Al Qaeda Psychos Butcher Newspaper Staff!

Tea Party terrorists on the loose


I was savagely attacked by a crazed terrorist last week—and barely survived to tell the tale.

OK, that might be a slight exaggeration. What actually happened was, Virginia senatorial candidate Jamie Radtke dropped in. She shook hands with the Richmond Times-Dispatch Editorial Department staff and talked.

Still—it was a very narrow escape for all of us. We were this close to having our heads sawed off with a rusty knife. Because you see, Radtke is a Tea Party Republican.

According to Froma Harrop, the new president of the National Conference of Editorial Writers (NCEW), Radtke's Tea Party roots place her among those who "have engaged in economic terrorism against the United States." (Harrop, incidentally, will spearhead the NCEW's newest venture, which is called—kid you not—the Civility Project.)

To Harrop and nine out of 10 other pundits, Tea Party Republicans are "insane," "ultraorthodox" extremists—"political suicide bombers," says Maureen Dowd of The New York Times. As Dowd's colleague Nicholas Kristof put it two Sundays ago, Radtke and her ilk are "the biggest threat to America's national security."

Well, tell you what: The terrorist crazies are getting savvier. Not so long ago they all seemed to be Middle Eastern men with glassy eyes and moist upper lips, wearing big overcoats to hide their explosive belts. Once in a while they'd show up as racist yahoos like Timothy McVeigh or Luddite hermits like the Unabomber.

But Radtke wasn't wearing a vest at all. Neither was her advance man, Chuck Hansen. The mother of three wore a business suit and heels; he was Friday casual. They could have fooled anyone—even an Israeli airport profiler. They looked like perfectly normal, middle-class Americans.

They sounded like it, too. Radtke didn't shout "death to America!" even once. She didn't quote a single line from The Turner Diaries. (She might have fired a few rounds from an AK-47 into the ceiling for emphasis once or twice—but who doesn't?)

She did talk a lot about George Allen, the former Virginia governor and senator she wants to take the GOP nomination from. She's got a long slog ahead of her on that score: According to a recent poll Allen beats her 11-1 in a hypothetical primary. Seventy-seven percent of Virginians don't even recognize her name.

But Radtke thinks she has enough time to overcome that obscurity. And she thinks Allen's record leaves her an opportunity to win over at least the Republican wing of the Republican Party, which is the wing that counts in nominating contests.

She remarks with amusement on Allen's tergiversations over the corn-ethanol subsidy: He once was "a reliable vote against expanding the ethanol industry," noted The Des Moines Register in 2005. As he began to think about the presidency, he switched (a spokesman said his position had "evolved with technology").

This year Allen supported a measure to end ethanol support, claiming to have "long maintained" such a position. It depends on what the meaning of "long" is. A spokesman said Allen had held that view since 2007. Radtke laughs, and points out a 2008 piece in which Allen supported a dollar-a-gallon tax credit for ethanol blends sold in the U.S.

In sum: Allen stood (a) against government support for the ethonol industry, (b) then for it, (c) then against it again, unless (d) the ethanol is sold domestically. Now he might be against it categorically, unless he's changed his mind again. Check your watch.

Radtke also rakes Allen over the coals for his conversion on raising the debt ceiling: He voted for it four times, but a spokesman says he would have voted "nay" this time. And she tweaks him relentlessly for his past support of big-government notions such as the High Speed Rail Investment Act.

For his part, Allen—tacking right—says he regrets his past support for the Bush administration's expansion of domestic government through Medicare Part D and the No Child Left Behind Act. But he also supported other measures to expand the scope of government: the Patriot Act most notoriously, but also the Military Commissions Act and, his principal contribution to federal law, a measure to pump billions into nanotechnology research. No wonder a slice of the, ah, "Republican street" is upset. Some Kiwanis conservatives may feel about Allen as diehard liberals do about Barack Obama: betrayed.

