'Would the Tea Party Exist....'

[Foxfyre]

The left sure is focused on race.

Hmmmm.

That does seem to be the court of last resort for them. They can't attack the principles themselves without looking like idiots. So they attack and insult those holding the principles and try to marginalize, diminish, discredit them. And of course, being the race conscious folks they are which makes them the racists, they think calling others 'racist' is the worst and scariest insult they can heap on them.

I think it is interesting to wonder if the Tea Parties would have emerged if McCain had been elected. My experience with the Tea Partiers is they are in no way motivated or concerned about political party. So if he had governed even close to the way Obama has governed, I have to believe the Tea Parties would have been generated anyway.

 

[Si modo]

The left sure is focused on race.

Hmmmm.

That does seem to be the court of last resort for them. They can't attack the principles themselves without looking like idiots. So they attack and insult those holding the principles and try to marginalize, diminish, discredit them. And of course, being the race conscious folks they are which makes them the racists, they think calling others 'racist' is the worst and scariest insult they can heap on them.

I think it is interesting to wonder if the Tea Parties would have emerged if McCain had been elected. My experience with the Tea Partiers is they are in no way motivated or concerned about political party. So if he had governed even close to the way Obama has governed, I have to believe the Tea Parties would have been generated anyway.

Because of Bush's last hurrah with the checkbook before ducking out of the WH, anyone who kept up that sort of insanity would have motivated protests. Based on McCain's track record, I have little doubt of the same.

 

[Avatar4321]

I suppose that depends alot on what John McCain would have done once elected. Because I could easily see the Tea Party existing with him as well.

Of course, the way this administration has completely ignored the will of the people and forced legislation through has seriously helped the Tea Party gain momentum. So it wouldn't likely be as strong.

 

[Eccgmike]

What part of Tea Party are you all not getting? They are the silent majority of voters. They are made up of Repubs, Dems, and independents. They are sick and tired of both parties.
They want to get back to the republic form of government. Where it is a government repesentaion of the people by the people and not the special interests and only the special interests aka lobbyist's!!!!!

Bullshit.

They are NOT a majority.

They are a right wing fringe group.

Oh!,... Well since you said that it MUST be true!!! You kooky lib's either just don't get it, or you think if you say something over and over, perhaps it will become truth. I guess 73% of American's aren't REALLY for the immigration bill, and Eric Holder is a really smart guy! The reason lib's always end up back at the "Tea partier's" is because they ARE the majority, and they ARE a MAJOR threat to the left wing agenda! Brown, Christie,Bennett......all examples of the "fringe-ness" of the tea partier's . Don't worry kookalibs, your brief run is nearing the end. As always, when you do manage to "dupe" the American people to give you a shot, you guys act as if you have liscence to shove every last radical policy down our throats, and you always get pushed right out again!! Just look at history, it doesn't lie. So enjoy the stage for a few more months, cause the lights are going down, and nobody's in the balcony!

 

[midcan5]

The left sure is focused on race.

That does seem to be the court of last resort for them. They can't attack the principles themselves without looking like idiots. So they attack and insult those holding the principles and try to marginalize, diminish, discredit them. And of course, being the race conscious folks they are which makes them the racists, they think calling others 'racist' is the worst and scariest insult they can heap on them....

Only at the fringe, please read the words posted and not your own personal limited biased view of others.

When key leaders of the tea party admit it would not have formed had McCain won, I think you have to believe them. Now this was only two people but since they represent the party, I think their words valid. Most forget the Clinton election, and the same sentiment, the only thing missing was a tea party. Of course they had conservative think tank money, 40 million of your money, and a real flunky, Kenny Starr. It is a republican thing, be honest for a change, a real change.

 

[Foxfyre]

The left sure is focused on race.

That does seem to be the court of last resort for them. They can't attack the principles themselves without looking like idiots. So they attack and insult those holding the principles and try to marginalize, diminish, discredit them. And of course, being the race conscious folks they are which makes them the racists, they think calling others 'racist' is the worst and scariest insult they can heap on them....

