I enjoy reading the Brit pub The Economist because it offers a fresh viewpoint on American politics we cannot find in this country. But, this yuck yuck by B.G. misses the mark on conservatives and Tea Partiers by, oh, say, the width of the Atlantic Ocean between New York and London.
The article's author suggests conservatives turned against former President George W. Bush because he was too liberal. Gee, I was under the impression they turned against him for unleashing spending from a surplus to a trillion dollar deficit by the time he left office.
Question -- Isn't waging two wars, enacting a drug program for seniors and essentially reducing AIDS in Africa without paying for it a conservative principle?
Answer -- It is until the chief executive's poll ratings tank to 21%.
The Economist notes that 57% of Tea Partiers in the New York Times/CBS poll look favorably on Bush while the rest of the nation holds a 57% unfavorable view.
What's important is how and when one describes conservative.
B.G. and I agree on one thing. Both Republicans and Tea Partiers hate Obama, that dirty Commie, Nazi, Fascist, socialist anti-christ one-worlder who pals around with domestic terrorists.
Their words. Not mine.
Readers comments are welcome as long as they remain civil. We reserve the right to delete any comments that are vulgar, libelous and totally irrelevant to this posting. -- Jer