Understanding the Tea Party Movement
Mar 3rd, 2010 by David Anderson
Written by David Bozeman
Tuesday, 02 March 2010 13:37
Columnist Kathleen Parker recently called tea partiers “the noisiest sector of the GOP.” She chided members of the movement for attacking newly elected Massachusetts senator Scott Brown, who voted with Democrats in supporting a cloture motion on their $15 billion jobs bill. Brown, who conceded that the bill was imperfect, added that he hoped his vote would be “a strong step toward restoring bipartisanship in Washington.”
Parker did kindly note that most tea partiers are “not weird.” Kathleen, you are too kind. Such obligatory politeness softens the blow to come (and preserves her stature — such as it is — as a conservative columnist). She proceeds with: “But some are at risk of flying off into the blood-red zone of wing nuttery” and “the growing libertarian strain [within the party] combined with an anti-RINO (Republican In Name Only) attitude is making life increasingly difficult for moderates such as Brown.”
We can only hope!
Most tea partiers are reserving judgment on Senator Brown, but there are a few points about the Tea Party Movement that Ms. Parker and the senator should bear in mind.
First, this is not a top-down movement, fueled by charismatic personality and silky baritone oration, a la Barack Obama. Most tea partiers are motivated by their adherence to such principles as smaller government, less spending and lower taxes. While leadership, particularly in government, certainly matters, leaders tend, as often as not, to disappoint, so their actions are viewed somewhat skeptically. Still, most activists are confident that the right leader will present his or her self in due course for 2012. Until then, the real fun, a guiltier pleasure than a reality TV drama, is watching the growing fissure between President Obama and Democrats running for re-election in moderate and conservative districts.
Second, tea partiers do not send leaders to Washington to achieve bipartisanship. To Democrats who want to support any plank of the conservative agenda — welcome aboard. To the rest, tea partiers seek your defeat. Since liberals have grown their power incrementally, bipartisanship usually works to their advantage. Conservatism advances by holding to principle, thus tea partiers shun such banal fashion statements as ‘civility’ and the current already-worn-to-death ‘reconciliation.’
Finally, tea partiers do not do nuance. Not to sound anti-intellectual, but big-government elites have granted themselves enough rhetorical wiggle room to near effortlessly increase spending (called ‘investing’) and raise taxes on middle-income earners and business owners (i.e., ‘the rich’). While tea partiers need not be confrontational, they are at least direct. While the movement may have attracted some “wing nuts,” maybe Ms. Parker would like to detail how the GOP has been served by the nauseatingly conciliatory tones of John McCain, Arnold Schwarzenegger and George W. Bush.
David Bozeman, former Libertarian Party Chairman, is a Liberty Features Syndicated writer.
It’s about freaking time someone got it. Amen to David Bozeman…leave it to a Libertarian to figure it out.
If you’re sitting around waiting for Libertarians to figure things out, then you are in bad shape.
and yet Phil…they seem to be leading the way…hmmm…go figure
How many votes did Wendy Jones get, again?
Mr. Bozeman’s comments are relevant because the political system in America is broke and corrupt. If you believe in the infinite wisdom and brilliance of government of course you reject the Tea Party movement. However, if you are a realist and believe in Freedom, Liberty and Opportunity then you understand government is not the answer.
The giant farce government has become has motivated every day people to say “no more”. As recently as this week Sen Bunning from Kentucky made the bold statement to have the PAYGO law be enforced. Ten Billion dollars should be “paid for”. The man was vilified as a grouch and old man all the while we allow trillions and trillions of debt to pile up without one shred of accountability.
Just as I believe unions are a by product of management, so is the Tea Party movement a by product of a dysfunctional and disingenuous government.
Mike Protack
The trouble with this post is the same trouble the Tea Party has: Lot’s of vague complaints, clever slogans, discontent – but not one word about policy. Please say something real about something real. Anything. Just one idea. Say –
“I want to abolish Social Security”
“I want to abolish the FDA”
“I want to get rid of the minimum wage”
“I want to end unemployment benefits”
“I want to end food stamps.”
