I have been reading about the tea party movement for months now and I finally decided to write my own article about it. I found it interesting that there are so many different organizations bearing this name. Some of them seem to be sticking to the "core ideals" of the movement (fiscal responsibility, low taxes, small government) whereas others of them seem to be hotbeds of extremism, and still others seem to be supporting the mainstream Republican establishment. That page is my attempt to sort out some of the most prominent of the different groups bearing the "tea party" name. I'd be curious to hear what others think of these or other groups, or the movement in general.
They are racist, Islamophobic and other things. Of course they will tell you the extreme individuals are a minority.
I'd say the teaparty has as many "extremists" as the Republicans, or the Democrats. People like to lump people into nice monolithic voting blocks but it doesn't represent reality. Take the 2008 election that won Barack Obama the presidency, for instance. Black people in california showed up in droves to vote for the man. Unfortunately for supporters of gay marriage in California, Black people generally do not support gay marriage. Also true of latinos(50% of the California population) who are predominantly Catholic. Truth be told, it was Democrats who sunk gay marriage in California, and most of the Republicans I know voted for it. Swap over to the deep south and you have religious(social) conservatives. While these people scare the crap out of the Democrats, they tend to vote with the Democrats on most social issues related to helping the poor. As your blog states, the core value of the tea party is smaller government and fiscal conservatism. Period. It is the one common value that spans all the various groups you name. Sure there are lots of people within those groups trying attach riders to the message, like Christianity, or anti-abortion, or self promotion(Beck,Palin, Bachman), but I believe most people understand you can't own a pet without a few fleas. Are there a few racists in the group? You betcha, but no more than you find at an average Democratic rally or NAACP convention. Its comic to watch the the left and MSNBC label the group without success. First they were the Tea Baggers, then the Racists, now the Extremists. They are panicing because the message resonates with most independents and a LOT of Democrats. I've seen a few polls that say the tea party has more favorable ratings than either party. As long as they stick to a single message and dont get mired down in Abortion, Gay Rights, or any of the other crap, I think they have the potential of making the most sweeping changes in our government we have seen in half a century. Its already happening in places like Wisconson and Ohio. @IsraeI: Tell me again how you want to wipe out the population of Iran and IsraeI and kill all non-Muslims? Comic to watch you try and call anyone an extremist. Nobody breeds Islamophobia like you.
to me it sounds as though the libertarians burnt themselves and wanted to come up with a new name and hence Tea Party. By this time they may be brainstorming for a new one.
Funny that you think "Islamophobic" is a pejorative but "anti-semitic" is a compliment. There are extremists and moderates in any group of humans. The Tea Party is no exception to that rule... it's like the law of gravity... it exists whether you believe it or not. The basic tenets of the tea party are pretty similar to Libertarianism, and closer to the GOPs own roots than the current GOP. Hence the reason they tend to identify more with the GOP than DNC. As people in office in both parties are fiscally outta control (on budgeting their biggest difference is how they want to allocate money that isnt there)... the tea party is attempting to hold both to account on that score.
/chuckle Another label, and incorrectly placed in my opinion. For me, the Libertarians fall more into the "extremist" category(funny how anyone can be someone else's extremist). Don't get me wrong, I love watching John Stossell do what he does, and most of what he says makes a lot of sense, but I believe in government regulation and a mixed market economy. True libertarianism would quickly turn our society into something out of Lord of the Flies, IMO. I think it is possible to say our government has gotten WAY too bloated without embracing the idea of doing away with all government regulation. It doesn't take a genius to look at median wages for government workers as compared to equivalent jobs in the private sector and realize we have a problem. With all the labeling, name calling, hand waving, and confusion, common sense has a hard time surviving but I'm a believer.
I think the Tea Party Movement represents the traditional values that Republicans were previously known for. As the OP said: 1. Fiscal responsibility 2. Low taxes 3. Small government To an extent, the Republicans want to associate themselves with the Tea Party Movement; at the same time, they appear to be somewhat embarrassed by them. I may be completely wrong, that is just my perception. The Republicans still stand for these values (at least WAY more than Democrats), yet, it seems they have veered away from them in the last decade or so. (Of course, this is all a wide generalization.)
