Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Scary White Men

It's kind of an odd twist of fate in a nation terrified of a YMCA that the scariest group of people are the squeaky wheels of the Tea Party.
 
(side note: how is it that an editor at Cracked is the most coherent spokesman on the subject of the Islamic community center opponents? But I digress...)
 
And yet they are. Intentionally. When you strip away the frothing "anger" at tax hikes (because as we all know, Obama has actually cut taxes for 98% of Americans) there's really nothing there except hatred, bigotry, homophobia and, to be blunt, a fucking bunch of loons who would be the first against the wall when the revolution really does come.
 
Hatred, masked by the call for tax cuts. We may see a day when "tax cut" becomes a quaint phraseology of the moronic marshmallow appeasement faction of the right, much like "separate but equal". The Teabaggers talk about "taking the country back" but from whom? The 53% majority that elected Obama? Sounds to me like they're talking treason, which of course renders the question why in the hell the media hasn't covered this aspect of the movement from day one?
 
Oh. Right. I keep forgetting. We have a radically conservative media that pays lip service to the progressive point of view, and when things on the right get really hairy, enlist Paris Hilton to show us her boobs.
 
There was a time when Republicans would "work the ref", to borrown Al Franken's delightful phrase about Republican campaign rhetoric and legislative manner. They'd make the case for their side, then whine about liberal bias whenever a media figure pointed out the truth of it. Now, Republicans own the dialogue and guess what? They're STILL whining!
 
Despite the likelihood the Teabaggers are going to wake up the morning of November 3 with much egg on their faces, we should welcome any Teabagger victory as one more nail in the coffin of conservatism. I concur with the sentiment that the possilbly the best thing that could happen to Congress would be a Republican victory in one or more houses. Of course, many would say that was Ralph Nader's point...
 
Sure. Taxes may get lowered on the richest. But far better, far funnier, is the damage the Republican party will undergo to its image once the Teabaggers start obstructing the agenda beyond tax cuts.
 
Neither party will have either a filibuster- or veto-proof majority. That much was can be certain of. And as seems likely, if the Dems lose control of either house, it would likely be the House of Representatives.
 
Meaning, for all the bluster and bullying, nothing will get done. And in 2012 when the Teabaggers go back, hats in hand with all the corruption they've acquired in two short years, to their constituents, those constituents will just be angrier, and moreover, angry at them for being part of the problem.
 
More to the point, the GOP will have to caucus with people who will demand no quarter in their dealings with Democrats. This will make funding pork a rather interesting conundrum, since it is pork that drums up campaign contributions and it is pork that wins re-election.
 
Some would say that Teabagger faith-related issues would tide them over as their representatives pressed the radical agenda of Teabaggery. I say "bollocks". There are precious few Congresscritters who can honestly say they have been unsullied by the power and money of holding elective office, from Sarah Palin to Michele Bachmann to Rand Paul, all of whom are Teabagging darlings and all of whom have demonstrated an inordinate desire to scam money from the Federal government.
 
The election strategy of Democrats in individual races has been a good one: force the spotlight onto social issues and expose these cockroaches as the blustering idiots they are. The more photos of Teabaggers in Nazi uniforms, the better. Hell, I'd run TV ads linking these asshats to Glenn Beck, then show Beck on the cover of his "best-selling" book!
 
I mean, the Teabaggers are all a sham anyway, so why not expose them?