A Serious Question about the GOP and the Tea Party

[Oddball]

And I suppose you think the Superman Party's dedication to policies based on the principles of truth, justice and the American way is similarly vacuous and ill-defined? Everyone's a critic!

HOPE!...CHANGE!...

WE ARE THE ONES WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR!

 

[Mr.Nick]

And I suppose you think the Superman Party's dedication to policies based on the principles of truth, justice and the American way is similarly vacuous and ill-defined? Everyone's a critic!

HOPE!...CHANGE!...

WE ARE THE ONES WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR!

Tyrants will be going to prison soon.

 

[Oddball]

At this point in time, I don't see where they could be too much harm to that pack of country clubber old coots.

Actually, I would go a bit further here. I perceive a revitalization and renewal (via TEA party influence) of that GOP "pack" that has moved, until recently, quite far away from their original small government and protection of individual liberties platform. Far from harmful, however, is the very real (TEA party) influence on the GOP. When have we last seen Washington wrangling over how much to cut government spending? When was the last time we even broached the subject of a BBA (Balanced Budget Amendment)? Now, with the latest deal, we are told that both the House and the Senate will actually put our representatives on record as to whether they favor balancing the national budget with an actual vote (sometime before or in October of 2011). Those who would deny that the TEA party has significant influence on the conversation in Washington are not paying attention or, simply, in denial.

JM

They said the same thing about the *chortle* "Republican Revolution", back in 1994...We all know how that one imploded with a whimper.

So far, all I've heard out of the current bunch is a lot of talk and have seen precious little action.

When they propose and pass real cuts to the budgets, rather than a mere shaving of a scant few percent off of baseline increases, then I might be swayed.

 

[WillowTree]

this really should be in the Tea Party section.

 

[Foxfyre]

…but they all do share principle goals of re-establishing civil liberties, restoring fiscal responsibility and stability, and embracing more of the Constitutional original intent for the role of the Federal Government.

You and others on the right continue to make this and similar statements without providing specific examples, making such statements meaningless – and the TPM/conservatism meaningless as well.

Indeed, you refer to ‘re-establishing civil liberties’ when in fact Americans enjoy greater civil liberties now than at any time in our Nation’s history. The Lawrence ruling in 2003 was a great victory for advocates of civil liberties, for example.

You also refer to ‘the Constitutional original intent for the role of the Federal Government’ without defining what that ‘intent’ is, much less citing case law in support of that ‘intent.’

Until such time as members of the TPM are ready to engage in substantive, meaningful debate as to the meaning of the Constitution in the context of settled case law, any statements such as yours above are irrelevant and empty.

Obviously you have not listened to any Tea Party speakers or attended any Tea Party rallies. The debate is quite clear, understandable, and unambiguous. And almost any serious Tea Partier is perfectly willing to debate the concepts with anybody who wishes to discuss them. I have been doing it for months here on USMB. But instead of any willingness to discuss those concepts on the left, I am accused of various things. This time I believe you referred to 'irrelevent and empty.' Or a youtube clip of a jury rigged montage of 'stupid' Tea Partiers is put up as typical of those attending the rallies.

I honestly don't think most liberals are capable of discussing the concepts. They just want to trivialize them, denigrate them, or make them or those who support them, either evil or irrelevent.

Once again the Tea Party is not interested in the How To. They are interested in promoting what they want done. It is not much difference than when I am directing my staff, far more qualified in the specifics than I am, to accomplish a goal. I tell them what I want done and then leave it to them to work out how to do it using their collective skills, training, and experience.

That's what the Tea Party says to those they promote for high office. Here is what we want accomplished. Now go do it.

 

[EriktheRed]

I wonder if these two "parties" will split during the 2012 Election or unite.

If they each have a candidate to run, along with the democrats and the libertarians, what do you think will happen in the election?

Or do you think the two (GOP and Tea Party) will come together and run one person?

If they are divided, and each runs someone on their ticket, won't that divide the party base of the conservative movement?

The Tea Party IS the GOP.

 

[Mr.Nick]

I wonder if these two "parties" will split during the 2012 Election or unite.

If they each have a candidate to run, along with the democrats and the libertarians, what do you think will happen in the election?

