What is it about the Tea Party? I hear faux racism...I hear faux discrimination.
I just don't understand. Thoughts?
Meister, first, for the purpose of clarification, your term "liberal" I think we can safely assume, is used in the context of American progressivism/liberalism and not in its classical context. Classical liberalism (Wikipedia is a good source here) bears a strikingly familiar resemblance to American Conservatism, especially that of the American founding fathers, but no need to get too deep into the weeds here.
I have heard some people say that, as young children, we all start out as liberals. This is not meant as a slur to American Liberalism. As children we all are beholden, initially to those that rear us. In fact the success of parents, in large part, is measured in their ability to successfully wean their charges from the dependence they are accustomed to. Unfortunately, the older the individual becomes the more difficult it is for it to adjust to a state of independence. It becomes even worse when a central government assumes the role of parent and this type of relationship is continued, not only through the individual's life, but over several generations. The classical examples can be found in the U.S. and Europe by examining the American Welfare System and French society in general. The transitional difficulty is manifest in the French's unions' present difficulty in accepting a mere 2 year increase in the retirement age (something U.S. citizens accepted a number of years ago with little difficulty).
But we in America are fast approaching the French problem because of the power that has been afforded to the Unions representing government workers. There is a whole thread or two that might be devoted to this subject, but the point is that both government workers (state and federal) have become dependent on our government for very comfortable incomes, benefits, and retirement. These are all dependent on the largess of the politicians that run our government. Problem is it is not the wealth of the politicians that is being redistributed. It is that of taxpayers like you, me, and others like the Tea Party. There is now an effort by ordinary citizens like the Tea Party to rein in the spending. One can argue whether or not the T-Party is grassroots or Astroturf but that is a sideshow to what is actually happening in the country now which is simply citizens attempting to stand "athwart history yelling, STOP" the spending.
Conservatives/Tea Party types feel that the spending has us on the one way road to perdition. However, there is a problem with cutting spending, at least for Democrats and the left. The whole reason for being of the present Democratic Party is to obtain and keep political power. If not in power they cannot assure its patrons (NAACP, ACORN, SEIU, AFSCME, NEA, AFT...) that they will continue to receive the government largess that sustains them. If those depending on such government lose members and, more importantly, the revenue (from their union dues that are then contributed to the Dems) then the cycle is broken and the Dems' power slips away initiating a cascade effect of ever decreasing revenue and power.
So, what you have seen with the name calling, lying about, and generally nasty stuff has been drastic last minute scurrying around to discredit anyone that might interfere with the Dems cash cow cycle. At this point we should point out that there are many liberals out there that truly believe and keep the faith. These are the ones that us conservatives feel are worth trying to bring over to our side. However, all we can do is lead them to the fountain of information; they must be willing to partake voluntarily. But we should not kid ourselves that those dependent on the current government/Union/Democrat cycle are worth any such effort.
When you find people who call others names you probably have not found an open mind tolerant enough to listen to any argument whose conclusion might question their beliefs. They will say the same of us when our argument proves them wrong. However, what conservative needs an argument when we have the example of France?
JM
