Talking about the Tea Party

Posted · Add Comment

On November 13th, 2013, I posted this picture on my Facebook page:


Is it hyperbolic? Of course it is. And did I mean it seriously? Of course I did, to a point. And it really aggravated some people. Which was, after all, my intention.

People wanted to know why I was equating ‘Baggers with mass-murderers and/or white supremacists. My initial glib response was, “Well, if the sheet fits…” but then I realized that I would be better served by not using words like “racist” to describe them. Not because I don’t think there are racists in the Tea Party—there are plenty—but because the word “racist” simply isn’t a large enough descriptor to capture all of the group’s vile nonsense.

Therefore, I am going with the word bigot.

Moving right along, I want to make quick rebuttals to the various accusations made against me, on Facebook and otherwise, and to the various defenses trotted out by ‘Bagger apologists, while also offering some general facts about their tawdry, horrifically anti-American, little “movement.”


The Tea Party is anti-intellect. Many members seem actually to be proud of not knowing things. America’s Founders, men with whom the ‘Baggers are wont to compare themselves, were serious people with serious credentials. They taught themselves other languages. The ‘Baggers are hostile even to the idea of Americans speaking anything other than English, and scared shitless of people who do. The Founders were scientists, and enthusiastic about science. The ‘Baggers are hostile to science, about which I will explain more below. The Founders were voracious readers on all subjects, and committed to the life of the mind. The ‘Baggers, as is quite obvious, do not read. Their favorite president, the gleefully ignorant G.W. Bush, apparently read only two books ever: the Bible (aka, The Child’s Book of Christian Mythology), and My Pet Goat, (of the two, My Pet Goat is the better guide to good governance…), and Ted Cruz cannot even successfully navigate the tricky literary landscapes of Dr. Seuss.

The Power of the Guv’ment

I’ve been told that the Tea Party is about limiting the power of the Federal Government, or, in the words of the degenerate Grover Norquist, to make government so small he can “drown it in the bath tub.” Republicans were trotting out this silliness long before the ‘Baggers started waving their misspelled signs. Generally it is a catch-all excuse for being against any legislation they do not like, which is, generally, any legislation than might help their countrymen. ‘Baggers do not like helping people, because helping people might make them appear weak, and is therefore an affront to their already tenuous mental health.

In truth, the ‘Baggers are against government of the kind they hate, and rabidly in favor of the kind they like, and they want more of it. Lots, lots, lots more. To wit:

  • Establishing Christianity as the national religion. Rand Paul, Rick “I’m a Christocrat” Scarborough, and Michele Bachmann, among others, have harped on this subject many times. North Carolina tried to enact state-level legislation to that effect this year. The whole idea is about as unconstitutional as it gets, and so will go nowhere, but it remains a fine example of the ‘Baggers having no problem with the government controlling the lives of citizens.
  • Voter registration laws. This is sweeping legislation in numerous (Southern) states aimed at stopping a non-existent problem. There have been exactly three—count ‘em—three documented cases of the type of voter fraud that so exercises the ‘Baggers. So, what possible point could they be making? Well, since those restrictive, draconian laws largely effect liberals and minorities… When the Supreme Court destroyed the Voting Rights Act, claiming it was no longer needed, it took less than 48 hours for those Southern states to enact legislation aimed at disenfranchising minorities.
  • District gerrymandering. Hey, too many congressional districts filling up with brown people? Well, we gotta fix that, by god! Let’s just redraw the district lines and split those minority voting blocs, thereby effectively silencing those pesky slackers! That’s teach them to vote against us! District gerrymandering has taken place in Virginia, Michigan, Texas (of course), North Carolina, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, with others in process.
  • Elimination of TORT laws. (A bone for their corporate leash holders.) This isn’t taking away governmental power. It’s taking away citizen power.
  • Allowing taxpayer money to fund religious schools and other religious activities. Again, totally unconstitutional, but this one is gaining unfortunate headway.
    Cutting veterans benefits, as Bush did in 2002, 2003 and 2004. Apparently the ‘Baggers have more use for dead soldiers than wounded ones. I mean, who doesn’t like a parade?
  • Legislating against gay marriage. This one is on its way down in a massive fireball, thanks to progressive states like California and New York, but that didn’t stop the aforementioned ‘Bagger stalwart, Rick Scarborough from proposing a “class action suit against homosexuality.” This somehow leaves the realm of simply bigotry and enters the world of weapons-grade stupidity.
  • Stomping on female reproductive rights. Do I even need to enumerate this ghastly stuff? Get over your bigoted terror of lady parts, people! What are you, twelve??
  • Then, finally, there’s the whole “god’s law” business. ‘Baggers across the country are on the record stating that America should be governed by god’s law. Again, totally unconstitutional, but that doesn’t stop them from gibbering about it every chance they get.

Hey, guys, god’s “law” has had its day on the world stage. We call that era the Dark Ages. And, god’s “law” is what currently holds sway all over the Middle East, and we all know what a tolerant, successful and intellectually vibrant place that is. And while we’re on the subject, is there any way a government could be a larger, more oppressive, nanny state than by turning its control over to an Invisible Man in the Sky and his oh-so rational earthly lickspittles?

