I never understood the reson behind the wording "anything you say can and will be used against you...". What if I say (truthfully!) I was reading to blind people during the time the crime was committed?
True but the marriage issue is mostly conservative vs non-conservative issue. I use the term non-conservative as it encompasses both the liberals and large swaths of the libertarian movement. In fact, libertarians often dislike the "conservative" label.
"[...]and also labeling certain websites and institutions (such as Reason and the CATO Institute) as being "ultra right wing," which is funny if you know much about Reason or Cato."
Though this whole thing is wholly insane, the Libertarian politics are generally associated with right-wing politics and ideology. If anything, the majority of libertarian politics can be described as anti-state right-wing. One can easily be forgiven for thinking of the Cato Institute as right-wing given their association with the Koch brothers and opposition to climate change/global warming science.
A quick Google search also reveals that Officer Lyons is an author of a book on the history of law enforcement in Oceanside. He can definitely be proud of repsecting the legacy of a storied department. At the same time, I wonder if he'll see more interest being shown in his book? http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/073853112X/reasonmagazineA
As I am rather prone to self-doubt, I thought to myself: "Maybe Big Mook is right. Maybe I am being flippant. Maybe the public face of the TEA party is not the somewhat racist-ish, uneducated horde that we see so much." So I went on a highest-rated (by Google) site which is teapartypatriots.org and checked out some random blogs of their supporters. I also scanned the news. Here are my findings of the world according to Teabaggers:
1. 27 x 65 = 7555
2. President Obama is a secret Muslim.
3. It's OK to shoot cops if you're feeling oppressed.
4. Anders Breivik is a liberal but he's right that multi-culturalism is a bad idea.
I think I'll stick with the derogatory term Teabagger for the time being.
A. Not all people who place their scrotums in other people's mouths are closeted homosexuls. Some are quite open homosexuals. In fact, not all people who do that are homosexuals at all. If you were to put your balls into your very heterosexual wife's mouth, that would still be considered teabagging. By ascribing the act of teabagging to closeted homosexuals, you reveal your own prejudice.
B. There's a difference between teabaggers and Teabaggers. I do not identify all conservatives as Teabaggers. In fact, I am rather conservative/liberatrian. The Teabaggers are the people who roll around spewing outrage about about sand storms being referred to as haboob and changing facts to suit their prejudices and creating their own encyclopediae to suit the imagined "facts".
Has someone else got any other fascinating insights into my character?