Or do you think the two (GOP and Tea Party) will come together and run one person?

If they are divided, and each runs someone on their ticket, won't that divide the party base of the conservative movement?

The Tea Party IS the GOP.

No we're not..

 

[Big Fitz]

And I suppose you think the Superman Party's dedication to policies based on the principles of truth, justice and the American way is similarly vacuous and ill-defined? Everyone's a critic!

HOPE!...CHANGE!...

WE ARE THE ONES WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR!

Tyrants will be going to prison soon.

Not until the washington elite is routed from control of the parties and the halls of government. Remember this, even the radical left with supermajorities in congress and the presidency could not try, convict or execute Bush or Cheney.

The same will happen to P-BO and company: Nothing.

 

[Mr.Nick]

HOPE!...CHANGE!...

WE ARE THE ONES WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR!

Tyrants will be going to prison soon.

Not until the washington elite is routed from control of the parties and the halls of government. Remember this, even the radical left with supermajorities in congress and the presidency could not try, convict or execute Bush or Cheney.

The same will happen to P-BO and company: Nothing.

Oh, they'll be wearing stripes...

That's a promise.

 

[Maple]

I wonder if these two "parties" will split during the 2012 Election or unite.

If they each have a candidate to run, along with the democrats and the libertarians, what do you think will happen in the election?

Or do you think the two (GOP and Tea Party) will come together and run one person?

If they are divided, and each runs someone on their ticket, won't that divide the party base of the conservative movement?

They will come together and support one candidate and right now all of us would vote for the orange juice can before we would re-elect Obama.

 

[Big Fitz]

Tyrants will be going to prison soon.

Not until the washington elite is routed from control of the parties and the halls of government. Remember this, even the radical left with supermajorities in congress and the presidency could not try, convict or execute Bush or Cheney.

The same will happen to P-BO and company: Nothing.

Oh, they'll be wearing stripes...

That's a promise.

I'll believe it the day they frogmarch his ass out of the court room in an orange prison jumper. Till then, I doubt it. Not to mention, he'd probably flee from prosecution first if it was inevitable.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Those motherfuckers are going to jail for violating All ten amendments of the Bill of Rights.

 

[JamesMorrison]

Waving "hi" to JamesMorrison, I agree that the Tea Party has not so far given serious thought to forming a third party and running their own candidates. They are interesting in results and 'winning' is not an acceptable goal if it does not result in a turn around of our nation's most disastrous actions and policies.

Tea Party is a state of mind and principled concept more than an ideology. As is conservatism for that matter. Certainly all Tea Partiers do not embrace all the tenets of conservatism, but they all do share principle goals of re-establishing civil liberties, restoring fiscal responsibility and stability, and embracing more of the Constitutional original intent for the role of the Federal Government.

Accusations of racism hasn't been working too well for Tea Party opponents to accuse the Tea Party because the Tea Party has attracted people from all walks of life and has shown no preferences for one 'race' or 'group' over another. If the candidate has the track record and the vision for Tea Party initiatives, the candidate gets their suppot.

So, it seems the new assigned designation to demonize the Tea Party is to call them terrorists and accuse them of terrorism.

Which is ludicrous and highly offensive to me because it first is so hateful, and second trivializes real terrorism and that should be offensive to everybody.

Hi Foxfyre, I hope every thing is well with you and yours.

To be succinct I believe the TEA party, or more accurately [Hat tip to California Girl] the TEA party movement is merely an awakening of a significant portion of Americans that are extremely concerned about government spending and have taken Rush's and Mark's advice and done some reading. Although most of these citizens are new to the politics game they have garnered from those reading recommendations recognition that it is not only that more and more of their wealth is taken by the government but that their very liberties have been siphoned off as well in the process. (Individual liberty correlates directly with one’s ability to keep one’s earned wealth. This is one reason conservatives view McCain-Feingold as unconstitutional regarding free political speech) That recognition has now been translated into principled citizens serving in both houses that feel, strange as it may seem, that they must follow through on their campaign promises to those they represent. That the left considers those in the TEA party as [insert leftist epithet du jour here] merely represents the left's unfamiliarity of the concept of principled behavior or, perhaps, just their intolerance to those Americans that simply hold a view different than theirs (witness Sen. Kerry’s recent demands that the press not give the TEA party “extremists” equal time).

