Associated Press photo
A thousand words: “Tea party” dipshits in Nashville, Tenn., earlier this year. USA Today reports that just under 80 percent of the “tea partiers” are non-Latino whites, but that number seems awfully low to me.
Thank God that the Fourth of July has come and gone. It perhaps is my least favorite holiday — my least favorite holiday because too many Americans get sanctimonious and self-righteous on the Fourth of July, as though they’d freed the nation themfuckingselves, and even though most of them probably would be hard-pressed to tell you which other nation the U.S. of A. gained its independence from. Even when they’re still sober.
Pseudo-patriotism, like pseudo-Christianity — and the two are so entwined, aren’t they? — makes me want to vomit. Even just to see photos of “tea party” gatherings, such as the one above, or photos of the fucktards who attend the quadrennial Repugnican National Conventions — and the images are very, very similar — give me the creeps.
“What is the Tea Party?” USA Today asked recently (just in time for the Fourth of July), although photos of the “tea party” dipshits answer that question clearly enough. I can answer that question fully with a simple sentence fragment:
Q. What is the “tea party”?
A: The Ku Klux Klan without the sheets.
The USA Today article (which Yahoo! News picked up as a “special report”) features photos of three people interviewed for the story:
USA Today photos
Gee, what trait do all of these “tea party” dipshits have in common?
Yet USA Today — and most of the rest of the mainstream media, all of them very apparently terrified of being branded the “liberal mainstream media” (even though that’s inevitable) — pretend that the “tea party” has nothing whatsofuckingever to do with racism, which is as American as apple pie baked and served by slaves of African descent, and/or that the “tea party” is something new. And/or the mainstream media portray the “tea party” as some sort of an enigma, as though there really were something to figure out.
Here are USA Today’s first several paragraphs of its piece on the “tea party”:
The “Tea Party” is less a classic political movement than a frustrated state of mind. A year and a half after the idea of a Tea Party burst into view, three of 10 Americans describe themselves in the USA Today/Gallup Poll as Tea Party supporters — equal to the number who call themselves Republicans — though many of them acknowledge they aren’t exactly sure what that allegiance means.
“I don’t really understand it, but I like what they stand for,” says Terry Rushing, 63, of Greensburg, La., who was among those surveyed. “They just support everything I’m looking for — lower taxes, less government…. All the good things, you know.”
“What we need is to push the tea over the edge of the boat, and the Tea Party is trying to do that,” says Dale Jackson, 37, a school bus driver from Jefferson City, Mo., mentioning his concerns about illegal immigration and government bailouts. [Jackson is the one pictured above with the dogs (named Cooter and Shilo, according to the caption). He looks like he could be my slightly younger brother, and we even share the name of Dale, but I couldn’t disagree with Dale the Bus Driver (who very apparently is of the Joe-the-Plumber set) more.]
Jackson’s comment and the group’s name hark back to the nation’s revolutionary beginnings in its tax revolt against England, and the Fourth of July holiday this weekend has become a rallying cry for supporters who plan a gathering in San Antonio, a fair in suburban Atlanta and more. To look at who the foot soldiers are in the nation’s newest political army and what motivates them, USA Today combined results from national polls in May and June and did additional interviews.
The portrait that emerges fits a traditional conservative group. The ranks of the Tea Party include somewhat more men than women, and they are more likely to be married and a bit older than the nation as a whole. Residents of the South and West are the most likely to endorse the Tea Party, but it is unmistakably a nationwide movement: 28 percent in the Midwest and 27 percent in the East call themselves backers.
They are overwhelmingly white and Anglo, although a scattering of Hispanics, Asian Americans and African Americans combine to make up almost one-fourth of their ranks….
This isn’t some new group. This is the same fucking group that first supported “President” George W. Bush — under whom runaway government spending wasn’t a concern at all, since Bush is white — and then (most of them, anyway) supported John McCainosaurus.
The USA Today/Gallup poll found that almost 80 percent of self-described “tea partiers” are non-Latino whites and almost 80 percent are Repugnicans or “independents” who lean Repugnican. Almost 70 percent describe themselves as conservative. Significantly more than half of them are men, and almost half of them are 55 years old or older. Fewer than one in four of them is under the age of 35.
They are, in a nutshell, John McCainosarus’ demographic. A rapidly shrinking demographic. Because they’re shrinking, they’re shrieking — in a tacky sea of red, white and blue, because displaying cheap plastic “patriotic” shit that was made in China and bought at Wal-Mart is exactly what the “founding fathers” had in mind when they thought of patriotism.
The “tea partiers'” main beef very apparently is that their guy didn’t win the 2008 presidential election.
Remember when they called Democrat Al Gore’s supporters “Sore Losermen” even though Gore had won the popular vote in 2000?
Who are the “sore losermen” now?
As fucktarded as they are, the “tea party” dipshits know that they can’t just come out and say that they’re just pissed off that their stupid old white male candidate lost to the intelligent, younger black candidate. So they have to claim that they’re just generically miffed, as does the “tea party” dipshit interviewed by USA Today. (And it is rather terrifying to think that people who actually make statements like, “I don’t really understand it, but I like what they stand for” cast votes.)
And so the “tea party” dipshits have to paint their “cause” in grandiose terms. They’re “saving” the nation from “tyranny” — even though 53 percent of Americans voted for Barack Obama and only 46 percent voted for John McCainosaurus in November 2008. (Yes, “tea party” dipshits, please save us, the majority of Americans, from ourselves!)
This is how the wingnuts operate: they like the democratic process only when their candidates win. If they don’t like a centrist or a left-of-center president, such as Barack Obama or Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, they label him a “dictator” or a “tyrant” or the like, hoping that this blatant lie, repeated enough, will catch on and that the bleating masses will then start to question the legitimacy of the democratically elected president whom the wingnuts don’t like.
There is nothing noble — nothing patriotic, nothing American, nothing Christian — in the subversion of democracy, in the willingness to shit and piss all over the wishes of the majority in order to get your guy into power. You know, the way that the Repugnicans — who have rebranded themselves as the “tea party” — did in 2000, when they were able to get George W. Bush installed in the White House, even though he was nothing but an usurper. Bush lost the election, but his supporters screamed the loudest, so they “won.”
I see nothing in common with those who risked their lives striving toward independence from the English monarchy and those sanctimonious, pseudo-patriotic, racist, anti-democratic, cowardly dipshits who comprise the “tea party.”
Ironically, the extent to which they shamelessly attempt to appropriate such ludicrously lofty associations as with the “founding fathers” and with the Boston Tea Party is the extent to which the “tea party” dipshits are utterly un-American.