The tea-party movement is trying to regroup after taking some licks
in this month's elections. Several groups already are setting their
sights on 2014 congressional races, in which they plan to promote their
preferred candidates and hope to weed out Republicans they consider
insufficiently conservative.
Yeah, that's the ticket! You know, if we get enough Tea Partiers as the GOP nominees, as BooMan notes, Democrats may be able to take back the House and keep the Senate.
You know they make ideal opponents, because they have such a fine grasp of reality ... the reality on Planet Bizarro, that is:
Tea-party activist Greg Fettig, a founder of Hoosiers for
a Conservative Senate and a backer of Mr. Mourdock, said the main
lesson from the loss is that activists need to be sure the campaigns
they support are well-run.
If by "well run" he means "not prone to saying insane things that
make voters flee them in droves," he might have a point. But that would
not describe any known or likely Tea Party candidate.
But of course it can't be them. It can't be that their gravitational
pull forced every GOP candidate, including Mitt Romney, into such
extreme far-right positions that they couldn't appeal to the broader
American electorate. Heavens no. It was the fact that Romney tried to
appear sane nonetheless:
In their post mortems of the 2012 election, activists put much of the blame for Mr. Romney's defeat squarely on the candidate.
"If we choose someone who runs a content-free campaign and is left of
center, at least within the Republican Party, we will get our butts
kicked," said Judson Phillips, founder of Tea Party Nation.
The Tea Party folks -- to no one's great surprise -- are not taking
their electoral defeat at the hands of a black man lying down. They're
threatening to pack up their soccer ball and take it home.
Of course, where they'll go once they're packed up is an open
question. But by God, they are NOT gonna put up living around a bunch of
libruls any longer. Matthew Feldman and Leonard Weinberg at TruthOut round up some of the far-right reaction.
It was particularly chortle-inducing to read the reaction in the Seattle Times of Keli Carender, the Seattle woman credited with providing the initial spark for the whole Tea Party shebang back in 2009:
"It's getting harder and harder for me. I was at Trader
Joe's, and I was glaring at everyone around me," says Keli Carender, 33,
co-organizer of the local group.
Carender's glaring took place at the Trader Joe's in the University
District, a neighborhood that, for sure, is a bastion of libs.
"I kept thinking I was surrounded by people who are destroying
freedom,"says Carender. "It's starting to make me angry, not wanting to
be around these people."
Trust me, honey, no one wants to be around you, either. Especially as
you glare psychotically at them for having the audacity to think
differently than you and the voices in your head. Most of us, when we
encounter folks like you, run the other direction before you can pull
out your sniper rifle and begin firing.
But this was especially hilarious to read in Seattle of all places.
Hello, Keli: The voters in Washington state had just voted to legalize
marijuana and gay marriage both in the same election -- one of the most
massive expansions in individual freedom in any election in recent
memory.
The only "freedoms" they turned their backs on, as it were, by
rejecting Republican rule were the "freedom" to not pay taxes and the
"freedom" not to have a non-right-wing president. At least, those seem
to be the freedoms that Tea Partiers are most focused upon. (Yes, we know they're extremely paranoid about their gun rights
being taken away, based on their readings of vapor trails, as far as we
can tell. Indeed, here in Seattle, we'd be delighted -- for obvious reasons
-- if the Obama administration actually were to take up the problem of
gun proliferation and its attendant violence. But we're not holding our
breaths.)
Of course, if Keli really can't stand to be around those steenking
libruls, all she really has to do is move across the lake to Bellevue,
where Republicans are still mostly dominant. Though that is waning, too,
as more and more people figure out that the GOP is controlled by
nutbars.
Even as Americans flock to theaters to see a film about a
revered historical figure that reunified the nation after a bloody
Civil War, there’s a fresh movement among some political factions to
have their states secede from the United States.
In the wake of President Obama’s re-election earlier this month, a
flood of petitions has filled the White House’s “We The People” website,
seeking federal permission for states to “peacefully” withdraw from the
nation and “create [their] own new government.”
Although the petitions are largely a symbolic gesture meant to
express some people’s dislike of election results, residents of all 50
states have now filed them. More than 675,000 digital signatures have
been collected so far.
Of course, anyone can create a petition on the White House site;
under the site’s guidelines, White House staff only will review a
petition and issue a response if one garners at least 25,000 signatures.
(For context, other recent petitions have called for nationalizing
the production of Twinkies, to ensure their continued existence; and
pardoning the Ohio State Buckeyes from “unjust NCAA sanctions” that
prevents the team’s “rightful access to a BCS bowl game.”)
Thus far, only secession petitions from Alabama, Florida, Georgia,
Louisiana, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas have reached the
25,000-signature threshold. Not surprisingly, all of those states –
except Florida – went for Republican Mitt Romney in the election.
This notion of conservative secession has its merits. Of
course, as "True America" we'd want to attach some constraints to the
separatists: no nuclear weapons, get your own damn military, and we'll
be carving out territory for you that consists entirely of places close
to sea level, so that you can ignore climate change from the best
possible vantage point. But this sounds pretty doable, once the
logistics get worked out. So what are you going to call yourselves?
United Galts of America? New Jesusland? That's great, we'll send you a
card.
This gap between political perception and fiscal reality
is also reflected in the distribution of tax dollars at the state level:
Most politically "red" states are financially in the red when it comes
to how much money they receive from Washington compared with what their
residents pay in taxes.
Of course, most of these halfwits believe that their tax dollars
actually subsidize the welfare parasites who live in the Blue states,
when the reality is that it's the other way around.
FWIW, I just watched Lincoln the other night. And while contemplating the subsequent reality -- that the South effectively overturned all of Lincoln's careful work (not to mention the verdict of the war itself) in the years following, all under the bellicose banner of the Bloody Shirt
-- I was struck by the thought that we all might have been better off
if we had just let the South go fester in its own moral and economic
rot. We might still be.
Because what's clear about these folks, beyond their delusions about a decline in our freedoms, is that they do not believe in democracy.
That's clear not just in their threats but in their daily actions and
their constant contempt for democratic institutions, not to mention
their overwhelmingly clear preference for right-wing authoritarian rule
and an oligarchical society. Well, mebbe we should let them have it.