Tea Party proposals, language, disturbing

There is much anger/hatred among some, at levels not before seen in my lifetime.

The '60s saw discontent, but the masses were not additionally incited by elected officials. But the Tea Party movement's anger/hate is often encouraged by elected/potential conservative officials whose actions/demeanor/direction take on disturbing tones.

Tea Party campaigns are highlighted by such things as: massive deregulation; giving voice to utilizing Second Amendment remedies if they do not win; promises to investigate Democrats, even if they impact pending legislation; placing welfare recipients/unemployed in prisons for “re-education”; privatizing Social Security; disbanding benefits such as Medicare/Medicaid/unemployment for the masses but allowing Tea Partiers/relatives to still use; tossing around secessionist and revolutionary language; using hot button terms such as fascists/socialists/Communists to describe opponents.

During the Reagan years, I used hateful language to describe Reagan/Republicans but never thought about inciting hate/fear/revolution.

The “adults” of the Republican Party have caved in to Tea Party language/outrage so much so that it is a party I no longer recognize. They are emulating the least among them, to the point of using language not in the dictionary - example: Palin's “refudiate.”

There are no William F. Buckleys around with whom you may disagree but still acknowledge their incredible ability to think. Buckley's son disavows today's Tea Party.

If physiologically possible to combine the brain masses of several Tea Party candidates, it would not compare to a single Carter/Clinton/Obama. Is this why they are so anti-intellectual/elite?

Independents need to understand Tea Bagger's limitations.

Hold candidates responsible for terrorizing language.

Thomas Sass

Iowa City