Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Tennessee Teabaggers About as Weird and Awful as One Might Expect

The Tennessee Tea Parties are issuing a set of demands for the teaching of history in TN.

(Via the Memphis Commercial Appeal)

NASHVILLE — Members of Tennessee tea parties presented state legislators with five priorities for action Wednesday, including “rejecting” the federal health reform act, establishing an elected “chief litigator” for the state and “educating students the truth about America.”

Wait. Chief Litigator? Does Tennessee not have an Attorney General? Isn't that what a "chief litigator" is?


All Currently Available
Regarding education, the material they distributed said, “Neglect and outright ill will have distorted the teaching of the history and character of the United States. We seek to compel the teaching of students in Tennessee the truth regarding the history of our nation and the nature of its government.”

Okay, that sounds reasonable. But of course, you know it won't be.

That would include, the documents say, that “the Constitution created a Republic, not a Democracy.”
Um, everyone already knows that. Are they worried that Tennesseeans are going to try to vote directly for laws rather than electing representatives to . . . oh, forget it. It doesn't matter. The real point is their demands re: history textbooks.

The material calls for lawmakers to amend state laws governing school curriculums, and for textbook selection criteria to say that “No portrayal of minority experience in the history which actually occurred shall obscure the experience or contributions of the Founding Fathers, or the majority of citizens, including those who reached positions of leadership.”
Sure, sure, it's important to be sure that those pesky minorities don't get too much ink. Although, apparently, it's okay if it's a minority experience which did not actually occur?

Fayette County attorney Hal Rounds, the group’s lead spokesman during the news conference, said the group wants to address “an awful lot of made-up criticism about, for instance, the founders intruding on the Indians or having slaves or being hypocrites in one way or another.

Intruding on the Indians? Intruding? What did the pilgrims walk in on them in the bathroom? 
I don't know which is worse, that the attempted genocide of Native Americans would be considered a mere "intrusion" or that criticizing said genocide would be considered "made-up criticism." Oh, and also slavery is totally made up. None of the Founding Fathers ever had any slaves. You could look it up! But don't.