The Mad Haters' Tea Party

My mind was wondering around aimlessly today when it formed the name "Mad Hater" and immediately, I pictured NY Senate candidate Paladino.

It then occurred to me that some of the hateful innuendo - and overt statements - made by Tea Partiers really did make this year's election a Mad Haters' Tea Party.

We are told the Tea Party has emerged because people are "angry" about how government works, or doesn't work.

Fine. But what is the Tea Party angry about?

Deficits? Where were they for the 8 years when W ran 2 wars without even trying to pay for them? I didn't see any tea bags stapled to John Deer hats from 2000-2008. And did you know that the budget deficit for the last fiscal year was 8% lower than the prior year? So, we are actually reducing the deficit while we ended combat in Iraq and have scheduled the end of combat in Afghanistan.

And bail-outs? Did you know that the bank bailouts will likely result in the US government actually making money? Most of it is paid back already. The last bit is being paid in stock which can be sold over time - for a profit. And the auto bailouts: saved thousands of jobs and will also be paid back. Plus, the taxes on income and car sales are additional revenue that resulted directly from the auto bailout. All in all - both winning policies.

Big government and entitlements? When the mostly white, older Tea Partiers sign up to give up their Medicare and Social Security, I'll believe they're serious. Until then, they're just a bunch of hypocrites. What I hear and see are demands to "Keep You Government Hands Off My medicare!" Riiiiiiight.

Yup. They're mad alright. Mad as a hatter.

They believe that taxes are the highest ever when in fact they are the lowest they've been in more than half a century. (While fighting 2 wars, mind you.) They actually think their taxes have gone up since 2008 even though they actually have gone down.

They think crazy stuff like: the President is a Muslim sleeper agent; the President is a socialist; the President was born in Kenya; the President wants to destroy America. (Weird how everything is about him.)

They think gays shouldn't be allowed to serve in the military, get married to each other, adopt children, or teach school. Just because they are gay. And they think gay is icky.

They think the Civil Rights laws are bad and the Constitution should be applied as intended when written, which means segregation - by race and gender - will be right back in style in these lovely Tea Party communities. Does that give you a warm feeling all over? It gives me the shivers.

They think public schools are a waste of money, so if you cannot afford private school, good luck to ya. (Hope you can read this.)

They think we should exchange chickens for health care (though this Tea Partier did lose).

They don't think there should be separation of church and state, so if you're Mormon in Alabama, Jewish in Wyoming, or Muslim anywhere, you better learn to pray with your shudders closed.

And this may be my favorite: they want to outlaw abortion, even in cases of rape and incest. Wow. Could they be more misogynistic? I doubt it.

What I do not understand is why the media treats these crack-pots extremeists like legitimate candidates with legitimate points of view. Can they say any crazy thing and still be taken seriously? Even Karl Rove makes fun of them and he's on their side!

When that Buck guy from Colorado was on Meet the Press Sunday, he was asked whether he believed homosexuality was a choice? He said yes. He was asked what he based that on and he stammered around and admitted that maybe there was some inborn tendency, like alcoholism, but that ultimately, it was a choice. (So, short answer, based on his own uninformed opinion.) There is actual science on this issue. Had David Gregory not been such a sycophantic cupcake, he would have cited scientific studies, and opinions of known scientists to the contrary, and shown Buck for what he is: a guy who thinks gay is icky because his Bible told him so. And then he should have asked: "So, Mr. Buck, when did you choose to be straight?" Buck has a right to his POV, but shouldn't intelligent people in the media try to show what, if anything, that POV is based on?

[It isn't liberal to expect more than front porch philosophy and Sunday School dogma from politicians. It is the job of the media to press on these issues. The Tea Party is taken seriously because the media has taken them seriously rather than debunk them the way it is supposed to.]

IMO, for a lot of Tea Partiers, their anger is about people of other than European heritage playing a larger role in American society, including in the White House. That is the America of the future. The Tea partiers are not going to stop the change that is coming by unravelling 100 years of racial, sociological and cultural progress. But they are going to try.

Yes, they want to "take our country back." They want to take our country back to 1789. Research your history. 1789 sucked.