A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand

I grabbed this slideshow from Atheist Revolution. It’s the Teabaggers 9/12 rally Hall of Shame. You’ll want to watch it in full screen mode, so you can read all the signs.

This is what right-wing hate media is fomenting in America.

20 Responses to “A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand”

  1. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Fundie, teabagger, birther, deather, tenther, fiscal conservative (since Jan 2009), 9/12ers are bipartisan, spontaneous, and grass roots! (TM)

    My wife has a friend that went to that. Any time my wife tries to have a discussion with her, she always cuts it off and basically says “I don’t want to discuss this with you.” Awesome. That’s the adult version of “LALALALALA I CAN’T HEAR YOU SO YOU DON’T EXIST!”

  2. luna600 Says:

    Ok all I can Say is WTF and you I think most of those people are throwing temper tantrums because they didnt get who they wanted in office but ohhhhh well they can keep throwing their tantrums and I will cont. to laugh at them a form of entertainment in my book

  3. Imroy Says:

    Wow. I’ll give that a pretty big “WTF” too. So much hate, so much stupidity.

    Can someone explain to this Australian the people dressed up as Native Americans (“Indians”)? What was that in reference to?

  4. LightningRose Says:

    Imroy, I’m guessing it’s a reference to an important event leading up to the American revolution known as the Boston Tea Party.


  5. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Ahhhh… Nothing like embracing the most racist part of the piece of American populist uprising whose name you commandeered. Super-fundie powers activate! Form of… a racist bastard protestor!

  6. Brian Says:

    Holy. Fucking. Shit.

    This may very well be one of the densest collections of idiots to ever gather in one place. Now I know every time fundies and crazy conservatives do something mind-blowingly asinine, we usually think they could never out-do themselves and acheive even greater heights of dipshittery. But somehow they always do. I’m really afraid of how they’ll top themselves this time…

  7. Jeff Eyges Says:

    “Glenn Beck 2012”! And why am I not surprised by the Confederate flag?

    Did you look through the comments?

    the world has gone mad. these people are proof that democracy requires educated voters

    Lol, there’s a reason why the founding father’s wanted a republic and on more than one occasion spoke against the evils of democracy and rule by the public. The nation we live in is as much a result of that as anything else.

  8. Bart v.d. M. Says:

    If they hadn’t failed to understand history they’d know that calling someone a czar and a commie at the same time is a tad contradictory. Unfortunately, the only thing they manage to understand is how to turn lobbyist lies into slogans and paint them on wooden boards. Congrats to them for passing kindergarten!

  9. Jeff Eyges Says:

    Congrats to them for passing kindergarten!

    I wouldn’t leap even to that assumption.

  10. Parrotlover77 Says:

    These rallies are completely pointless. I can personally guarantee you that not a single soul attending that rally (at least with a sign, since some were reporters and bloggers taking pictures) voted for Obama. So what’s the point? ZOMG you STILL don’t like Obama. Congratufuckinglations.

    When libs did the anti-war protests, it wasn’t just a random “anti-Bush” rally. It had a point. They were protesting a war. They were protesting needless death. They were protesting violence.

    These fuckers are protesting the fact that a black man with a foreign sounding name is the president. Actual arguments against health care (ZOMG DEATH PANELS ABORTIONS GAYS doesn’t count) were completely non-existent.

  11. Dan Gilbert Says:

    The lack of any kind of consistent message is really telling. Like Parrotlover77 says, all this crowd is doing is screaming that they still don’t like Obama. If that many people showed up with a coherent, consistent message, it might actually be noteworthy (in a positive way), but they didn’t even come close.

    I also find it amusing how many of those people complain about “czars”… and don’t know that the term first came to be used during Reagan’s administration with the “Drug Czar.” Heh.

  12. KennyCelican Says:

    *blink blink*

    I think the word Czar predates Reagan just a wee bit. Unless you’re talking about the media borrowing the word?

  13. Ron Britton Says:


    You are correct. I thought Reagan was the first to have a drug czar, but apparently Richard Nixon was the first. Other czars date back at least as far as FDR. And leave it to George W Bush to have an Abstinence Czar!

  14. Jeff Eyges Says:

    And leave it to George W Bush to have an Abstinence Czar!

    If only they’d been preaching abstinence when Bush Sr. and Barbara were younger…

  15. Parrotlover77 Says:

    One problem with the “protesting against the czars” is that these people apparently don’t realize that not a single so-called Czar actually has the official title Czar. The word Czar was made up by the media because they are too god damn lazy to write out the full title of the individual. And then the media actually covers the protestors “against czars” as if they actually have some sort of point. The media is, at least, equally responsible for the dumbing of America as fundies are.

    Remember Bush’s so-called War Czar (Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Iraq and Afghanistan)? Where was the outrage then? He basically handed over a part of his commander-in-chief duties to a non-congressionally approved random dude. I’m not against the idea that the president can appoint people as advisors without congressional approval, but somebody with the power to direct the pentagon? That was a bit overboard. So where was the outrage then?!?!

  16. KennyCelican Says:

    Well, I could see a very non-military minded President (Carter springs to mind) appointing a former military person to a position like that, in a ‘I’ll tell you my goals, you translate them so the folks in the puzzle palace understand them clearly’ kind of way.

    But what we had seemed more of a ‘I am lazy’ and ‘I need plausible deniability’ combo platter with a side of ‘scapegoat if needed’.

  17. OtherRob Says:

    Well, I could see a very non-military minded President (Carter springs to mind) appointing a former military person to a position like that, in a ‘I’ll tell you my goals, you translate them so the folks in the puzzle palace understand them clearly’ kind of way.

    While I'm not going to defend the Presidency of Jimmy Carter, I would like to point out here that he did, in fact, serve several years of active duty in the Navy after graduating from the Naval Academy. So I don't think he really fits your description here.

  18. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Kenny – I agree, to a point. I think it’s fine if the president wants somebody like that in their cabinet. But somebody with such broad executive powers (as in, over and beyond advisory) should have to get congressional approval. But a “car czar” or something along those lines? I don’t see the point of the outrage.

    Anyway, there is arguably actually a small point to the protest deep down underneath all the racism and “hate me some liebruls” attitude, but they wouldn’t know where to find it.

  19. KennyCelican Says:

    OtherRob – Knew that at one time, didn’t recall it when I was writing. The only reason I picked Jimmy was that he appeared to be the most personally peaceful individual who has been President in my lifetime.

  20. lisamariefan Says:

    You know, I don’t think the fundies appreciate the irony of having free speech.

    That is to say, if America today were truly like any of the totalitarian regimes that they keep equating Obama’s and his Administration to, they’d be killed for their dissent, or put in prison.

    Fucking retards don’t even understand that much.