09/07/2012 09:18 pm ET

Tea Baggers are the Opposite of Robin Hood

After viewing the RNC and DNC in a side-by-side comparison over the past 10 days during their respective tent shows, it's absolutely fascinating to witness the adulteration of morality by the super extreme right.

Unequivocally speaking and as a statement of fact: Tea Baggers, a subset of the RNC faithful, are the opposite of Robin Hood. In that they take from the poor and give to the rich. And more disturbing, they appear to be proud of it?

This fetish of deficit reduction, as spearheaded by many in the Republican Party, is nearly an obsessive compulsive disorder that would even fascinate Freud himself.

In their Tea Bagger quest for a near perfect society, what comes next after the budget is balanced? The elimination of dumb people. From an economic point of view, that actually makes perfect sense. The heroine of many Tea Baggers; new age philosopher Ayn Rand and founder of the objectivist movement --- advocated that non-producers of the economy deserved to be regulated out of the mainstream of society.

Her novel The Fountainhead, published in 1943, advocated egotism and rejected ethical altruism via the books' protagonist, Howard Roark. Narrated in a perfect German like staccato, Mrs. Rands' hardened 'take no prisoners approach' is stunning. Instead of ethnic cleansing, it smells like economic cleansing.

Moving the IQ deficient, the non-diploma GED proud, and the blue collar barrel-chested to the wayside under the presumption they are a non-contributor to society is segregation of the worst kind. Viewed under a more favorable euphuism, perhaps this is unintentional ethnic cleansing? From the libertarian elitist mindset, it's nothing personal, but if you happen to be 'dumb, brown and broke' --- Oh well, sorry pal. Maybe next time you'll be born a blue blood in a red state. Or at the very least, a NASCAR Dad who aspires to be a blue blood in a red state.

Super hardcore conservatives aren't the only ones who are good at avoiding the forgotten. Mainstream Democrats on the other hand seem to have left their underrepresented brethren at the train depot as well. When's the last time the minimum wage was on the Democratic platform as a "do or die" mandate? I'm thinking when Kennedy ran against Carter in 1980!

Instead of being concerned about whether or not common folk are making a "living wage" and can afford to put food on the table, the "progressive" wing of the Democratic Party are more concerned if Johnny and Steve can legally fornicate in the bedroom. Where are the priorities here? Messaging is always critical, but so are feeding hunger bellies.

For the Democrats, it poses the age old dichotomy between guns and butter. The relationship between establishment Democrats and their progressive socialist counterparts, is nearly the stepchild relationship that exists between Palestinians and their well to do Middle East cousins. (Nothing like family in a time of crisis). Sadly, the Palestinians are nearly an inconvenient after thought, and thus the same can be expressed metaphorically within certain subsets of the Democratic Party.

Generalities are always an easy cop out. With the Democratic Convention wrapping up this evening in Charlotte, NC, many will be looking for specific legislation to make its way to governmental bodies not only in DC, but in state legislatures across the country. And more specifically, how new lawmaking will permanently buttress the bottom rung in society --- who incidentally can only dream of becoming part of the American Dream.

And therefore the under-class, which from an entrepreneurial perspective should be viewed as an untapped opportunity that ought to be groomed into the middle-class for the betterment of America, gets marginalized out of the conversation because it doesn't "message" well.

This puts Democrat politicians in a peculiar situation. How can Democrats continue to get re-elected without seeming to cater too much to their historic base without appearing too grassroots like? Or too soft hearted (God forbid).

Here's the solution: state that you're a FDR Democrat that views class warfare as a silly little parlor game and that the business of America is business.

If that doesn't make the re-positioning of the under-class into the mainstream of America sexy, I'm not certain what does. Position your "message" as such, that not doing the latter is actually un-American. The net effect is to nullify the far rights' re-definition of Robin Hood, which is becoming far more acceptable these days. In that taking from the poor and giving to the rich is customary.

But in an era of ''low info" voters --- for the right and left and everything in between, this is easier said than done. For the moment, Darwinism is the central tenet of the super extreme right and will remain so for the foreseeable future.