Jesus Appears in Bird Shit »« Scalise: Cold Inauguration Proves Global Warming False

Comments

  1. Reginald Selkirk says

    Right. Because if we ever are required to carry national identity cards, it will be drive by the left wing.

  2. Who Knows? says

    It’s like a bunch of non-creative people with limited intelligence made a trailer for The Matrix.

  3. netamigo says

    It’s actually pretty good rhetoric for obscuring their agenda of more tax breaks for the rich. I look forward to their next one about guns, gays and abortion.

  4. Loqi says

    Fiscal responsibility!
    Limited government!
    Free markets!
    No black people!

    Unfortunately, the last line runs off the screen. Stupid aspect ratios.

  5. says

    Where are all the old white people in Medicare-provided scooters, fighting for Liberty by being focused as a laser on economic issues, like keeping socialism out of vaginas and protecting the ballot booth from “urban”* voters?
     
    * *Wink, wink*

  6. rowanvt says

    It really says something that the dystopian future they imagine… is exceptionally boring communism.

  7. matty1 says

    “Now showing in booth 501″ presumably because anything bigger than a booth would be too large for the expected audience.

  8. Trebuchet says

    Holy crap! There’s a minute and a half I’ll never get back. (Couldn’t make it to the end.)

  9. Rip Steakface says

    That is the most bizarre depiction of increases to the welfare state that I’ve ever seen.

    2112 did it better.

  10. starskeptic says

    I want one of those cool cards that will allow me film at length, communicate nothing, and win me the approval of like-minded people…

  11. DaveL says

    To be fair, there’s already been a movie made about America under a Tea Party hegemony. It was called “A Handmaid’s Tale.”

  12. MyPetSlug says

    Well, oddly enough, that trailer perfectly describes the Tea Party ethos. In the “movie”, a tea party type, except young, is upset about the rise of a political party he doesn’t like. Why is he upset? Because by providing for everyone, people will become lazy and dependent, he asserts without evidence. Apparently, that doesn’t apply to corporations. Anyway, in response to being unhappy with the democratically elected government, he does what I’m sure every tea party patriot must want to do, he stops paying his taxes. Of course, the government comes knocking on his door and he becomes a fugitive, which of course makes him a hero. Then, after finding allies among the like minded, together, they spout vague platitudes about freedom at all white political rallies. Because, of course, if they are for freedom, their enemies must be against it. That’s the way it works, right?

    Also, it’s a bit dramatic to say liberty died at the beginning of the trailer and then showing the “good guys” “winning” at the end. It didn’t really die then, did it?

    Your Tea Party in a nutshell.

  13. Akira MacKenzie says

    I’m still trying to figure out what is so terrible about the scenario these Tea Baggers are posing. A society that takes care of it’s people and plants a boot up the backside of capitalist knuckle-dragging sounds downright utopian to me.

  14. Loqi says

    Also, it’s a bit dramatic to say liberty died at the beginning of the trailer and then showing the “good guys” “winning” at the end. It didn’t really die then, did it?

    To be fair, the Tea Party religion is based around not understanding that death is final.

  15. says

    MyPetSlug “Also, it’s a bit dramatic to say liberty died at the beginning of the trailer and then showing the ‘good guys’ ‘winning’ at the end. It didn’t really die then, did it?”
    Hello? Zombie Liberty. It’s like regular liberty, except it doesn’t apply to ferners, Muslins, sluts and the like.

  16. lofgren says

    I think it’s interesting that the trailer doesn’t bother to argue that the government can’t provide for everyone, which is an assertion that is pretty solidly supported by historical evidence, but rather that there is some kind of inherent virtue in not being provided for.

    The trailer doesn’t show any negative effects of this new policy at all. The crowds of people being taken away by stormtroopers supposedly have some gripe, some reason for rejecting the government’s aid, but this is never explained or even hinted at. The tea partiers appear to have all of the same freedoms that they have always had, except now they also have more stuff.