Only at the fringe, please read the words posted and not your own personal limited biased view of others.

When key leaders of the tea party admit it would not have formed had McCain won, I think you have to believe them. Now this was only two people but since they represent the party, I think their words valid. Most forget the Clinton election, and the same sentiment, the only thing missing was a tea party. Of course they had conservative think tank money, 40 million of your money, and a real flunky, Kenny Starr. It is a republican thing, be honest for a change, a real change.

There ARE no 'key leaders' of the tea party movement, so I don't feel obligated to believe them. There is no "Tea Party" (capital T - capital P) And I don't feel obligated to accept your interpretation about what is 'honest'.

If McCain had won and governed right of center and had avoided most of the issues the Tea Partiers are addressing, then there would have been no Tea Party movement. If he had continued down the fiscally irresponsible road and continued to increase the scope and authority of government as we have seen the last couple of years, then I believe there would have been a Tea Party movement no matter who was in the White House.

Until folks like yourself have the ability to know what the Tea Partiers are all about and are capable of honestly assessing that, you are hardly in a position to lecture me about honesty.

Do have a nice day.

 

[Tom Clancy]

FoxFyre, there's no need to waste your time, He Probably believes the Tea Partiers are paid by Fox News.

 

[Foxfyre]

FoxFyre, there's no need to waste your time, He Probably believes the Tea Partiers are paid by Fox News.

I don't expect everybody to appreciate the Tea Partiers or see them as a constructive thing. I do expect people to represent them honestly, however, and I will continue to call them on it when they don't. I don't believe in letting the opposition determine either the language or the agenda.

But you're probably right and I am wasting my time.

 

[midcan5]

Ostrich, thy name is republican conservative. Ignoring reality is a quality you guys possess way too much of. But why this fact is denied does perplex me. I guess though it is the normal American meme that [you] we are special, when you are really the same complainers, whiners, biased non think tanks, and assorted wingnuts that tried to drive Clinton from the presidency. Face reality for a change, you may get used to the view.


Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated - NYTimes.com

"The 18 percent of Americans who identify themselves as Tea Party supporters tend to be Republican, white, male, married and older than 45.

They hold more conservative views on a range of issues than Republicans generally. They are also more likely to describe themselves as “very conservative” and President Obama as “very liberal.”

And while most Republicans say they are “dissatisfied” with Washington, Tea Party supporters are more likely to classify themselves as “angry.”

The Tea Party movement burst onto the scene a year ago in protest of the economic stimulus package, and its supporters have vowed to purge the Republican Party of officials they consider not sufficiently conservative and to block the Democratic agenda on the economy, the environment and health care. But the demographics and attitudes of those in the movement have been known largely anecdotally. The Times/CBS poll offers a detailed look at the profile and attitudes of those supporters. "

 

[midcan5]

"Since the Tea Party is getting such national attention, our God’s Politics blog is going to begin a dialogue on this question: Just how Christian is the Tea Party Movement — and the Libertarian political philosophy that lies behind it? Let me start the dialogue here. And please join in.

Libertarianism is a political philosophy that holds individual rights as its supreme value and considers government the major obstacle. It tends to be liberal on cultural and moral issues and conservative on fiscal, economic, and foreign policy. This “just leave me alone and don’t spend my money” option is growing quickly in American life, as we have seen in the Tea Party movement. Libertarianism has been an undercurrent in the Republican Party for some time, and has been in the news lately due to the primary election win of Rand Paul as the Republican candidate for a Senate seat in Kentucky. Paul has spoken like a true Libertarian, as evidenced by some of his comments since that election last week."

How Christian is Tea Party Libertarianism? - Jim Wallis - God's Politics Blog

 

[bodecea]

Boy oh boy, all of a sudden a LOT of people are worried about the Tea Party.

you have to wonder why?

could it be the PROGRESSIVES are seeing their Lose of Power happening with election after election.?

Goodbye to ya Progressive freaks, wouldn't want to be ya.

Is the "Tea Party" still around?

 

[LANMaster]

Yes, the TEA party movement would still have developed if McCain had won.

