What is the Tea Party Movement?

[Centexfarmer]

My BFF since Middle School is a big time supporter of the "Tea Party Movement."

He's also a declared "Libertarian" and a "Credentialed Member of the Texas Republican Party."

He's also "straight" and doesn't have a problem letting anyone know that his BFF is a Gay "Liberal" Democrat. That would be me.

We have this back and fourth, he sends me links to Alex Jones, and I send him articles from the New York and LA Times.

He supports the Tea Party Movement, and loves Sharon Angle.

Though he's a registered "Republican" and hates the current GOP almost as much as I do.

The only thing that I dislike more than the current DNC is the GOP in all of it's manifestations!

However I've found that I can't support the Tea Party Movement.

My BFF is pissed by this because I agree with a lot of their principles and ideals; less government, fiscal responsiblity, etc.

Here's why:

The "Tea Party Movement" in my opinion has been usurped by the antithesis of Newt Gingrich; Dick Army. The former Republican Texas Congressman, and resident Gay Hater.

Remember the "Barney Fag" comment?

Anyway Dick Army has a New Book:

Give Us Liberty: A Tea Party Manifesto.

Which brings me to FreedomWorks.org.You cant' even log onto that ^ link without first being assaulted by Glenn Beck's image.

From the Washington Post:

Dick Armey's 'tea party' history is a strange brew


From that article:

The problem with Democrats and other "people here who do not cherish America the way we do," he explained, is "they did not read the Federalist Papers."

Yeah, and I'd be willing to bet that Sara Palin, and many of their Candidates running for election (Early voting starts Monday!) haven't read it either.

Here's a Quiz question:

Who here (without Googling!) can tell me what the Federalist Papers are, and how they contribute to the since ratified U.S. Constitution of 1788?

I really have a HUGE distrust of any political party that seeks to divide for political gain. (Challenge me on that, and I'll explain what I see as the difference.)

Any candidate, any party, any group that seeks to unite for the greater good of "We the People" as Americans will get my support.

Any group that seeks to divide, while they rape and pillage our National Treasury, sell out their constituency for political expediency and to ensure that they remain in power, or regain power, while selling the American Electorate a bill of goods, are more traitors to the cause than any "terrorists" threat that we could experience from some "fundamentalist."

The Tea Party Movement may actually be legit.

But what is it, and will it still be around if some if not all of "their" candidates win next month?

 

[swerve]

will it still be around if some if not all of "their" candidates win next month?

Thats a really good question...

I suspect that some of the candidates (if not all) are just trying to garner that "block vote"...

What if the movement was ENTIRELY made up by FOX news???

I mean, the news media in LARGE part gets their "news" from OTHER news media...

Interesting perspective that just raises more questions...

 

[Centexfarmer]

Why would you want to turn over the complex responsibility of governing to a group of people who hate government?

That's like hiring an arsonist to be the general contractor for the renovation on your house.

Or asking a militant vegan to get the meat and work the grill at the next family barbecue.

I mean, really?

I never suggested that I'd ever consider casting my vote for any one of them.

But I LOVE your analogies.

 

[CowboyBob]

Good point Unclean.

A Tea Party Candidate should have a slogan like:

"If You Hate the Government, Vote For Me".....?

 

[MrBubulino]

Basically, this:

 

[construct]

But what is it, and will it still be around if some if not all of "their" candidates win next month?

Are you asking what happens to them when the outside becomes the inside? Are you asking if they'll be red dogs (analogous to blue dogs)? Are you asking if the Tea Party will continue their hatred of government?

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

As far as I've been able to figure out...

The Tea Party is mostly a 21st century version of the White Flight when white people were scared out of their Los Angeles neighbourhoods by being told that they were going to be taken over by blacks and hispanics.

Their reaction was to panic and move to the Valley. So Van Nuys is the fault of them. On behalf of white people everywhere, I apologize.

But the Tea Party is basically a bunch of white people who aren't quite ready to share their equality with people of colour.. people with different ethnic backgrounds and different cultures... the GLBT community... They're scared. They're seeing their perfect white world being taken from them.

And a group of scared people are VERY easy to manipulate.

A few billionaires and corporations have been very successful at harnessing that fear and turning it into a voting block. People who say that "we need tort reform" and they have no idea what it means. People saying "socialism" who don't really understand the concept. People saying things like "He's from Kenya" or "he's never shown the birth certificate" when they don't even really believe it.

And frightened people can be VERY dangerous. Wait and see where this goes. Because I've been told by a couple people that this is how the Third Reich came to be... the under-educated masses taking their revenge on the intellectuals and Jews and immigrants. And gays. This could get ugly.

 

[justapixel]

But now whenever I hear his name all I can think of is

That is like me saying, the only thing I can think of when I hear the name Bill Clinton is:

"I did not have sexual relations with that women".


Is that fair?

 

[jackoroe]

The Tea in Tea Party stands for Taxed Enough Already. They've had it with Washington dictating to us instead of following our wishes.

They aren't a top down group, but a grassroots group. They were formed by regular folks who felt disenfranchised. They aren't structured like the other two parties and that makes people nervous.

I like that they seem to have a grasp of the 10th Amendment in that government needs to be very limited in what it does. I especially like the fact that they do not have a social agenda. That's where the republicans went off the road. Government has no business legislating morality.

