We now have an idea of what and who the Tea Party is, but what does it all mean?
Despite the obvious racism of the thread photo, the Tea Party is not, in my not so humble opinion, inherently racist.* As with any large group of people, there will always be that element that has “darker” motivations.
(In the interest of fairness, the man holding the sign in the thread photo was booted out of his local Tea Party chapter.)
It is clear, however, that much of the anger-fueled rhetoric from the Tea Party is focused on President Barack Obama and his “liberal” agenda. That is curious in light of the fact that most progressives feel that Obama has not been liberal enough.
The “Tea” in Tea Party is an acronym for “Taxed Enough Already” and much of the focus of the Party is on taxes and spending. Another focus is on the Constitution and the constitutionality of recently passed laws.
Tea Party wrath is aimed at incumbent politicians, yet those same office-holders and former office-holders regularly speak at Tea Party events, so it would seem apparently that the majority of the wrath is directed at incumbent Democrats.
A few incumbent Republicans have been deemed insufficiently conservative for the Tea Party and some have even been turned out of office for that reason.
So, is the Tea Party movement a grassroots semi-organization that is non-aligned, or is it merely the hard-right arm of the Republican Party?
The political landscape of America is largely a two party system. While third parties periodically pop up, most are short lived and fail to actually win state and Federal offices.
Tea Party goals and the rhetoric that backs them up is exclusively that of the far right champions such as Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin. You can dress up the pitbull and slap on the make up, but it’s still a far right, Republican pitbull. There isn’t enough lipstick in the country to make that dog into anything else.
Is the Tea Party a viable political force for the future? A negative focus rarely makes for longevity, and the Party focus is largely negative.
The Great Recession will end, deficits will be reduced, benefits of TARP, the Stimulus and HCR will be recognized and, perhaps more important to the Tea Party, Barack Obama will leave office (after two terms) and the Tea Party will fade into a historical footnote.
*(Since I wrote this, the Tea Party Federation has kicked the Tea Party Express out of the Federation for a racist parody written and published by their spokesperson, Mark Williams. While I agree with little of the Tea Party philosophy, I do have to applaud their quick and decisive manner in dealing with a racist element within the Federation.)
William Stephenson Clark
18 responses to “Let’s have a Tea Party! Part III”
I’ve seen nothing and read nothing that changes my opinion that the te partiers are sore losers. Their complaints aren’t valid. If you take the subject of taxes and use facts — Americans paid the lowest taxes in 2009 for the last 50 years — why would complaints of taxes being too high be relevant? President Obama hasn’t been nearly as liberal as he promised during his campaign! Why would it be a surprise to anyone that he pushed for legislation that followed the exact political philosophy he spoke of repeatedly for two years before his election?
So, when you look at the facts, all you find is their side lost and they’re upset by that.
Solution? Get their side elected. That (no matter what else you’re told) is their goal.
And this is how the Party of No came into being – in my opinion.
The most effect the Tea Party has been on the Republican Party – it went from a big party to a rather narrower party (RINOs need not apply signs everywhere now).
When the original Tea Partiers (those rude and obnoxious town hall protesters) got all the media coverage, I think alot of establishment Republicans thought they could parlay all that energy into a concentrated movement against Obama and Democrats.
Little did they know – the Frankenstein monster grew out of control and has now turned on the very people that made them so powerful – those RINOs.
At the end of the day, the only thing that really matters is the perception people have about the Tea Party. No matter what the actual facts or how many racists they kick out of their group – the perception still remains the Tea Party is racist.
In my opinion – if these Tea Partiers, Fox News, radio talk entertainers and the Republican activists such as Andrew Breitbart continue to beat the drum about ‘reverse racism’ – it will only backfire on them.
And we have not even talked about how the Tea Partiers want Obamacare to be repealed but are so happy with Medicare (which is just another big bloated government health care program) but that Medicare is THEIRS – and therein lies the rub.
Tea Partiers may or may not be racists but they ARE selfish when it comes to getting government subsidized health care for themselves and they do not want anyone to get the same thing.
“We now have an idea of what and who the Tea Party is, but what does it all mean?”
That some people in this country want to elect someone they agree with more closely. It’s no different than always, they just use a new name, new costumes, but the goal is the same as its been for the ages. When your guys are out of power you motivate voters to get them back in.
I think people of today aren’t as different as the many ways we have of hearing about them. I think some people have always been as silly, as unkind, as deluded but we weren’t subjected constantly to the most silly, unkind and deluded. Today that’s what fills the hours of the many 24-hour news channels, it’s what is tweeted and blogged. Because the mundane is never as interesting as the spectacular and outrageous.
Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve. — George Bernard Shaw
The Republican Party is running out of time for 2012 and need to really concentrate on finding something beyond criticism on which to run. “Hell NO!” is a very limiting and short-term strategy. I know they need nothing more than being against Obama for their base. But their base isn’t enough votes and others need to know what they would do differently and how — complete with details and specifics. They can’t run on simply taking out the democratic majority and find success at the national level.
Remember that if the Republican Party doesn’t find both a leader and a plan before 2012 it’s likely President Obama will be reelected for a second term and four more years of potential SCOTUS appointments! 😉
He hasn’t completed two years of his first term YET, but, if the economy continues to improve, 2012 will be here very quickly. I haven’t seen a potential candidate for the Republican nomination who seems interesting enough to be a threat. Maybe someone will appear soon?
What does it all mean? Nothing new, except a bunch of costumes and mispelled signs.
