Yes, I mean it.

Here's a "reprint" of my interview with Dylan Ratigan last night:

I, and FedUpUSA, ought to sue anyone using this moniker for their so-called "political affiliation" for defamation.

Yeah, that's a joke.

But so are you.

All of you.

Especially Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Bob Barr, and douchebag groups such as the "Tea Party Patriots."

Let's look at their mission statement:

• Fiscal Responsibility
• Constitutionally Limited Government
• Free Markets

Really?  That sounds pretty good.  But did you read "Free Markets"?

Free Markets: A free market is the economic consequence of personal liberty. The founders believed that personal and economic freedom were indivisible, as do we. Our current government's interference distorts the free market and inhibits the pursuit of individual and economic liberty. Therefore, we support a return to the free market principles on which this nation was founded and oppose government intervention into the operations of private business.

Oh, oppose government intervention eh?  You mean, you oppose stringing up the people who break the law and steal people's homes and wealth?  Private business is only private up until it rips someone off.

Notice what's missing from this mission statement and principles: Any mention of why I and others led people to mail tea bags to Congress and our President in the first place: rampant theft of over taxpayer money propping up FAILED private businesses.

Then look at what's over at TeaParty.Org: you'll find the usual pablum.  Guns, gays, God.

Heh, I like talking about Guns, Gays and God too.  Let's talk about all of them within the context of The Constitution, which is what the Tea Party was supposed to be about.  In short:

• Guns.  What part of "shall not be infringed" didn't you bother to read?  That one's simple.  And yes, this means that under The Bill of Rights there should be no Brady Law nor any bar on a convicted felon who has served his time buying or owning a weapon!  I know what the current law says and I understand the reasoning behind it.  But you can't square it with the clear language in the Second Amendment.  Our entire system of criminal justice rests on the premise that if you are convicted of a crime and serve the time for it, your debt to society is paid.  If said convicted criminal is still dangerous to society (and thus shouldn't have a right to self-defense) why are we letting him out so he can victimize other people?  Sentences should reflect this; you should not be released until you are no longer a danger to society - period.   Prison is often debated as to whether it's about rehabilitation or punishment - I argue it is neither, it is and should be about removing those who harm others from society until they are no longer a threat to others.
  
  
• Gays. What part of "what you do in your bedroom is none of my damn business" didn't you bother with?  You can find that in the 4th Amendment as well as elsewhere.  In terms of public space what is your private sexual preference and life doing in the public space in the first place?  200 years ago we called such people perverts and stuck them in the stocks.  You want to address this problem?  It's simple: That's a gay (or straight) person's private life and its none of anyone else's damn business what two or more consenting adults do behind a closed door on private property.
  
  
• God.  What part of the Establishment Clause didn't you bother to read?  "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"  You want prayer in the schools?  Not unless I can lead a prayer to Allah should I so choose; it is not Constitutional to favor one religion over another.  Therefore, you either keep it all out or you keep none of it out, and my preference is to keep all of it out, although I'll settle for none - either position is Constitutional.  No other position is, and that's the beginning and end of it.  The same applies to any other publicly-run and funded space.  What people do on their own private property with regard to how they worship is none of your damn business. 

Now that we've dispensed with Guns, Gays and God in the context of what one of the founders of the Tea Party Movement believes, I'll deal with the rest.

The Tea Party was initiated as a political protest against the unlawful and in fact unconstitutional usurpation of power from the Congress and The People in the form of extortion-led bailouts of enterprises that had engaged in acts that I, and many others, believe were at least civilly actionable and in many cases crossed the line into criminal activity.

This indictment is not limited to the nation's large banks, although it certainly starts there.  The corruption of our economic and monetary systems runs the gamut from Fannie and Freddie through their ties to Congress (including literal sexual encounters in some cases), banking interests selling trash securities to everyone from pension funds on down, judges who don't judge but rather protect monied interests on Wall Street, The Federal Reserve intentionally debasing our currency and monetizing government debt, government spending that is running 40% above revenues and much more.

In short, The Tea Party was and is about the the corruption of American Politics and the blatant and outrageous theft from all Americans that has resulted.  It is about personal responsibility and enforcement of the law against those who have robbed, financially raped and pillaged the nation.

Yet today we hear literally nothing about these issues among the so-called "Tea Party" candidates and their backers.  Sarah Palin has not said one word about locking up the banksters that brought up on the housing bubble and economic collapse.  Not one word about Bernanke's out-of-control Fed and the arguably unlawful monetization of Fannie and Freddie paper, not to mention the monetization of the Federal Debt.  Not one word about throwing judges such as this one:

in the dock - although that, ladies and gentlemen, is a statement of felony judicial corruption.  If you as an investor run into trouble with a commodity or futures trade and sue you will not get your day in court - a literal "green light" to rob the people by the big banks with official judicial sanction.  And you wonder how Hillary Clinton managed to "win" in her Cattle Futures trades eh?  Wonder no more.

Tea Party my ass.  This was nothing other than The Republican Party stealing the anger of a population that was fed up with The Republican Party's own theft of their tax money at gunpoint to bail out the robbers of Wall Street and fraudulently redirecting it back toward electing the very people who stole all the fucking money!

You want me to support The Tea Party as it is currently constituted? 

Do all of the above, do it now, and apologize for attempting to perpetuate the financial rape of this nation.

Publicize the following as your LEAD:

STOP THE LOOTING AND START PROSECUTING

And finally, one more:

ALL FIVE OF THE LARGEST BANKS ARE RESOLVED AS OUR FIRST ACT IN CONGRESS. 

They caused it, they pay for it.  Period.

Until and unless you do?