But it's easy to talk big when you don't have to back it up. Radtke never has served in Congress. She's never even held elective office. (Then again: Neither did one of liberalism's patron saints, Paul Wellstone, before he became a senator.) She never has had the pleasure of having her arm twisted by the White House, party leaders, and campaign contributors with chits to cash in. Maybe once in office she, too, would fold like a wet sock.

Or maybe she'd just cut off their heads. You never can tell with those crazy terrorist types.

A. Barton Hinkle is a columnist at the Richmond Times-Dispatch. This article originally appeared at the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

NEXT: Reason.tv: Guns, Laws, and Panics - How Fear, Not Fact, Informs the Gun Rights Debate

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You should have capped that terrorist bitch.

        1. CIVilization is depRAVed!

          1. Only GReat Mocha FATHer in WashINGton saVe peopLE now!

    1. no, waterboarding while being sodomized is the preferred interrogation method

      1. And by “preferred interrogation method” I mean the way I prefer to spend my weekends.

        1. and by “weekend”, I mean the weeks I spend in my mom’s basement.

      2. How does being sodomized while you waterboard someone make it more effective?

        1. E-mail me.

          1. Well played



      3. ok then just cap the teaparty terrorist

  2. “Harrop, incidentally, will spearhead the NCEW’s newest venture, which is called?kid you not?the Civility Project.”

    Doesn’t the cognitive dissonance just make your skin itch? Wait, that’s probably just my eczema.

    “You’re a dangerous terrorist if you don’t agree with our political views” is the oldest and crudest trick in Machiavelli’s book.

    1. I don’t think even Machiavelli was so cynical as to advocate demonizing your political opponents in the name of civility.

      1. You gotta admit tho, it is more than a bit… uh… Machiavellian.

  3. I understand your making light of the idiot left. But the asshole left is out of control and there is very little to laugh at. Between the warmongering thumpers on the right and the anti-capitalists on the left….this country is in deep shit!

    1. The right is such war mongers. Good thing we elected a Democrat in 2008 so we could get out of the wars we were in and not get into any new ones. Glad that at least worked out for us.

      1. We know. Totally made of awesome, ain’t it?

        1. the [CHULDRUNZ] luv my artillery!

        2. Bitch. You wanted it. You know you wanted it.

      2. If Bush would just let Obama close Guantanamo …

      3. If Bush would just let Obama close Guantanamo …

      4. Good point.

        But thankfully, the political right wholeheartedly embraces the free market and small government.

      5. “Good thing we elected a Democrat in 2008 so we could get out of the wars we were in and not get into any new ones.”
        Obama is a fucking idiot….as are you. But since you mentioned it Bush started two needless wars….chimp ears, so far has started only one and it is minor.

      6. Name one on the left who can hold a candle to John “Captain Kankaroo” Bolton for being a wanton war monger.

        1. Should be warmonger.

  4. I love the fact that people who want to save the nation. balance the budget nad reduce the size of goverment are called terroists. I get it now, we are terrosits to the federal goverment, we endanger thier way of life, while also being the champion of the citizens. see if we balance the budget, and cut defense to a resoanable size and budget ( i say sell all foreing bases, bring all troops home, move all tropps to reserve status, except for a core min. number, and have them, IDK actually do thier jhobs of protecting the US, not iraq, iran etc. post em at the border, restrict access to the country, hey lets get everyone who visits make them have a visa. and the rest are on call for national disaters! IDK guess i am crazy for having sense.

    1. If you outlaw common sense, only terrorists will have common sense.

      1. I have totally stolen this AND made it my “Today’s Best”.

        Awesome – thanks, Jeff.

    2. Teh liberalz will eat you alive for those spelling errors.

      1. Hey, at least with his name you should be expecting it.

      2. I’ll simply add a ‘t’ in front of the ‘e’ and the liberalz can suck it…

  5. the warmongering thumpers on the right

    Kneejerk says “wha — ?”

