Since I’m on the topic of what represents conservative thought, let’s take a look at someone who exemplifies the geniuses who make up the Tea Party.
Over at PJ Media, David Solway authored an article titled, What Will It Take? Solway has the distinction of being less witty and a poorer writer than his more well-known fellow Canadian wingnut, Mark Steyn. That in itself is a major accomplishment, but Solway has to go the full Teabagger. Everybody knows you never go full Teabagger! Solway sets up his piece with this soon to be classic paragraph:
“Let me begin with a categorical statement that, given current events and recent political history, can be easily defended: Barack Hussein Obama is a willful, indoctrinated child of the Left with strong Islamic sympathies who is not fit to govern. Indeed, he would not be fit to govern Lower Slobovia, let alone the United States of America. Obama is a historic disaster of the first magnitude and, if not restrained, he will see to the irrevocable decline of the country which foolishly elected him, leaving the world on the brink of a conflict — or in the midst of one — whose repercussions cannot be underestimated.”
If that doesn’t tell you how representative he is of the stereotypical Tea Party member, I don’t know what will. Solway abuses his thesaurus to go on an epic rant over just how terrible Obama is, employing every Loony Teabagger theory in the process. What it boils down to is this:
- Obama is wreaking havoc on the US and its allies (because everything was peaches and cream before January 2009).
- Any criticism of Obama is decried as racism, therefore no criticism can be considered racist.
- Obama is working on some sort of Marxist/progressivist/utopian project.
- Obama is salting the government with Muslim Brotherhood operatives plotting the destruction of the US.
- Obama is purging the military, just like the Turkish autocracy.
- All Obama does is lie, lie, lie.
- Obama has sold out Israel.
- Obama has sealed all of his records to hide the fact that he is not a US citizen.
There’s much more, including his approving citations of other wingnuts such as Monica Crowley.
Solway finishes his masterpiece with the question that began the piece. He cleverly just asks the question, but never voices his implied solution as to what people should do when they have had enough. To me, his preferred solution is unmistakable when you read the whole thing, and you really must read it. My potentiality for articulateness withers before the splendiferous exemplification of Solway’s mellifluous eloquentness.