The attached graphics contain two conversations I recently had on Twitter with supporters of the Tea Parties, and both conversations - as with every other single interaction I've ever had with teapartiers - drives home every negative thing I say about them at the link. If you oppose illegal immigration, the teapartiers are just standing in your way. Not only are they intellectually and emotionally incapable of helping, but by being the loudest opposition to the Obama administration's policies they're standing in the way of a smart, effective, pro-American (as opposed to just pro-teapartier) opposition.

Both graphics should be read from the bottom up. The first refers to this post at Andrew Breitbart's site by one "Liberty Chick" (Mandy Nagy) in which I asked her to compare her "wide-ranging" post to this and the 68 entries on the Service Employees International Union page.

Did she do that, and endeavor to understand the point I was getting at? Of course not: she's a tea partier. Thus, in her first reply she uses the "Jump, Smear, and Lie" technique, falsely assuming that I would support the SEIU's video she discusses. If you take a quick glance at the SEIU link - or even mouse over it - you'll see that no one in their right mind should jump to such a conclusion yet jumping to such conclusions is a core part of the teaparties ideology.

The reason I tweeted that to her in the first place was to express disappointment at her treatment of the video and to encourage better treatments in the future. I saw the SEIU video and was considering discussing it here but just didn't have the time. It would have been great to find someone else taking it apart with the goal of showing the SEIU's supporters how they weren't credible, but "Liberty Chick"'s post isn't that: it simply plays to the Breitbart echo chamber and I'm willing to bet that not even one SEIU supporter would have their faith in the SEIU questioned by her post. Of course, that's not just an issue with Breitbart but with the great majority of bloggers: very few are capable of showing the supporters of something how they're wrong. For an issue like illegal immigration there's definitely a place for encouraging your base, but there also has to be a place for showing the followers of the other side how they're being misled. Few others are willing or able to do that, and Breitbart's contributors aren't helping.

Instead of learning the lesson I'm trying to get across, "Liberty Chick" then gives credence to unspecified ad hominem and false arguments against me including those made by the non-credible Dave Weigel. "Liberty Chick" is seemingly incapable of understanding how referring to smears of me doesn't help her. She - and every other teapartier I've ever had the misfortune to encounter - is incapable of doing the smart thing and adapting the posts here to their goals. She - and every other teapartier I've ever had the misfortune to encounter - is incapable of doing what's in their own best interests unless it's extremely sugar-coated and designed to appeal to their base instincts.

You might think that the foregoing is simply an argument against "Liberty Chick" when it's not: she's just an example of what I've seen endlessly repeated. Tea partiers have various issues that prevent them from being effective and that result in them in effect helping those who - in addition to violating tea party "principles" - also support illegal immigration. That wouldn't be that big of an issue if the teapartiers weren't so loud and if they weren't actively trying to drown out the voices of those who actually know how to do things in smart and effective ways.

Discussing the second graphic is left as an exercise; note the high similarity to the first.