The four most objectionable winners of 2010

Of all the bad behavior that went on in the last couple of years, how did it affect the perpetrators?

Rep. Joe Miller (R. - S.C. 2), who shouted "You lie!" during Obama's health care address to Congress in September 2009, was re-elected 53.5% to 43.7%.

Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R. - Tx. 19), who shouted "Baby killer!" at Rep. Bart Stupak during the final House debate on the health care bill, was re-elected 77.7% to 19.1%. Stupak, by the way, decided to retire after the kerfuffle, and his House seat, which he had held for eight terms and won re-election to by a 65-32 margin in 2008, was lost yesterday to a Republican.

Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R. - Mn. 6), who is famous for saying stupid shit, was re-elected 52.5% to 39.8%.

Rep. Ron Paul (R. - Tx. 14), who has made a career out of ostensibly opposing almost every aspect of the federal government he is a part of -- for example, even though he represents a wide swath of Texas Gulf Coast, he opposes the federal flood insurance program -- was re-elected 76% to 24%.

Man.

There's always someone more conservative/crazier/foamier

Reading conservative blogs and news for research purposes, I came across this doozy, which says that "some libertarians" believe foamers like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are secret "neocons... conning the Tea Party."

Here's all the salt you have to throw at that bird:

1. The assertion that Beck and Palin might be secret "neocons" is laid to someone called Pastor Chuck Baldwin. Who is he? See below.
2. In the universe of the Ron Paul cult, a "neocon" or neoconservative is just another big-government interventionist who wants to interfere in their lives. Thus, to suggest conservative demagogues like Beck and Palin might be secret "neocons" is tantamount to calling them false prophets and potential traitors (indeed, "Judas goats") to the Libertarian movement (which Paulites feel is the only proper approach to conservatism) and the US as a whole.
3. The poster goes on to defend and praise Beck and Palin.
4. Most comically of all, the poster's main allegiance seems to be to the "Tea Party," ignoring (or simply ignorant of) the fact that the "Tea Party" organization is nothing more than a collection of front groups funded by Texas billionaires (as reported last week in the New Yorker).

This guy Chuck Baldwin is a real piece of work. From his Wikipedia page: "Baldwin supports lessening U.S. involvement in the United Nations, reducing U.S. income taxes and repeal of the Patriot Act. He would withdraw troops from Iraq, seek to end illegal immigration, and enforce stricter immigration laws. Emphasizing "America's Christian heritage", he supports the gold standard, the right to keep and bear arms, homeschooling, and pro-life legislation such as the Sanctity of Life Act." And that's his Wikipedia entry -- his own blog is even more hilarious:

Speaking of Hillary Rodham, I predict that she will replace Vice President Joe Biden BEFORE the 2012 elections. I've said that in private for many weeks, and now say it in this column -- remember, you heard it here. The Clinton-Bush Crime Syndicate (CBCS) needs Hillary in the White House badly, and Obama has readily accepted a subservient role in the criminal affairs of CBCS (for very profitable reasons, no doubt).

In other words, a nutbag pretty much on the scale of the guy who took over the Discovery Channel building yesterday (permalink).

The strangest thing is that as far as I can tell the entire pro-Tea Party blogosphere is simply ignoring the New Yorker's piece. They require their Tea Party to be a grassroots movement, therefore it is, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. Meanwhile the Ron Paulites, who predate the creation of the Tea Party, are all sour grapes, complaining they were the real conservatives all along and only they have the right answers.

It would be great if this division and infighting, this struggle for conservatism's mantle, translated into general confusion among the right wing when it came to the election in November. But it won't help the Democrats, because nothing will make any of these people vote Democratic, and there aren't enough third-party candidates to dilute the right wing. November will be ugly, people.