In this week's books section, I wrote a long lead titled "What It Feels Like for a Teabagger." In the article, I relay to you all the wisdom I gathered as a recent graduate of Glenn Beck University, combined with quotes from The Overton Window and a recent Teabagger text called Mad as Hell, and I condense the Tea Party's platform into three simple points.

The comments to the piece are already pretty awesome. At 6:04am, Conservatives Rule posted this:

Your ignorance is surpassed only by your stupidity.

Then, at 6:08 am, ConservativesRule decided to follow that up with an amendment:

Dude - your stupidity is second only to your ignorance...

Which is it, ConservativesRule? Is my ignorance surpassed by my stupidity, or is my stupidity second to my ignorance? After posting the letters "ddd" twice in two separate comments, IMFLover2 published a screed that begins as follows:

So many problems with this article, there's almost too many to count!

1) This is obviously a biased political spew designed to make the reader hate the Tea Party. Why does the writer need to do this, I wonder? Paid?

I admit it: I was paid to write this article.

Slam 1263 wants me to know that words hurt:

Why try to make a valid point by using the term "Teabaggers"?

Support The Stranger

More than ever, we depend on your support to help fund our coverage. Support local, independent media with a one-time or recurring contribution. Thank you!

Contribute

Callng an angry woman a bitch, or a man a dick does not help make a point.

And Keister Button takes issue with an incidental claim that I make in the article that Catholics unofficially worship saints. I am pleased with the discourse. I hope you will jump in there, too.