Normally, attacking a political position by saying that the people who endorse it are evil isn’t really a fair attack. It means that you’re not attacking the position; and they now have to defend their character instead of talking about the position.

It’s usually a way of ignoring the issue and making it about a personal thing instead.

But in this case, I just can’t help myself.

You might have seen these “teabagger” people- the ones who launched the tea party protests last year to express their outrage over… well, I’m not really sure, to tell the truth.

The original tea party in Boston was because the colonists were angry about getting taxed without any representation in the British Parliment; the tea party protests here in the USA last year HAVE representation in Congress and the Senate, it’s just that the guys they wanted elected lost.

In other words, the teabaggers are sore losers who don’t really get how democracy works. But I digress.

The “leaders” of the tea party protests include a lot of scumbags. A perfect example is Sgt Charles Dyer, aka “July4Patriot”, who was a bigwig in the “OathKeepers” subgroup of the teabagger movement.

Mr Dyer was recently arrested for allegedly raping a 7 year old girl. A search of his house apparently turned up a (stolen) grenade launcher along with the typical collection of firearms you’d expect to find in a right-wing, anti-government wacko’s house.

Now, it kind of makes sense that these types are really anti-government; they don’t want the police telling them which children they can sodomize and so forth.

That’s a guy leading the tea party movement. Quality dude.

But the problem is that they SOUND semi-reasonable. They exhort their followers to “enlist” on their web site, and people (who don’t do any research) get manipulated into “signing on” with their goals.

It just kills me to see people who normally wouldn’t associate with scumbags so eager to sign on and follow losers who’re manipulating their emotions.

Step back for a minute, folks, and think. Health care reform- the current bills passed by the Senate and the House would not take away your present plan. It wouldn’t give the government “power” over your decisions, or your doctor, or whoever. It wouldn’t even make most people pay for the costs of ensuring the presently uninsured.

Yet the teabagger types have everyone believing that it’s some kind of huge socialist plot that’s intended on controlling Americans.

Meanwhile, the teabagger leaders are scrambling to cover up the fact that they were associated with accused child rapist Dyer. They’re even lying about the fact that he was ever involved with them (fortunately, the internet has stored proof that they’re covering it up).

The Democratic equivalent? I suppose it’s John Edwards, surprising exactly nobody by admitting he’s actually the father of his ex-girlfriend’s child. (Gee, we’re shocked.)

Wake up and smell the raped children, folks. These “teabaggers” are a bunch of friggin nutjobs, and the Republicans in Congress are using them and their followers to cover up the fact that they don’t have any ideas other than to try and stop the Democrats from actually doing anything that they were elected by a wide majority to do.

You’re going to read a bunch of hype in the political news about how yesterday’s election was a huge, huge deal for the nation. People will tell you that it signifies a giant shift in public opinion, that it means the nation hates the policies that President Obama and the Democratic Party have been putting forward, and that it proves the Republicans have their mojo back.

Don’t believe the hype.

The win by Republican Scott Brown, a teabagger type in Massachusetts (which is said to be a fairly liberal) state, is due primarily to a couple of factors.

First, Brown definitely outworked the Democrat, Martha Coakley. Between the primary and Sunday, Coakley held 19 events. Brown held 66. When you hold three times as many rallies, speeches, and so forth as your opponent does, you’re outworking them. She ran a crappy campaign and frankly, she deserved to lose. Only at the last minute did her campaign recognize the danger and start working hard, and by then it was too late. (Kind of reminds me of how Hillary Clinton took things for granted, and deservedly lost.)

Second, despite what you’ll read about how incredibly liberal Massachusetts is, remember- this is a state that elected Mitt Romney their Governor, for crying out loud. (Granted, he ran much further towards the middle than he did when he was running for the Presidential nomination.) They’re not afraid to be a bit different and elect a Republican now and again.

Third, and perhaps most importantly… the Boston Democratic political machine was even lazier than Coakley was. By and large, they didn’t do anything to help her out. Why? Because she beat the Boston-area chosen candidate in the primary (Mike Capuano). The machine didn’t do diddly of their normal stuff- no fundraising, no GOTV (get out the vote), no phonebanking, no nothing.

The reality is that the old saying about all politics being local was true this time.

In a way, this result is a good thing. It greatly lessens the importance of that turncoat slimebag Joe Lieberman; now that he’s not the 60th vote in the Senate any more, who cares if they piss him off? He’s totally dead meat in the 2012 election (assuming he is stupid and arrogant enough to run again instead of retiring).

In fact, the Democrats would be wise to take a page from the Republican playbook and bounce Lieberman right out of his chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. They should either give him the crappiest committee assignment they can think up, or better yet, assign him to zero committees at all and tell him if he wants a slot he should get it from the Republican pals.

Naturally, because the Democratic leadership are a bunch of weenies, they probably won’t do this. (Can you imagine a truly bold, gutsy, brave Democratic party in today’s world, led by guys like LBJ and Sam Rayburn? Healthcare would be done months ago.)

The result also gives the Democrats a built-in excuse; now they can propose endless numbers of popular policies and watch the Republicans filibuster them over and over, thereby taking the blame for stuff not getting done.

The Democrats are paying the price for their lack of boldness. People voted hugely for change in 2008. For Pete’s sake, we elected a BLACK GUY for President. That’s pretty huge for a nation where, about two generations ago, black folks couldn’t drink from public fountains, or sit in certain restaurants, or walk down the street in many states in our country while holding hands with a white person without risking their personal safety.

President Obama has been too careful. He needs to be bold again. He needs to step up. He needs to propose even MORE liberal and progressive policies and then negotiate back DOWN towards the middle with the Republicans, instead of starting at a moderate position in the vain hope that it’ll result in “bipartisanship” (how’s that worked out so far?) and winding up with wishy-washy policies that aren’t much of a change.

While this election has more to do with local factors than national ones, it still holds both warning and opportunity for the Dems. Let’s hope they recognize it and take advantage.

You know how us liberal types are always bleating about how utterly whacko-nutjob-crazy the right wingers are?

And how a lot of moderates thought “oh, those progressives, they’re just hyping stuff…”?

Well, here’s some actual proof… the company that provides the ACOG scope to the US military for use on rifles has been putting coded references to Biblical verses (from the New Testament) onto the scope.

Seriously.

And the company’s director of marketing says that those folks who brought the issue forward “aren’t Christian”, so it doesn’t really matter what they are complaining about.

Even more, some commanders in the field reportedly referred to weapons with these sights as “spiritually transformed firearms of Jesus Christ.”

I couldn’t make this up.

You can read the full story here on ABC News’ web site.

I personally didn’t realize that Jesus was so into killing people, but hey, my bad. I’m a heathen Buddhist, after all- what do I know about it?

Okay, seriously… here’s the problem. These type of people, this type of thinking, it’s exactly what we’re fighting. This kind of thinking is what the problem is, at least in terms of the War on Terror.

Taken to its extreme, this thinking leads to massive genocide. The terrorists arrayed against us believe that they are doing the right thing because their version of religion teaches them that anyone who doesn’t believe as they do deserves either conversion or death.

And to counteract that, we’re sending guys into the field with weapons of killing that are “spiritually transformed” by Jesus himself? Doesn’t that make us just like them?

Oh, but of course not- because we’re the GOOD guys. We know this, because… why, exactly?

Because Jesus was all about killing people, of course.