Skip to main content

Who's to blame for the rise of the Tea Party? Just ask an Ohio Republican...

I read a letter-to-the-editor in the Columbus Dispatch today which really made me wonder at what point in the denial process are many Republicans. The title of the writing was, "Don't blame the GOP for the Tea Party," and the one paragraph which stood out from the rest was the final one in the piece, where this was written:

"Those who criticize the tea party must realize that this group came to legitimacy in 2010 only as an opposite and equal reaction to Democratic leadership’s decision to demagogue, demonize and dictate rather than cooperate with moderates of all stripes in thoughtfully addressing our ever-growing list of national challenges.

BOB BARTHOLOMEW

Hilliard"

Mr. Bartholomew is absolutely right. This is why Tea Partiers are sending their own candidates to challenge traditional Republicans in primaries, because the reason for their existence is due to the Democrats and their agenda. It's also why even some traditional Republicans have admitted that the party is at war with itself between traditional conservatives and Tea Partiers - because of the darn Democrats!

In all seriousness, Mr. Bartholomew is right about one thing, which is that the Tea Party does appear to be the polar opposite of the Democrat Party. Obamacare has proven this to a T. While the Tea Party doesn't want the government to function, which their shutdown illustrated, the Democrat Party wants the government to function and help better the lives of people. So, congratulations, Mr. Bartholomew, for allowing your party to move so far to the right that a separate party was created in an attempt to combat "moderate" Republicans in Congress and replace them with candidates so far to the right, they make Rush Limbaugh not need Viagra anymore. Also, congratulations on believing it's the Democrats whom are to blame for this, because they want a functioning government, and lord help us, according to Tea Partiers, our Founding Fathers never wanted such a thing. Excuse me for a moment while I attempt to live in a similar la-la land as yourself, but only in my neverneverland, Fox News and right-wing talk radio don't exist.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2013/12/03/1-bartholomew-sat-gk1ps2m7-10.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"