This is nothing new, for the difference is that conservatives feel liberty is obtained by being freed from government coercion while the left feels liberty is obtained through government coercion. Early progressives admitted this and recognized this paradox early on (a principled action) but today’s progressives’ goals are more tawdry and will not so admit this paradox for fear of rejection. But, Americans are not Europeans and, other than frequent visits of its European tax collectors, for hundreds of years they have made their own way practically free, for the most part, of statist institutions; they were necessarily and by habit responsible for themselves and thereby free. But today’s Democratic Party is no longer tempered by the Democratic Leadership Council (think Billary Clinton). That party is now controlled by leftist such as Pelosi and Obama who will not give up their statist dream state and feel no remorse spending this great nation into penury on their way to their progressive dream. Those in Greece, Spain, and Italy also shared that dream and, indeed got closer to that desired end. But living in reality, as we all do, we must be careful of what we wish for. Greece, Spain, and Italy ignored that all socialist forms of government can only exist, in reality, within the context of some form of capitalism where wealth is created by those productive souls and entities which can then be parasitically tapped to support the ever insatiable welfare state; Tapped that is, until those productive golden geese are then strangled by over taxation at which point the wards of the state simply, in the words of Margaret Thatcher: “…run out of other people’s money”.


Much has been made of a recent NYT/CBS poll that says the TEA party popularity has begun to fall but, aside from the natural narrowing of conservative eyes when both these sponsoring entities are invovled, I am hearing from self described Democrat Mickey Kaus that this was not exactly a random poll; a grain of salt is recommended here. There is something else about polls. This latest debt ceiling was simply another one of this Administration’s faux crises. Dems controlled Congress last year but perhaps they decided not to address this 'crisis' for the same reason they have decided not to put forward a budget for the last 830 days or so, but then Sec. Geither said, this year, that the drop dead date was May, then, August, then one Sunday morning in July he told all of us (via the Sunday shows) that Congress had to do something by 4pm that day before the Asian markets opened. But I wonder how the American public views all this. Can’t remember where I saw it this morning but someone was discussing that NYT/CBS poll and noted, in another poll that those that now declared themselves ‘liberal’ was about the same as those declaring themselves TEA party advocates- 20% (its acknowledged NYT/CBS poll was 18% support-pretty close). The interesting thing in that second poll was that those declaring to be conservatives was 40%. During the debt ceiling debate the fear of Republicans was that the Dems would successfully label the TEA party caucus as causing a ‘default’ or Dow drop and make the GOP share the bad economy. I might suggest that the drop of TEA party supporters by mainstream GOPers or TEA party leaning participants fearing just this outcome was reflected in the NYT/CBS poll. However, whoever the GOP fields in the 2012 election will garner both mainstream Repubs and those supporting the TEA party. But there is something else: recent tradition has seen a split of each, liberal, conservative, and independent voters of about 1/3 the total for each (maybe a few points less for conservatives). Where did the 10% increase in conservatives come from? My guess is from independents. Liberals (now 20%) probably lost many to those that now declare independent status. Further, many independents may have now decided to lean conservative thus increasing the conservative share. This shift is towards the right which is consistent with the claim that America is a center right country. I often wonder about President Obama being a transformative president. Is it true in the sense that his policies, now on record, have awakened Americans to the contrasting choice they face this next Presidential election and will his statist agenda be perceived as contributing to the prolonged recovery, adding to world economic angst, and shift the politics of the U.S further rightward?; If so, for how long?

JM

 

[JamesMorrison]

They said the same thing about the *chortle* "Republican Revolution", back in 1994...We all know how that one imploded with a whimper.

So far, all I've heard out of the current bunch is a lot of talk and have seen precious little action.

When they propose and pass real cuts to the budgets, rather than a mere shaving of a scant few percent off of baseline increases, then I might be swayed.