McCain is no fiscal Conservative. And that is really what the TEA Party movement is all about.

It's not GOP, but fiscal Conservatism. It's the Independent candidate's dream .... so long as that Independent is fiscally conservative.

 

[Foxfyre]

Yes, the TEA party movement would still have developed if McCain had won.

McCain is no fiscal Conservative. And that is really what the TEA Party movement is all about.

It's not GOP, but fiscal Conservatism. It's the Independent candidate's dream .... so long as that Independent is fiscally conservative.

I honestly don't know how John McCain would have governed. I have opposed many of his initiatives over the years as being far too liberal to be good for the country, and I was strongly opposed to him winning the GOP nomination. But I do think that basically, as politicians go, he might be one of the more honest and consistent ones. Up until mid 2008, the deficits were coming down, the budget was approaching balance without tax increases, the developing cyclical recession appeared to be a mild and short lived one, and the election hadn't happened yet. The Tea Partiers were furious at the fiscal imprudence of the Republicans, but all in all there was no srong incentive for Tea Parties to organize. I think the seeds had been planted though.

Then came the housing bubble collapse that set us all reeling. McCain, among many others, supported TARP and we swallowed hard and didn't raise too much of a stink, but that is when the red warning flags started seriously popping up. Everybody waited to see if Obama would be as good as his campaign rhetoric. And the liberal Democrats were rewarded with a Congressional super majority along with him that November.

Then in February, it was the dishonest appropriations bill passed early on coupled with an unconscionable and fiscally mad stimulus package initiated by the Obama/Pelosi/Reid machine that frightened the Tea Partiers enough to start mobilizing in earnest. And it was the equally unconscionable, irresponsible, and fiscally suicidal healthcare overhaul coupled with a proposed federal budget that only a madman could endorse that goaded them into high gear.

Would a President McCain have supported that pork laden appropriations bill? Senator McCain voted against it.

Would a President McCain have supported a stimulus package? Senator McCain led the fight against it.

Would a President McCain have signed a Pelosi/Reid designed healthcare bill into law or accepted that insane budget? Senator McCain strenuously opposed both.

Given the Democrats' super majority status however, they could have overridden a Presidential veto. Would they have? I don't know.

But you may be right, that if McCain had dusted off his conservative roots and governed from a sensible position right of center on all important policies, the Tea Partiers might still have mobilized to get rid of that super majority.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda......some things its fun to speculate about. But we just don't know.

 

[midcan5]

There would be no tea party if McCain had won. Analyzing his record means little, the key element is he is a republican and the tea party is republican - plus a few fringe nutcases. Denying reality is nice but no tea party candidate exists as the piece below shows. To repeat, the same craziness occurred when Clinton won. Bush had relative political peace until he turned out to be so large a buffoon even the conservatives disowned him.

"There is no Tea Party.

Forget the internal documents showing that the “Tea Party Express” outfit is merely a blatant, cynical effort to make money for the PR agencies who are organizing crowds. Those are just facts and can easily be dismissed by anyone willing to close their eyes.

But less easily dismissed is that for all the effort of the PR agencies putting together rallies, putting together town halls, putting together “conventions,” there’s one thing they somehow haven’t been able to put together, that you’d think would be really important for a political party –

Candidates.

I don’t mean Republican candidates who say they support the “Tea Party,” pandering to get “Tea Party” votes. No, no, I mean people running on an actual Tea Party Ticket.

For instance, there was angst-ridden outrage last week in California when Sarah Palin endorsed fired Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina for the Senate over the supposed “Tea Party Candidate,” Chuck DeVore. Except that, you see, Mr. DeVore is a Republican. He’s running in the Republican primary. He wants to be the Republican Senator.

If the Tea Party actually existed, if Tea Party People truly had the courage of their convictions, if the Tea Party wasn’t merely a PR gimmick – then we’d see Chuck DeVore running in the Tea Party. "

What if You Held a Tea Party and Nobody Came? - Robert J. Elisberg - Open Salon

 

[Foxfyre]

There would be no tea party if McCain had won. Analyzing his record means little, the key element is he is a republican and the tea party is republican - plus a few fringe nutcases. Denying reality is nice but no tea party candidate exists as the piece below shows. To repeat, the same craziness occurred when Clinton won. Bush had relative political peace until he turned out to be so large a buffoon even the conservatives disowned him.

