Thursday, August 5, 2010

Shut The Fuck Up About "Revolution," At Least For Today

As many of you know, I’m kinda radical libertarian in my politics, whilst being a conservative effer.

The kind of libertarian whose idea of proper government – at least under the compact known as the U.S. Constitution – would have an extremely limited national government, and huge restraints (through the 14th Amendment) on state governments from interfering in the daily lives of the citizenry.

This is an impossibility. The ship sailed, as it were, sometime around my aged parents’ births, or possibly earlier when ol’ San Juan Hill got well-intentioned megalomania kicking.

Of course, the good intentions were pretty good – robber barons were fuckers too. Showing the holes in my philosophy. But I digress. . . .

ANYWAY, I do have one word for the extreme “right-wingers” – frequently lumped in with, and occasionally part of, the Tea Party movement --


Okay, really -- it’s many words strung together. I get it.

I am Jeffersonian enough to think that blood may again have to be spilled to halt tyranny. I really do. And anybody on either side o’ the current aisle who looks at the expansion of federal power under (a) George W. Booosh; or (b) Barry Obama should be able to envision a day when a national leader, “for the good of the people,” steps over the line and shuts down basic freedom. If it hasn’t already happened in a place or two. Whichever one of those guys you hate, you can see it happening: the loss of “your” country. And whichever one you support: look again.

But I’ve digressed too much yet again. Let’s just say that I’m down with needed to revolt again.

But these Tea Party fuckers want a revolution NOT about encroachments on liberty, but about taxes and the size of government. So let me remind them: the first Revolution was about taxation without representation. These Tea Party fuckers LOST the election, they are represented but couldn’t muster a majority, and they’re now whining to unwind the representation.

We call that “subversion” by “insurgents.” 1/

The Tea Party fuckers should start a new revolution when they’re blocked from the polling booths, when the government declares a “miscount,” when tanks roll down the street to quell “dangerous, potentially violent, possibly terr*r|st” gatherings of Americans all to “protect us.” They shouldn’t talk about one because their views didn’t carry the day and they are in the political minority.

At least they shouldn’t call for one and lump it in with the First American Revolution.

Have I explained I hate some of those fuckers?

And I carry guns, hate taxes, and rail against the government all the time myself. . . .

1/ ^ Oxford English Dictionary second edition 1989 "insurgent B. n. One who rises in revolt against constituted authority; a rebel who is not recognized as a belligerent."


Mythical Monkey said...

I still insist I miss Mel Renfro ...

Don Rickles said...

I still insist I miss Mel Renfro ...

Mel Renfro?

Coloured guy?

I took a guess. . . .

¡barangus!™ said...

I'd be a libertarian too if they weren't all just a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners.

(tip of the hat to Berkeley Breathed)