Ever since the launch of Richard Nixon's infamous Southern Strategy, the South has been the bulwark of the GOP and the Republican home field. One need not look further than electoral maps from the past forty years to witness Republican dominance over the South. Only Southern governors such as Carter and Clinton and of course George Wallace had any chance at victory in the former Confederate States of America. But after the Dubya-DeLay disgrace of big government/interventionist so-called conservatism, the GOP brand is rightly tarnished. Now Southerners have turned to the Tea Party for a new identity. But how representative is the Tea Party of small government/fiscal conservative/anti-adventurist ideals? And how much is a Tea Party merely a rebranding for a regional uprising oblique to the GOP but focused against a Democratic President? The Tea Party Caucus is a regional phenomenon. Just like the American Independent party, it is primarily motivated by partisan Southern sentiment rather than nationwide conservative ideals. Don't be fooled by their historical and colonial New England garb: they are a Southern party defending Southern sentiment. That's why they oppose any tax increases at all in the face of catastrophic debts while claiming to defend fiscal conservatism. Likewise, I predict the majority of them will set aside their anti-adventurist foreign policy again once another Republican becomes President (much as mainline Democrats blasted Iraq but defended Obama's escalation in Afghanistan and his illegal intervention in Libya). The Tea Party should stop waving this flag: And pick up this flag instead: They have more in common with the Confederate States of America than the Articles of Confederation of America.