“I want to abolish the Securities and Exchange Commission.”
“I want the government to stop regulating credit card banks.”
Even the Communists had a platform. They said they wanted to abolish our US Constitution, take away all private property rights. Good solid proposals we could reject. Tea Party’s got nothing but outrage at life in general.
Give us something to vote on. Any politician can say the United States government sucks. Vote for me I will make it un-suck. You think you’re new, but, stirring up discontent with no solutions, that’s the oldest trick in the political book.
You raise a reasonable point. I would contend that you don’t seem to understand the unique nature of the Tea Party movement. It is not one that a person or small group of people founded and others rallied behind. It is like the American Revolution. The bottom up percolating of ideas. It is a social political movement not leader driven political movement.
Some in the movement agree with you. There is a movement to form a formal platform. It will flop. In my view because there is no formal organization. There are hundreds of independent organizations and millions who identify with the movement without belonging to any organization.
The most successful effort has been the 9/12 project. It reflects the feelings of a great many though not by any means all of the movement.
This article does a good job of capturing the movement. It is based in the same sort of concern that led to a balanced budget in the 90′s. The Perot movement had the same issues. The two major parties were afraid of being displaced and changed to accommodate it. The Democrats had to lose the Congress to learn the hard way, but Clinton got it. Republicans fulfilled the charge. Unfortunately when Kaisch, Archer,Gingrich, and Army left the scene, the party started losing its way.
The Republicans had to lose Congress to wake up. Now it may be the Democrats turn again. If it keeps up, there will be a third party.
It’s comical seeing how intellectually overmatched think123 is by the avergae TEA Party goer and yet he thinks his insults matter. There’s more policy at a TEA Party than any of think123′s progressive retreats.
The problem is progressives like think123 are too damn stupid to understand any of it. Instead he’ll defend all the progressive social welfare programs until he takes his last breath. There’s little point in arguing with his pathetic nonsense.
You want TEA Party policy? Go hunt it down on the internet…or open your eyes and ears and pay attention.
Think123 asks: Do you want to do away with mimimum wage.
EvanQ answers: Your stupid progresive.
Tell us what program The Tea Party wants to abolish from that list? Or are you sticking with “government sucks, elect me I’ll make it un-suck”.
Biggest Tea Party in American history happened in November 2008. More Americans than ever came out to vote for a new President. Close to 70,000,000 citizens picked President Obama. Wouldn’t the Founders be proud? We pretty much did what the Founders advised – anytime we we’re happy with the government we have the right to elect a new one. I was not at all happy with the old one.
So good luck at the polls in November.
Even the Communists had a platform….. (t)ea Party’s got nothing but outrage at life in general.
Not really. They want to restore the U.S. Constitution, particularly the ‘powers of Congress,’ i.e., Article I., Section 8. As Madison (‘the father of the Constitution) clearly articulated in the last 3 or 4 paragraphs of Federalist #41, ‘General Welfare’ is not synonymous with carte blanche. Today our government is, in a nutshell, illegitimate.
“Think123 asks: Do you want to do away with mimimum wage.
EvanQ answers: Your stupid progresive.” – think123
Actually…you’re an idiot….and yes do away with minimum wage…the market will regulate itself…it did just fine until the progressives started tinkering with things because they “had to do something”. In fact, more people becamse unemployed as a result of that program than would have under the depression had the government focused on HELPING business instead of punishing it.
“We pretty much did what the Founders advised – anytime we we’re happy with the government we have the right to elect a new one.” – think123
Which doesn’t give you the right to ignore the laws of our republic and the rules/procedures to push through your progressive/socialist agenda. This is NOT a democracy, is is a republic, despite your ignorance of both definitions and the founders intents. Just because YOU can’t understand that…doesn’t mean we should be forced to change the rules to suit your ideas.