    It reminds me of the unsupported claim that women need to have children in order to be fulfilled. What exactly it means to be “fulfilled” and why children must be a part of it are always left unstated. This commercial seems to assert that in order to be properly fulfilled, we must reject government aid. It doesn’t even bother to make any assertions regarding responsibility, oppression, or free markets. The argument is purely emotional.

  17. Ichthyic says

    “Tea Party Patriots – A Movement on Fire!”

    Well, you know what they say…

    Light a fire for someone, and they’ll stay warm for a night.

    Light someone ON fire, and they’ll be warm for the rest of their lives.

    ….

    or… Better to Burn out than Fade Away?

  18. bcreason says

    I’ve been thinking lately we need to use the same tools the right does. Imagine a video with a lesbian couple holding hands on a park bench while watching their children play. When all of a sudden a swat team in helmets and riot gear forcibly arrest them and take the screaming children away. If you want to push the envelope maybe the final shot maybe a old fashion stoning of the couple.

    This is the world of liberty and small government they really want. We should start making videos to show them where their policies really lead.

    Maybe you get an independent action committee to produce them just before the 2014 elections and play them as commercials.

    Stop fighting fair DAMMIT! At least our videos will have a core of truth to them.

  19. Akira MacKenzie says

    lofgren @ 21

    As I saw it, the “hero” character was being arrested for “not contributing,” which in tea bagger usually means “taxes,” “public service,” or any other form of communal good that offends their sociopathic sense of atomistic individualism. Remember, these people idolized the “philosophy” of Ayn Rand (except for that inconvenient atheism part), therefore you don’t owe a damn thing to your fellow human beings. The money they make is their’s–or, as they would put it, “MINE! DO YOU HEAR ME?! MINE! MINE! MINE!!!–and they shouldn’t have to part with a cent of it if they don’t want to. The same goes for their property or business interests. It’s their sacred right to pay their workers 25¢ an hour or dump pollutants onto their land. If you don’t like it, you can work or live somewhere else. Any attempt to curtail this “freedom,” no matter what the reason, is nothing less than the blackest of tyranny.

    Of course, given how it has thouroughly fucked up the world, I’ve just about given up on the American theory of freedom in general. Therefore, you can color me unsympathetic to the Bagger’s complaints. To prarphrase and throw a quotation from one of the Right’s fictional heroes back at them, “I’m all broken up over their rights.” Particularly when ocean levels are rising, Sam Walton’s heirs are all together worth as much as the bottom 40% of Americans, and less than half of our citizens accept evolution as fact.

  20. Tualha says

    Not that I could sit through even half of this, but the part I saw puts me in mind of something I was thinking about yesterday. NPR ran a story about disabled kids on SSI and how the mechanics of the system discourage them from getting better – because if they manage to find work (which they could lose for various reasons), they lose benefits (which is a nice reliable check every month).

    So…why don’t we just do this? Every citizen gets, say, $500 a month, whether they need it or not. You take it from people like the Koch brothers and you give it to everyone. People who don’t need it can tell the government to pass it on to their favorite charity or to increase the subsidy to those who do need it. People who need it can go and find work without risking their check.

    Politically impossible in the current and foreseeable U.S., of course. But I can’t help but think it would work better than the current, “improve your life and you lose your benefits” model.

  21. lofgren says

    Michael Heath, hardly. If I give you a box of stuff your mine forever. That’s how I got my wife.

    If you give her a sock, she becomes a free elf.

  22. says

    Of course, given how it has thouroughly fucked up the world, I’ve just about given up on the American theory of freedom in general.

    Actually, the “American theory of freedom in general” is practically nothing like the Randroids and teatards say it is. Just for starters, have you noticed that the US Constitution gave the national government MORE power than it had before, not less?

    If the Founders were alive today, they’d be tarred as “socialists” by the teatards. And so would Jesus.

Leave a Reply