‘Baggers, stop pretending you are in favor of smaller government. You aren’t.


Those of you who know me, know that I am a logical positivist and a philosophical materialist to my core. I love and respect science because science works. Because it makes use of testable facts. Because it explains the natural world and our place in it better than religion ever has, can, or will.

And the ‘Baggers have no use for it whatsoever.

  • “American scientific companies are cross-breeding humans and animals and coming up with mice with fully functioning human brains.”—Christine O’Donnell.
  • They refuse to acknowledge the reality of climate change, absurdly claiming that the tens of thousands of scientists studying the problem world-wide are all part of some sweeping left-wing conspiracy to undermine…something-or-other, they are never very clear on this point. Like their ideological brethren on the postmodern left, they think science is “politics in white coats.”
  • They make up horrific nonsense that sounds “sciency” to bolster their need for larger and more oppressive government crackdowns on the rights of Americans. Fetuses feel pain at eight weeks. If a woman is “legitimately” raped, she can’t get pregnant.
  • They want creation “science” presented alongside evolution in public schools, screaming “Teach the controversy!” You know why no one is teaching the controversy? Because there isn’t one.

I could go on and on here, but it makes me too sad. And, yes, before you ‘Baggers start whining, I am fully aware that many liberal Americans are woefully ignorant about science, and that also makes me sad. And I am also aware of the recent study which claimed to demonstrate that ‘Baggers are slightly more scientifically literate than liberals. However, the protocols of the study were a bit wobbly, and, like all good science (statistical analysis is a science) we must await replication before drawing conclusions. Personally, if it turns out to be true that ‘Baggers know some science, I think that would be awesome, but I do not think it would do a thing to alter their preposterous blather on the subject.

St. Ronald the Addle-Minded

Oh, how the ‘Baggers love Ronald Reagan! To hear them talk, he was the next best thing to Jaysus!! For decades now I’ve been listening to friends, family members, and pundits shout St. Ronald’s name from the rooftops, but without ever saying what the guy did to make him so super-duper special. I’ve done a bit of reading on Reagan, and have come up with some bullet points that I think qualify as his major achievements:

  • He owed everything he got in life to labor unions (specifically SAG, Equity and IATSE) then became president and turned on unions like a rabid dog.
  • He was a turncoat and a rat, spilling his trembling guts to the scumbags running the HUAC hearings.
  • Despite a reputation as a tax cutter, he raised taxes nine times, effectively eviscerating the American middle class.
  • After famously stating that trees cause air pollution (gotta love that conservative commitment to science), he set about selling off the country’s natural treasures to the highest bidder, and gutting environmental protections.
  • He honored dead Nazis at the Bitburg concentration camp.
  • He unleashed a wave of torture and murder in Central America, under the guise of combatting communists, funding the scheme by illegally dealing WMDs to Iran. And he only got away with it because he was too senile to remember issuing the orders in the first place.
    He cheated on his wife, divorced her to marry his mistress, then blithered on for two terms about “family values.”
  • He invented a war history for himself, wherein he didn’t spend his entire enlistment on a Hollywood backlot (which is what he did), but instead liberated camps and fought in major battles.
  • And, he was a completely talentless actor. Bonzo had more emotional depth.

Did I miss anything?

Oh yeah. Where was my brain? He ended the Cold War, right?

Well, no. No he didn’t. As has been well documented, the Soviet Union collapsed because Siegfried and Roy were playing Caesar’s Palace at the time.

The Cold War was ended by Mikhail Gorbachev, the Afghan mujahedeen, and Trofim Lysenko. Never heard of Trofim Lysenko? That’s why you think Reagan did more than just stand around and watch while the Soviet Union fell apart under the weight of its own oppressive bullshit, because you haven’t read your history.

Government Shutdown

Theodore Roosevelt was an interesting cat. Politically, he occupied a niche that no other president had occupied before (except for Abraham Lincoln, to an extent) or has occupied since. Conservatives have a hard time dealing with Teddy. On one hand, he was a rough-and-tumble man of action—a soldier, a hunter, a fighter. But on the other hand, he wanted to return the Republican party to what it had been under Lincoln—a progressive government that helped every American citizen, regardless of color or religion, get a “Square Deal.” When he failed to get certain legislation passed, he had this to say about political compromise (and I’m paraphrasing): If you are stranded on a desert island and all you have is a chisel, a saw and a screwdriver, then you put those tools to use building the best raft you can.

Confronted with the Affordable Care Act, Ted Cruz and the rest of the borderline-treasonous ‘Baggers instead did the following: they sat on their asses in the shade while their betters built a raft, then when it was done they complained about the design, and when nobody listened to them, they shot holes in the raft in an attempt to drown its occupants. Even Grover Norquist said the ‘Baggers were acting stupidly, and when a guy like Norquist calls you stupid, man, you got a whole lotta stupid goin’ on.

In ‘Baggerland, compromise is weakness, and weakness is, I dunno, socialism or something, a word they love to throw around, unfortunately without knowing its definition.

The End

In closing, do I think all ‘Baggers are racists? No, I do not. Do I think they are all bigots? No, I do not. Do I think they support bigoted and oppressive governmental policies?

Yes, I do.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.