Monday, April 20, 2009

Where have you gone Abbie Hoffman?

OK, I caved. I should be devoting this time to product research but there are a couple of things I need to get off my chest. Over the last week, the world of political bloggers has focused on two things: 1)The Teabaggers and 2) Gay marriage (infighting in the GOP). I cannot think of two more nonsensical topics as these. I will spend a little time on each and then get back to work.

First, the teabaggers and their ridiculous display of protesting. The problem with this "grassroots" movement is that they lack a specific agenda. Their primary "war cry" is anti-government-now there's an original concept. They all need to get a copy of Steal This Book by Abbie Hoffman (which I did) and realize that they're simply rehashing an old and tired reason to assemble, get high, and protest against. I have no doubt that the majority of these "protestors" would not pass the test given to those who seek citizenship. I watched one particular newspot on these hoops where they asked 10 of the protestors what they were protesting against and they got 10 different answers. In my own home; I asked what their major complaint was. The response was that the government was spending too much-OK. I then asked what exactly was the government spending too much money on and what was their propoal? The reponse was: "You just don't get it." Well, that part made sense.

The fact of the matter is that their fearless leader, who has declared war on the government (OOOOH!) , has focused his attention on the tax issues. Well, unless you make $250,000 or more; then it doesn't affect you anyway. I don't know about you, but I had a problem picturing any of these wannbe Chicago 7 members being in this tax bracket. This would be almost comical were it not for the attention this nonsense has garnered. Estimates of the number of protestors range from 200,000 to 400,000. Let's take the high number and break that down-it equates to 8,000 protestors per state. I played football in front of bigger crowds and it's not as if I played for Notre Dame.

The second topic is the recent split in the GOP over their staunch opposition to gay marriages. A few members of the Republican Party have actually stepped up and defied the party line by supporting gay marriage. I hope they have employed competent bodyguards. What bothers me is the notion that anyone believes they have a right to dictate what any couple does with their lives. Unless I'm mistaken; this is the same party that vehemently objected to the President's intervention into the private sector by demanding the resignation of the CEO of General Motors. I, too, objected to this demand. The problem I have is that the GOP objects to government intervention into an arena where the government has actually assisted in their survival. Yet, they have no problem injecting their antiquated ideology into a truly private sector. I am a happily married heterosexual and have been for close to 50 years (the heterosexual part) and I happen to be close friends with a gay married couple. Someone needs to fill me in on who decides which one of the two has the right to happiness. I am fairly well versed on the content of our Constitution and nowhere does it condemn gay marriage .

Perhaps it is time that some people remember that this is, and always has been, a nation of choices . Just as I defend the right of these teabaggers to speak and assemble; I also defend the right of everyone tp pursue happiness. I have two questions that I would like to close with. 1) Where was the outrage when our government lead our young men and women into a war that was based on pure deceit? 2) Have these bible thumping hypocritical bastards looked at the statistics comparing the success ratio of heterosexual marriages vs gay marriages? Ididn't think so. AHHH-now I feel better.


  1. Good article. I personally believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman but I don't think that my personal opinion should intrude in the choices of others. When the gay marriage ban was up for a vote in my stat (MI) back in '04, i voted against it.
    As for the teabaggers, government spending is a very legitimate issue, bu as you say, if you're going to protest against it, then you need to say exactly where the cuts should be made. Education? Military? Housing? I didn't hear a lot of specifics from these protestors.

  2. Thanks for your comment IA. Every American is entitled to their opinion; I just wish that more of them would approach it the way you have. You are absolutely right when you say that government spending is a legitimate issue. The problem lies in the absence of specificity.