All good points. Your sceptisim is noted and warranted. But there might be a difference from the Gingrich et al effort and a conservatively controlled legislative effort in 2013 onward. This especially with a conservative executive branch. I know this is all hopey, changey type stuff on my part. But I think there is cause for optimism:

Conservatives/Rinos control only 1/6 of the government but we have seen:

Serious Washington dialog is over cuts (even if on the rate of spending-its a start) not spending increase amounts.

As regards RINOs ,they have newfound conservative religion as those such as Orin Hatch may well be targeted (can I still say that?) by more conservative candidates.

A real fight over the debt ceiling that has allowed conservatives to get some of their demands as unsatisfying as they may be.

A TEA party Caucus of Freshman and a few veterans that answer your sceptisim with real hard votes.

The perception of a conservative vanguard (TEA party caucus) advancing against a progressive rear guard action consisting mainly of Democratic ad hominom and class warfare-will the voters take note?

Vote on the BBA.

It all, of course, hinges on 2012 and how the voters perceive both the Dems, GOP, and the TEA party. The president's stewartship of the economy is also involved but he will simply go negative in the campaign. After all, what can he run on that is positive? The "brave and gutsy decision" to kill Osma bin Laden, in reality, was a no brainer.
But your sceptisim is of value in making true conservatives work harder to obtain 'real' results that actually would change Washington.

What is needed for a conservative agenda to be legitimate is a 2012 mandate from the voters. Having total control of the government does not a mandate make as we have seen in the passage of Obamacare and its national unpopularity. But, if the 2012 is a blowout for the GOP they can safely move the country to the right. If not conservatives will have to go for a balanced effort. That is why, I think, the GOP could only go so far without risking the 2012 election. Plus, playing legislative chicken with Obama who doesn't seem to know or even care about other's viewpoints or the country's welfare puts the country in jeopardy. His only calculus is how can he advance his political career and how can he blame the opposition when things go wrong. Obama is not leading because he is in perpetual campaign mode.

JM

 

[Foxfyre]

Expanding on Jim's comments, I honestly don't know the political affliliations of most of the people in our local Tea Party movement. I do know that Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Libertarians, and people who identify with none of the above are involved. At rallies, the very few who bring signs diverting from the focused mission (gun control, abortion, gay rights, etc.) or who have signs that are unnecessarily ugly re the President or whomever, are politiely asked to put them away.

They all do except for a few folks there that nobody knows who we assume are anti-Tea Party plants. They will never identify themselves but fall all over themselves to get in front of a camera and/or microphone when the media shows up. When the media leaves, they also disappear.

All this is to say that the Tea Party movement here and in other states that I am familiar with isn't really political. It is committed to one mission: stop the insanity and they know they have to elect equally committed people to high office to get that done.

 

[JamesMorrison]

... I honestly don't know the political affliliations of most of the people in our local Tea Party movement. I do know that Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Libertarians, and people who identify with none of the above are involved. At rallies, the very few who bring signs diverting from the focused mission (gun control, abortion, gay rights, etc.) or who have signs that are unnecessarily ugly re the President or whomever, are politiely asked to put them away.

They all do except for a few folks there that nobody knows who we assume are anti-Tea Party plants. They will never identify themselves but fall all over themselves to get in front of a camera and/or microphone when the media shows up. When the media leaves, they also disappear.

All this is to say that the Tea Party movement here and in other states that I am familiar with isn't really political. It is committed to one mission: stop the insanity and they know they have to elect equally committed people to high office to get that done.

Quickly here, the TEA party has focused on the simple goal of smaller less intrusive government from which follows all the rest whether that be social efforts or whatever. The individual people at a more meaningful local level choose. This is the spirit of the founders and our constitution. My takeaway of all this is simply that there is a growing movement among all Americans that sees the TEA party's point and agrees with its simple goals. It is the left that wants to assign all matter of complications with the movement in order to assign blame or place moral judgements upon that movement. Fox's personal observations merely show how much the left fears that simple message and feels it must destroy it. If the left can't control Americans and get their wealth via legislation,executive fiat, or judicial activism they are toast.

I've always whined about the American people not paying attention when it comes to who they chose as their leaders (as opposed to the left blogosphere who accuses them of their bumpkin like stupidity) well, no more.

JM