What the Tea Partiers Really Want

[lafinjack]

The passion behind the populist insurgency is less about liberty than a particularly American idea of karma.

Comments

[cyranothe2nd]

"We just want to be free. Free to lead our lives as we please, so long as we do not infringe on the same freedom of others."

Except for when it comes to abortion. Or gay rights. Or addressing social injustices...then it's "Fuck your freedom; our way is the only way."

[homasse]

...because even when you create equal opportunity, differences in talent and effort result in unequal outcomes. These inequalities must then be reduced by progressive taxation, affirmative action and other heavy-handed government intervention.

Fuck you, it's not "equal opportunity" to say that "Hey! Everyone's starting the race at the same time, so it's fair and equal!" when some people are starting halfway to the finish line and everyone else is at the starting line and carrying a backpack full of bricks.

[jetaimerai]

This, seriously. Equal opportunity is a myth, and believing that it exists only shows how privileged you are.

[dreadfulpenny81]

I consider myself a Tea Party supporter, but it's funny that if I'm not in lock-step with their way of thinking (like worshiping Sarah Palin), I'm immediately called a "Liberal scum". Then again, if I'm not in lock-step with the Liberal way of thinking, I'm considered a "Neo-Con". So where exactly do I fall politically?

[adequategirl]

You've internalized the two party system. There are a variety of political identities outside of 'Tea Partier' and 'Liberal.'

[dreadfulpenny81]

I understand there are varying identities. According to the Nolan chart, I'm Libertarian, but I don't exactly see why when I don't agree with a lot of their views. I think that survey is flawed.

[cassandraleo]

That's because it is. It's an incredibly shitty test that's biased towards libertarianism. The Political Compass is better, although it still has some notable flaws as well. Unfortunately there isn't a quiz associated with the latter critique that I'm aware of.

[jetaimerai]

Am I the only one COMPLETELY BOGGLED as to how accepting disease-free blood from a child molester is a bad thing? I don't see how the identity of the blood donor is in any way relevant if it can heal you/save your life. Its explanation of sanctity just confuses me even more. Does that mean people think that part of their spirit would enter their body or something? Is that what's so objectionable?? I seriously don't understand, at all. Can someone explain?

I am the epitome of a typical liberal though - I really don't give a shit about (political) loyalty, authority and sanctity. So that's probably why I don't get it...

[adequategirl]

No, you're right, its totally irrational.

[jiaren_shadow]

Dude, if child molester blood turns you into a child molester, will blood from an awesome person make you awesome? In that case I hope Rachel Maddow donates blood.

[xochitl]

I want chuck norris' blood.

[wrestlingdog]

[evelynwordsmyth]

That's an awesome gif! What movie is that?

[wrestlingdog]

I wish I knew! I just snagged it.

[castalianspring]

That's Cary Grant, and it's from His Girl Friday.