Why would any fighting Dem let TeaPartyTerrorists get away with coopting our nation's history?

[Uncle Joe]

6. It's kind of ironic, our corporate media was touting "royal blood" as a harbinger of

predicting the outcome of Presidential Elections in 2000.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=82279&

When it comes to picking the winner in the American presidential race, Britain’s leading chroniclers of royal ancestors say they’ve never been wrong — not once in almost 200 years.

Based on facts gleaned from the old scrolls and dusty archives of Burke’s Peerage — researchers of royal bloodlines since 1826 — the Brits wager it will be Texas Gov. George W. Bush.

They say Bush’s blue blood runs thicker than Vice President Al Gore’s. In fact it trumps the royal ties of every other president to date, including his father’s. It seems George W. has inherited his mother’s deep blue blood-line.

(snip)

Gore’s family members weren’t exactly peasants. The vice president’s family tree includes Charlemagne and three Holy Roman emperors.

Whereas the free press during the Revolution was speaking out against being ruled by kings, today's corporate media promotes it.

Obviously, I'm not of the mind that someone should be eliminated from Presidential consideration because their family tree has royal blood, but to me that kind of promotion smelled of subliminal propaganda, conditioning the American People for the autocratic rule that was to follow with Bush the Least.

Now that Obama is President, the same corporate media has no problem tying the the Gadsen Flag of Liberty to the Tea Party, because they're in most direct opposition to a President that probably doesn't have "royal blood" in the family tree.

Thanks for the thread, blm.