  6. Radtke sounds a bit too so-con for me.

    1. Mmm? Did I manage to miss some (or, hell, any) position on drugs, abortion, etc. staked out in said article? Serious question. Help me out, here.

      1. C’mon, dude. She’s a white woman. Palin, Bachmann , do I have to draw you a picture, here?

        1. I read the issues on her website.

        2. Yes, please, draw me a picture. OF NAKED WHITE WOMENSZ@@!@

      2. Maybe she’s staked out her positions in other articles that Mongo has read?

      3. I think Hinkle’s article is intended to show that America has lost the ability to have civil political discourse. Like Mongo, I just went and looked at her website. She seems to have a very Socon policy platform. I wouldn’t vote for her myself, but she seems to have a consistent, populist, political view. She definitely ain’t no terrorist.

  7. It would be nice to see her beat Allen. Allen is a complete incompetent phony. One of those people who is too fucking depraved to get a life or do anything beyond run for office.

    1. I thought he went to law school? Did he pass the bar?

      If not, do you think he could walk into Roger Goodell’s office or some NFL team’s front office, hat in hand, impliedly trading on daddy’s name, looking for work?

  8. The left had to come up with something new.

    ‘Racist’ long ago stopped having any effect.

    1. You forgot “fascist”.

  9. “I am not a terrorist.”

    Exactly the sign you would expect a terrorist to hold up.

    It’s like the tea partiers literally shot a bullet into Congressperson Giffords’ head to keep her from valiantly raising the debt ceiling and forgoing default. (Don’t be afraid to keep that imagery in your mind when you go to the polls next year.)

  10. Advocating for fiscally responsible government with limits on spending is “irresponsible.”

    Political Speech is Terrorism.

    Sanity is Insanity.

    Black is White.

    1. So Obama isn’t really black? And Sarah Palin is?

      1. No, Obama is still half black and half white, just the halves are switched.

  11. Anyone who opposes equality is the lowest scum of the earth.

    1. Good bitch. Have a snausage.

    2. How is that whole civility thing working out for you there Tony?

      1. He does as he’s told.

      2. Please don’t feed the fake sockpuppet…

        … or the real one, for that matter. You would risk boredom.

        1. The real Tony is at least somewhat interesting. It’s fun sometimes to watch him paint himself into logical corners. With Fake Tony boredom isn’t even a risk. It’s a guarantee.

          1. This. A lot of our progressive visitors can be annoying, but spoofers are orders of magnitude more annoying. Whoever the spoofers are, please stop.

            1. You fucking Muslim-hating hillbillies need to learn to respect other people and their religious preferences.

              1. STOP SPOOFING ME, DAMMIT!

    3. I’m opposed to bad parodies.

    4. Then why are you not paying as much taxes as the rich, low scum of the Earth?

    5. Anyone who opposes equality is the lowest scum of the earth.

      What kind of equality? So if one person is a parapalegic, everyone else needs to have all their arms and legs broken?

  12. In sum: Allen stood (a) against government support for the ethonol industry, (b) then for it, (c) then against it again, unless (d) the ethanol is sold domestically. Now he might be against it categorically, unless he’s changed his mind again. Check your watch.

    That would make an excellent Intrade stock!

    Note to myself…

    1. Sounds like that stock guy, Kramer.

  13. Off topic:
    Can somebody please explain how the ads work here. Today I see an ad selling conservative t-shirt slogans (worn by a hot blonde). The other day I saw an Asian dating site, and a Christian themed site ?


    2. I imagine that when someone is willing to pay the fee to advertise here that in most cases they will accept their money.

      Does that clear it up for you? 🙂

    3. One time I kept track of the dating sites I saw. It’s in the comments section of something from a couple of months ago. It was entirely ridiculous within an hour.

  14. I’m calling it.

    Ron Paul vs Barack Obama = civil war

    There are no words left for Ron Paul supporters after “terrorist” and “political suicide bombers” is used on a bunch of wishy washy Tea Party frauds who merely allow Obama to drive 95mph instead of 100mph.

