It really is time for the BBC to sack its North America Editor, Mark Mardell

I knew I’d stepped through a political looking-glass in 1987 when, working at BBC TV News, I happened to refer to Martin Bell as the BBC’s Anti-North America Correspondent. My boss that day was appalled: “Nonsense! We think he’s far too pro-American!” Nothing’s changed. I went to bed in a bad mood last night, having just read a typically infuriating post by the BBC’s Vote Obama Correspondent, Mark Mardell (you can read the pile of poo here).

The lefty lard mountain was lamenting the fact that, while the Tea Party hadn’t found a suitable presidential candidate, it had got everything else it wanted: Broadly speaking, it now has the policies it wants, the Republican Party it wants and the adversarial style of politics it wants.

As so often with the BBC’s reporting of American politics, Mardell’s article reads like a press release from some demented Marxist sect. Here’s an example of his Spartist rhetoric:

You might say today that the firebrand conservative Barry "extremism-in-the-defence-of-liberty-is-no-vice" Goldwater has now won his campaign to purge his party of moderates, it has just taken him 48 years longer than he had hoped.

The particular Tea Party sin which has led to them being anathematised here is the cardinal one of democratically ousting politicians who don’t share your views and replacing them with politicians who do share your views - what swine!:

Death by deselection was a familiar fate to Labour politicians in the 1970s, at the hands of the left. Here it is the right who are using internal party democracy to purify their party.

Good word, purify. It implies Nazis and genocide without actually actually accusing Tea Partiers of being homicidal racists (which, of course, they are).

So, let me get this straight: a bunch of mainly small-town, rural conservatives - without the backing of a foreign power or big business or the media or the coastal urban elites - who want the President and Congress to abide by the Constitution (after all, America is a Republic, not a Democracy) and who want politicians to start paying back the country’s grotesque debts and to stop spending money the US doesn't have are the equivalent of the Militant Tendency – a bunch of fascist revolutionaries whose sole aim was to destroy democracy and to impose a proletarian dictatorship on the British people (and the rest of the world).

Why is Fatso so stressed that he’s given up all pretence at reporting or rational analysis and has instead resorted to the sort of deliberately misleading analogies that would get a 16-year old laughed off the podium in a school debate?

Well, seems Mardell’s amazed that a populist, grass-roots political movement born out of exasperation at the way Washington career politicians of both parties have got together to impose European-style liberalism on a largely conservative electorate has rejected the cosy old cross-party concensus way of doing things. Don’t these dumb hayseeds – most of whom are so primitive they haven’t even visited Europe – realise that professional Big Government politicians know what’s good for them and should be left alone to impose their enlightened vision on those poor dears whose pater and mater never thought to send them to a decent Ivy League university?

The Tea Party’s crime (apart from their refusal to do the decent thing by furling up their banners and returning to the illiberal agrarian Palookavilles from which they first emerged in their Confederate Flag-festooned semi-trucks) was to remove Republican senator Richard Lugar from the seat he’s held for 36 years. Mardell, having carefully unpeeled an onion, writes through his tears: He was a gentleman from another era: careful, considered, rather old-fashioned, happy to behave like an elder statesman, someone who deliberately sought agreement rather than tried to exaggerate differences.

Well, maybe the hayseeds have seen where deliberately seeking agreement gets you and have decided that trying to exaggerate differences might prove a more effective tactic.

Drying his eyes, El Blimpo ends his article as he began it, by once more invoking the Left’s boogie-man-in-chief, Barry Goldwater: If you think you have seen gridlock, just wait and watch Goldwater's final victory.

Okay, Mark – I’ll do that very thing. If Barry Goldwater had defeated Lyndon Johnson in 1964, America would have escaped many of the baneful consequences of The Great Society.

Meanwhile, I hope your BBC bosses – despite the fact that they all no doubt agree with every biased word you write - realise that it's time for you to go. Mind you, as your colleagues back here in Blighty are just as biased when it comes to Ukip and the right wing of the Tory Party, you'll no doubt be allowed to pump out anti-conservative propaganda until the BBC decides it's time for you to take up a (specially-reinforced) seat on the Today Programme.