Amy Gardner and Krissah Thompson of the Washington Post offer "Tea party groups battling perceptions of racism" (link). While presented as an open-minded exploration of that issue it's, of course, an attempt by that paper to "just ask some questions" in order to yet again portray the tea partiers as racists.

Why does this keep happening? Why aren't the tea partiers able to strike back effectively at those who keep calling them names?

The answer to the first is, being much more frank than I should be, because all the tea party followers I've run into have various mental and emotional problems: they can't think things through, they have a persecution complex, they're paranoid, they're impulsive, they don't know what an argument is or have any interest in making one, they can't listen to constructive criticism (which this is to some degree), they have a barely-hidden fascistic streak (in relation to trying to shout down and redbait anyone who says anything negative about them), and on and on (and on). Their leaders are libertarians or on the take, and they can't think things through either except when it involves cashing checks.

But, wait, there's more: they're one-dimensional, concerning themselves with little more than fiscal matters. They don't have a grounding in things like opposing the far-left on social issues, meaning that when it happens they don't know how to do things effectively. Instead, they do things that help their opponents, such as engaging in bean-counting. If they were smarter they'd realize that they'll never beat their opposition when it comes to bean-counting, but because they just aren't that smart they don't know what to do.

For even more, see my extensive tea parties coverage.