    If these are “threats to national security”, the left will legit demand Ron Paul supporters be arrested, sent to Guantanamo Bay and tortured. Michael Moore has already called Obama nutless for not arresting the messenger of the downgrade.
    They are now already bordering on incitement to arrests and violence against political opponents. After all, what is America supposed to do with “terrorists”, or people who are “threats to national security”?

    I’ve said it before and i’ll say it again. These are not liberals, they are full blown Stalinists barely hiding behind the mask of “Democrats”.

    1. You know who else hid behind a mask…

      1. Tonto? No, wait…

      2. You’re gonna have to help me out here.
        Especially now with all these superhero movies.

        1. Office Space

      3. Curse you, Richards!

    2. I’ve observed that before. In fact, on another (“liberal”) blog, the obvious hostility directed at me was laughable (obviously I was hatin’ on PBHO because he’s “Black”). So I posted the dictionary definition of “liberal”, which did not apply to any of the people posting there:

      lib?er?al [lib-er-uhl, lib-ruhl] adjective
      1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
      2. ( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
      3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
      4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
      5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.

      I nearly spat out my coffee when I got to #4 and #5:

      “in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom”
      “favoring … freedom of action … personal belief or expression”

      Those two are cornerstones of Libertarianism and founding principles of America. Neither is highly regarded by Team Red or Team Blue.

      1. Ever heard of this thing called “classical liberalism”? Also, the word doesn’t mean the same thing abroad vs. in the US. It’s funny when Tea Party people are griping about Democrats being liberal on British sites, and the Brits are like “Wot?!” In Japan, the “Liberal League” is as close as they have to a libertarian party.

        1. hobo – here in the states, a lub-rahl is whatever rush tells the wingnuts.

  15. I’m confused at what you’re reporting here. Are you supporting this candidate because she’s a Tea Party Republican? You identify a single issue that she is aimed to defeat her primary opponent on – corn/ethanol subsidies. I’m more interested in knowing where she stands on social issues. Its all well and good for candidates to talk about being for small government, when they also have a social agenda that belies their small government stance. When will we see candidates who leave social issues to the individual and who focus instead on ending the damn war already and shrinking the government’s involvement in our lives? Show me THOSE people. Or tell me enough about Radtke to convince me she’s a viable small-government candidate.

    1. That’s what raised a warning flag with me: absolutely no mention of her planned social meddlings in the article.

      I think the piece was going for a cutesy ‘A terrorist? – THIS woman?’ approach.

    2. she’s authoritarian on social issues and wishy washy on the PATRIOT Act.

      Radtke’s counterfeit, George may as well be a Democrat, and Donner wants to pass a law requiring a mandatory mindfuck session with a pro-lifer before an abortion.

  16. “She might have fired a few rounds from an AK-47 into the ceiling for emphasis once or twice?but who doesn’t?”

    I wonder what the temps on Level 2 thought about that?

    1. “Sir, your right to fire your AK47 stops where my floor begins”

  17. “I am not a witch”

  18. A little head chopping might be useful.

  19. The TP continues to steer clear of cultural issues, and until they take a clearly defined stand on matters of personal freedom, including Gay Marriage, The Drug War, and the ongoing phenomenon of the corporate welfare-warfare state, libertarians would be best advised to steer clear of them. While their spokespeople might seem reasonable, they have plenty of witch-hunters, queer-bashers and cross-burners in their rank and file membership, and some disturbing links to white-supremacist movements. They are not terrorists, but neither is the “Reverend” Farrakhan.

  20. The Drug War, and the ongoing phenomenon of the corporate welfare-warfare state, libertarians would be best advised to steer clear of them. While their spokespeople might seem reasonable, they have plenty of witch-hunters, queer-bashers and cross-burners in their rank and file membership, and some disturbing links to white-supremacist movements. They are not terrorists, but neither is the “Reverend” Farrakhan.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.