These are people (old white guys, mostly, and the wives who do and think what they’re told) who have the means to travel, take off work, rent (0r buy) costumes, and are po’d that a black man was elected POTUS. Out of the many who “volunteered for the job, they didn’t have a viable candidate to run against him, and they still don’t. The fact is, besides their bitchin’, cute costumes, and mispelled words, they have NOthing.
We are not impressed. Laughing, yes. Impressed, no.
The thing I hear the most is that liberals are scared of the Tea Party.
When is laughing a response to being scared?
Part of the problem is one I face every time I make the statement that some of the most restrictive action concerning gun control were done by Reagan and G. H. Bush not Clinton.
It is part of the mindset of us and them and basic beliefs, the hard wiring is that Republicans are there safe guarding 2nd amendment rights and the Democratic is trying to take your guns away.
When looking at the two parties and comparing their basic beliefs as stated the natural direction of Conservatives would be the Republicans. But like my statement, the presumption does not stand up to the reality of the actions of the party .
And much like the claim that Republicans would eat their own children, there are some who would think nothing of using the innocently misguided for their own Political gains. We see that with the likes of Dick Army and the Tea party express group. But the largest majority of the Tea Partiers are serious and honest in their intent. But suffer from the angry villagers syndrome, they have taken up their pitch forks and torches to march on the monster’s castle. But failing to have the correct address. Are subject to simply wandering from castle to castle following anyone who shouts “THIS WAY!”.
I.E. Beck, Palin, Rush, Army and the list goes on of those willing to shout the phrase for their own profit.
Is there any way to actually have a calm conversation with those who ignore
— gun owners have fewer restrictions today than before President Obama was elected
–as tstb told us, more gun restrictions were enacted under Reagan and G. H. Bush than under Clinton’s two terms
–taxes are lower today then they’ve been for over 50 years
–our founding fathers knew religion should be kept separate
I’m sure I left out many points. And, I’m pretty sure there are points evil libaruhls are convinced of as strongly and shouldn’t be. When both parties hold firm to what could better be described as ‘urban legends’ than facts, where do you begin a calm conversation of looking to where we might find agreement?
btw, I see no chance of calm conversation with tea partiers. Why should I?
I’m asking for info I don’t have, insight I haven’t found, please.
I don’t find those statements that President Obama would do suchandsuch if he thought he could to be based on fact. I find those to be based on emotion and supposition.
When I hear any Republican/Tea Partier say that Obama would do suchandsuch, I always ask them – have you listened to the man or have you just listened to Fox News and Talk radio entertainers who are making millions to incite you into a frothy foam?
That usually makes them give me a big ‘hmmphh’ and they stomp off.
Yeah it is mystifying to me, the extent and the claims of what he meant by “It”.
I hate to keep coming back to it, but “kill Granny” anyone who had read the short amendment would have understood exactly what it was talking about and understood exactly what it would do.
That is the prime example of how blindly some believe in the Evil of the Left.
To the point that it calls for them to totally ignore what they believed of the left for years.
I will say it again, they is more likelihood of Liberals being willing to spend the entire National reserve to prolong someone’s life one day and to make sure they had a new puppy beside their bed. Then to cause them to die one hour earlier then they would have.
Which is as close a example of what has been the accusation about the Left for years!
Unreasonable delusion is the only way I could describe what is happening with the Right.
Shoot as I have said before I fell into it about Bill Clinton, there just was no proof or logic that could have been pointed to that would have convinced me I was wrong about him.
There were things that reaffirmed my beliefs and that did not help.
The talk of putting a high tax on each single round of ammo.
The Assault weapons ban was so broad and included many weapons that were not the intended weapons.
Unreasonable as many of the things presented by the anti-abortion people.
Part of the phobia that was baseless I see has weaned, the selves of ammo at Wal-mart are fuller. It took quite awhile before I finally was about to find a reason that made sense as to why they were not.
With two wars going on at the same time, the ammo makers were running three shifts to try and keep up with the demand from both the Government and the private section.
And with the phobia both the citizens and the gun dealers were buying up every amount that did make it to the shelves.
The gun dealers were in turn bumping up the prices to cash in on the phobia.
Indy I have found the same reaction from Palin supporters.
When asked what she has said that led them to believe that she have the answers?
They might repeat some baseless claims that I can shoot down with little effort.
Finally it is storm off after admitting to some extent that I was correct.
If that much!
Does anyone wonder how in the world a person could be a Palin supporter and what in the world are they supporting? What do they hear when she speaks that gives them something to support? She can’t even always be counted on to repeat the slogans well, and the rest of that word salad doesn’t contain information that would tell you anything.
Her supporters are proud to say Palin is a down-home, common person, common sense, non-elitist person who wants to take on Washington insiders and shake things up.
From all I’ve seen in actual life events is this:
Palin has parlayed her VP nomination into multi-million dollars for herself – hardly someone who can claim to be the common person.
Palin seems to be cozying up to those Washington insiders when they are able to further her ambitions.
Palin claims to have common sense. Simply throwing out 30-second soundbites to complex problems is not common sense – it is naive and highly dangerous.
Palin claims to not be an elitist. Nows this one intrigues me. I think when this is said it is intended to put down people who are educated. Since when has education become a bad thing?
And Americans do tend to want the underdog to win and will rally behind that person. But I want someone who is smart, educated and willing to govern the entire country – not just further their own ambitions with their own particular base of supporters.
I keep thinking about what that Republican Congressman that lost to the Tea Party candidate said to Chris Matthews –
Being stupid is one thing; but to be proud of being stupid is something else.
That pretty much sums up the Palin supporters/Tea Partiers in my opinion.