I'm not entirely comfortable with them seemingly taking over the republican party. I fear they will be co-opted at some point and be assimilated into neoconservatism. I guess I would have preferred they started their own party or simply run as Libertarians. But the hard reality is you need to belong to one of the major failure parties to get elected.

I like a great deal of what they stand for, but I'm not ready to pull the hook for republicans just yet. I'll stick with Libertarians for now.

The Federalist Papers were essentially a sales pitch for the unratified Constitution. They also serve as a window into the mind of Madison and what he intended by the each of the Amendments. Sadly, we don't teach about this important document in school. Most people have never heard of them.

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

They aren't a top down group, but a grassroots group. They were formed by regular folks who felt disenfranchised. They aren't structured like the other two parties and that makes people nervous.

I wish that part was true. I'd be more supportive.

But it's been pretty much proven that most of those "Moms and Dads" groups are all just invented and funded by the Koch brothers, two billionaires who are harnessing the fear and anger of people on the right.

Tell me... those "citizen's groups" that just form grass roots... who did you think was paying the hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay for those demonstrations... with sound systems and high-paid speakers and hundreds of policemen and huge armies of maintenance and security workers?

Some of those rallies have been promoted for a year in advance.. did you think that was free?

 

[fasteddy]

Why would you want to turn over the complex responsibility of governing to a group of people who hate government?

That's like hiring an arsonist to be the general contractor for the renovation on your house.
Or asking a militant vegan to get the meat and work the grill at the next family barbecue.

I mean, really?

If you believe as I do that government is the cause of our problems and less government is better government then that's who you want in charge of government. But if you believe like most liberals that government is the solution rather than the cause of problems then you want bigger government.

Of course to follow your line of reasoning we should only have farmers in the Dept of Agriculture, and businesspeople in the commerce department etc. etc.

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

If you believe as I do that government is the cause of our problems and less government is better government then that's who you want in charge of government. But if you believe like most liberals that government is the solution rather than the cause of problems then you want bigger government.

And of course... that's just absurd because nobody believes either of those things.

That's just asinine conservative talking points.

If the Tea Baggers think Government is the cause of problems, why are they constantly quoting all that silly "we the people" and "this is unconstitutional" and "our founding fathers meant for...." garbage and pushing for abortion laws, Anti-gay laws, anti-immigration laws, protections for billionaires, protections for banks and prayer in schools?

If liberals think more government is the solution, why are they railing against abortion laws, Prop 8, DADT, DOMA, the war machine, the Patriot act and government spying on private citizens?

 

[palemale]

They are mostly middle aged and older white people, many of whom have gotten the shaft economically, fear the demographic and cultural changes in our country, and lash out without really understanding any of the forces that have driven them to their current state of despair.

 

[CowboyBob]

They aren't a top down group, but a grassroots group.

OMG, do people actually believe that?

Do a little research into it and also the Koch brothers. Their billions have been financing it all along.

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

OMG, do people actually believe that?

Do a little research into it and also the Koch brothers. Their billions have been financing it all along.

And THAT is how gullible the older, white masses are. They're THAT easy to lead down the path like children following the pied piper.

It's sad that even in this day and age, it's still that easy to make people think they're part of a "citizen's group" when they're just pawns rallying to keep low taxes for the ultra-rich.

 

[CowboyBob]

Typical Tea Party Republican:

1) witch
2) raging homophobe
3) Nazi SS henchman
4) airhead diva

and they're doing a great job tearing apart the Republican party.

 

[purpilia25]

I've been to many of the Tea Party marches in Washington and I have a mixed view on the organizers and the people who come there. Many of the speakers and what they have are boring...there are some who have great things to say, others are just running rhetoric. The people there are all a very mixed group of people; I can tell you I have seen many more different races represented there recently.

My overall conclussion from talking to many people there is that, because it is sooo loosely formed with no real defined leaders, you can't really group them. I don't agree with everyone there, but when I go I just don't feel that the people at least want you to want everything that the movement represents.

 

[Centexfarmer]

I've been to many of the Tea Party marches in Washington and I have a mixed view on the organizers and the people who come there. Many of the speakers and what they have are boring...there are some who have great things to say, others are just running rhetoric. The people there are all a very mixed group of people; I can tell you I have seen many more different races represented there recently.

My overall conclussion from talking to many people there is that, because it is sooo loosely formed with no real defined leaders, you can't really group them. I don't agree with everyone there, but when I go I just don't feel that the people at least want you to want everything that the movement represents.

That's what seems to be what has my best friend all worked up. Not so much that people try to group them, but more so that certain demagogues with the GOP are trying to usurp their message; Dick Army, Newt Gingrich, Sara Palin, Fox News.

There may actually be a legitimate movement there, but they're clearly not as "mainstream" as some of their questionable promoters would like to make them out to be.

And when we hear phrases like "Tea Party Favorite..." who within the Tea Party decided that they were a favorite? Do they actually have an official "spokesperson?" Or is this decided through some type of polling?

As much as I might support some of their ideals, those who are either financing or trying to usurp their message for their own political gain certainly don't appear to be speaking for me or any other Americans that I know unless they're Libertarian, and even Ron Paul seems to be keeping his distance.