Answering a Ranting Letter to the Editor

If you wish your writing and opinions to be taken seriously, perhaps you should lay off the slurs and try to find some facts to back up your rants. Since many tea party activists are older females, a class who has endured bias for eons, calling them bags wins you no friends among any group of women. As unacceptable as racial slurs, gender slurs reveal ignorance and woeful lack of respect for women.

You suggest tea-partiers are radical, “burning witches at the stake and imprisoning Mandela”, or ignorant, “parroting patriotism.” Witches? Isn't that what your "bag" label is implying? Conjures a picture of women in black throwing themselves onto a fire. Funny but not very effective.

The tea party stands for smaller government and greater individual freedom, the constitution, and less spending to reduce federal indebtedness to foreign countries. That is hardly radical and certainly not unpatriotic.

It seems you are saying that because they don’t always support politicians calling themselves Democrats, Tea Partiers have no respect for Democracy. What? Everyone knows that Democracy and Democrats are not one and the same.

Anyway, the tea party doesn’t necessarily support Republicans either; they’re looking for candidates of any party who will stand for smaller government, the constitution, and less spending. Admittedly most who are in support of those values are Republican, but not always.

You suggest that this country’s financial problems, endless wars, and even oil spills are the fault of tea party supporters, but what are the facts?

The financial mess is the result of poor governmental decisions made by both parties in Congress, under both majorities.

The endless wars also have come and gone while both parties held Congressional majorities. Do you even know which party was in charge in Congress when these endless wars were decided upon and funded? Or do you think the President declares and funds wars all by himself?

The oil spill in the gulf was the result of deep water drilling. Who refused to allow land drilling and shallow water drilling? Not the tea partiers.

Many tea party supporters are in favor of increasing US drilling and decreasing dependence on foreign oil. What does anti-drilling solve? Are you only worried about the environment here in the US? Is it okay to place the environmental risks elsewhere on the planet? How hypocritical would that be?

Perhaps we should take the risks out of the ocean and put them on dry land where spills may be less likely to get out of hand, but is the US too special to take its share of the risk? The gulf oil spill was a disastrous accident, but it could have been somewhat mitigated by prompt acceptance of the aid offered by other countries. Contaminated sea water could have been avoided by on-land drilling.

You further suggest that tea-partiers harbor irrational fears of other races. Controlling illegal immigration is about terrorists and armed drug dealers – they, too, may be God’s children as you say, but with guns and drugs they kill ranchers and children and should not be welcomed with open borders. Unchecked borders make about as much sense as discontinuing airport screening.

Drugs and violence notwithstanding, our southern border states are staggering under the millions of illegals who come here to utilize taxpayer-paid services. Controlling the influx, as do other countries and even the Vatican (who probably are aware these are also God’s children), is only a sensible thing to do.

The tea-partiers are main-stream Americans and their concerns do deserve attention, not out-of-hand condemnation. After all, are not the "bags" also God's children?

Turn on the lights in your attic. Give me not rants, give me facts.

In the interest of full disclosure: I vote the issues so have voted for candidates of both major parties. I have never attended a tea party rally.