"There is no Tea Party.

Forget the internal documents showing that the “Tea Party Express” outfit is merely a blatant, cynical effort to make money for the PR agencies who are organizing crowds. Those are just facts and can easily be dismissed by anyone willing to close their eyes.

But less easily dismissed is that for all the effort of the PR agencies putting together rallies, putting together town halls, putting together “conventions,” there’s one thing they somehow haven’t been able to put together, that you’d think would be really important for a political party –

Candidates.

I don’t mean Republican candidates who say they support the “Tea Party,” pandering to get “Tea Party” votes. No, no, I mean people running on an actual Tea Party Ticket.

For instance, there was angst-ridden outrage last week in California when Sarah Palin endorsed fired Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina for the Senate over the supposed “Tea Party Candidate,” Chuck DeVore. Except that, you see, Mr. DeVore is a Republican. He’s running in the Republican primary. He wants to be the Republican Senator.

If the Tea Party actually existed, if Tea Party People truly had the courage of their convictions, if the Tea Party wasn’t merely a PR gimmick – then we’d see Chuck DeVore running in the Tea Party. "

What if You Held a Tea Party and Nobody Came? - Robert J. Elisberg - Open Salon

Alas another one drinking the kool-ade furnished by the leftwing 'let's destroy the Tea Party' campaign. You simply don't have a clue what the Tea Party is, who is in it, or what it is all about. Well back to the drawing board. There must be a way to educate the most brainwashed. At least I keep hoping.

 

[midcan5]

"As of 2004, the richest one percent of Americans possessed sixty percent of all wealth in the country, while the bottom forty percent accounted for a whopping two-tenths of a percent." 791 American companies outsource their work to foreign countries. Added together, how many jobs do you think this list comprises? "Currently there are 2.4 million job openings for 15.3 million unemployed Americans." At the top: Soaring incomes, falling tax rates


While I still am in agreement with my basic assessment of the tea party from few months ago, I have been re-reading John Kenneth Galbraith and it occurred to me the more appropriate name for the tea party would be the 'contented party.' Contented with their perks and privileges under republicans, but afraid democrats may ask them to make a small sacrifice for all Americans. The growth of the 'contented' in America has changed the dialectic so much that now 'greed' has become a virtue and personal philosophy for many Americans.

Reading the "Culture of Contentment" or "The Good Society" is reading a clairvoyant who not only sees the future, but they explain it in a detail that astounds. A similar situation took place when Clinton was elected. The bubble economy and its consequent recession are covered well in these two books. Check them out if you want to read honest, excellent economic writing and analysis.



"'The Culture of Contentment' is a deliberate misnomer. Galbraith is using irony here, irony little short of sarcasm. What he really means is the culture of smugness. His argument is that until the mid 1970s round about the oil crisis the western democracies accepted the idea of a mixed economy and with that went economic social progress. Since then, however, a prominent class has emerged, materially stable and even very rich, which, far from trying to help the less fortunate, has developed a whole infrastructure - politically and intellectually - to marginalize and even demonize them. Aspects of this include tax reductions to the better off and welfare cuts to the worst off, small 'manageable wars' to maintain the unifying force of a common enemy, the idea of 'unmitigated laissez-faire as embodiment of freedom,' and a desire for cutback in government. The most important collective end result of all this, Galbraith says, is a blindness and a deafness among the 'contented' to the growing problems of society. While they are content to spend, or have spent in their name, trillions of dollars to defeat relatively minor enemy figures... they are extremely unwilling to spend money on the underclass nearer home. In a startling paragraph he quotes figures to show that 'the number of Americans living below the poverty line increased by 28% in just 10 years from 24.5 million in 1978 to 32 million in 1988 by then nearly one in five children was born in poverty in the United States more than twice as high a proportion as in Canada or Germany." Peter Watson in "The Modern Mind"


If you want an eye opener please check these two books out.


