let's consider the debt accrued by all this. The numbers aren't pleasant, but we're still talking about a lower debt-to-GDP ratio than the days after WW2. That would suggest that this is not going to be the end of the republic. The 50's are remembered as a time of great prosperity, even though we were coming off the greatest levels of debt that the world had ever seen.

So, we're all against wasteful spending. That's a no-brainer. But let's put things in perspective. Without perspective, we can claim almost anything we want. The truth is that the leaders of the tea party movement, and the "death panel" bullshit, are totally committed to a RADICAL philosophy of extreme capitalism, the kind of which has never been practiced on this planet. The rank and file may be ordinary folks with understandable fears, but they are being misled, and to be frank, this is at least partly their fault. They may not be crazy or radical, but they are playing the fools to these crazy leaders.