[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Culture-Contentment-Penguin-economics-Galbraith/dp/0140173668/ref=sr_1_17?s=books&ie=UTF8]Amazon.com: Culture of Contentment, the (Penguin economics) (9780140173666): John Kenneth Galbraith: Books[/ame]

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Good-Society-Humane-Agenda/dp/0395859980/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8]Amazon.com: The Good Society: The Humane Agenda (0046442859981):…[/ame]


Also check out Dean Baker, Joe Bageant, and David Michael Green, they provide a viewpoint that is rare today. Money has bought media and controlled media and politics since The New Deal, and change has become much more difficult than it was for FDR or LBJ. Society moves back and forth, the tea party is an example of back. The contented class cries and cries and the corporations laugh and laugh.

The Conservative Nanny State

The Regressive Antidote - Mission Accomplished: The Reagan Occupation and the Destruction of the American Middle Class

Joe Bageant: Tea Baggers are our canary in the coal mine

Jared Diamond on why societies collapse | Video on TED.com

Economics for all: Economic Policy Institute

 

[daveman]

Boy oh boy, all of a sudden a LOT of people are worried about the Tea Party.

you have to wonder why?

could it be the PROGRESSIVES are seeing their Lose of Power happening with election after election.?

Goodbye to ya Progressive freaks, wouldn't want to be ya.

 

[midcan5]

[

If whining equates to victory, you guys are clear winners or is that whiners?

Your (copied) response is you assume others fear a group that is really just representative of the usual human penchant for whining? Why would the tea party be any different from say the Greeks protesting a change in their benefits? The privileged, even when the privilege is small, don't appreciate any changes to the status quo.

Also, you assume there is substance to the tea party whining that would make some difference. If there is you need to show it. Whining is whining, the contented hate the thought they may have to support the society that supports them. Note too that they are mostly middle aged or older and have lots of time on their hands, if they were hard at life and work, they may want some rest, not active whining.

Galbraith nails it:


[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Culture-Contentment-Penguin-economics-Galbraith/dp/0140173668/ref=sr_1_17?s=books&ie=UTF8[/ame]

 

[Steerpike]

I think it is convenient for the left to view the Tea Party as a GOP creation. Which I don't think it is. It is also convenient for the GOP to view it that way, as they try to coat-tail to the extent the Tea Party gets traction.

It is undeniable, though, that the average tea party person is more likely to share GOP views than Dem views, although I know a few Dems who are part of the tea party locally.

If McCain had one, who knows what would have happened with the tea party. On the one hand, McCain and even Bush are not people who govern in the ways the tea partiers profess to want, so you could still see the movement come about. But on the other hand, it takes a certain amount of 'critical mass' to get people motivated and to turn out for something like the tea party events, particularly those members who haven't been politically active before. Even if those same people didn't like McCain, there may not have been enough dislike or concern for people to show up to tea party events.

 

[daveman]

[

If whining equates to victory, you guys are clear winners or is that whiners?

Your (copied) response is you assume others fear a group that is really just representative of the usual human penchant for whining? Why would the tea party be any different from say the Greeks protesting a change in their benefits? The privileged, even when the privilege is small, don't appreciate any changes to the status quo.

Also, you assume there is substance to the tea party whining that would make some difference. If there is you need to show it. Whining is whining, the contented hate the thought they may have to support the society that supports them. Note too that they are mostly middle aged or older and have lots of time on their hands, if they were hard at life and work, they may want some rest, not active whining.

Galbraith nails it:


[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Culture-Contentment-Penguin-economics-Galbraith/dp/0140173668/ref=sr_1_17?s=books&ie=UTF8]Amazon.com: Culture of Contentment, the (Penguin economics) (9780140173666): John Kenneth Galbraith: Books[/ame]

I see you have yet to learn the difference between your opinion and fact. And that your opinion isn't fact because you really, really, really want it to be.

Oh, and "copied" response? I created that image.