This are not GOP's ideals, it's just good economics and it's part of any political sector (except utopian fringes that barely exist nowadays). Fiscal responsibility is just that: fiscal responsibility. Do Dems brand themselves as "Fiscally irresponsible"? Don't think so. Low taxes: Nobody claims "High taxes just for the sake of it" The difference is that GOP thinks taxes should cover the bare minimum of services to keep the country functioning and Dems think that tax money has a more extensive function Small government: Same idea, I don't think anybody to expand gov't just because. The differences are ideologic, the level of taxation and gov't size are just consequences of that.
They aren't GOP Ideals, but they used to be. I agree these are basically good economic principals and common sense, but neither party has the fortitude to stick to them. Don't spend more than you make. Don't borrow what you cant repay. Don't borrow needlessly. Fact: We have a 14 trillion dollar debt. Fact: We have a 1.5 trillion dollar deficit Fact: The Democrats are fighting against any reductions in govt spending and pushing for higher taxes Fact: The Republicans are fighting against higher taxes but not really committed to cutting spending Those are the cold hard facts. Ryan proposes cuts and immediately come the slings and arrows : "Ryan wants to kill grandma". Does Ryan really want to kill grandma? Of coure not! I might be able to keep my devilish good looks and extend my lifespan an extra 10 years by hiring a personal trainer 3 times a week right now, but if I just lost my job and can barely feed my family, the personal trainer has got to go, period. Does that make me suicidal? A wise man once told me, hard decisions are usually obvious. They are hard because the obvious decision is going to involve a bit of discomfort. Enter the Tea Party, a group that claims to be willing to make the hard decisions most of the country realizes needs to be made. After all the bullshit about wanting to kill grandma, they seem to be the only people talking like adults. Sure, the differences are ideological, in the same way communism is a different ideology than capitalism. This seems like a dramatic oversimplification. The fact of the matter is, the ideology of the Democratic party, by definition, leads to bigger government. They may not put it in their campaign slogans, but everyone is aware of this fact. We have thus far stuck to the altruistic ideological differences between the parties, but it is worthy of note that there are very corrosive moral issues at play when you allow the government to become so large. We already see examples of this, with politicians using payolas to special interest groups in exchange for votes, government labor unions being at the top of the charts in this category. We vote for you, you bump our compensation. I look at the salaries and perks offered to our elected officials right now, and compare that to what their far more cultured and intellectual betters received a century and a half ago, and something is obvious. We are not on the slippery slope toward becoming a Kleptocracy. We are already there.
I kind of like them . A stronger US with a better economy is great for the entire world . Maybe in their patriotism they won't forget to pass some laws stimulation the manufacturing sector - that place has been neglected for the last two decades .
Oh c'mon... you know reality is just a crutch used by people that don't share his religious xenophobia.
I think the last thing we need is more laws to stimulate particular sectors. I also think this is not exactly in the spirit of the tea party movement. What I think we need is to simplify existing laws, remove the bureaucracy, tax burdens, and regulatory burdens that are holding back businesses. Furthermore, we would do well to selectively add taxes and regulatory oversight in such a way that it keeps jobs at home and encourages more wealth creation. For example, I would support a shift of taxes away from income tax (an anti-business, anti-wealth-creation tax) and instead to consumption-based taxes (which is a pro-conservation tax). Read my whole tax plan for more details. Another thing that I'd do is close loopholes and tax breaks that encourage companies to move overseas. Currently, there are tax breaks that allow and even encourage this, and I'd want to eliminate those first. This would raise some revenue and encourage more companies to stay home. But if we are going to have regulations, I think there's an intelligent way to do it. Maintaining stricter standards about how things are produced and about various contaminants might also encourage more domestic production. American goods are generally seen as higher quality and produced in a more environmentally sustainable way than goods produced in China. There have been frequent scares with contamination of various products from China. Aggressive inspection and restrictions to ensure that imported goods are actually safe would not only protect Americans, but it could make goods from China more costly. Right now, too much of the commerce coming in from China is based on the idea of cutting as many corners as possible, even when it puts peoples' lives and health at stake, and I would like to see that end.
The main issue of the Tea Party Movement is fiscal responsibility. I think that what really characterizes the Tea Party Movement is that it is mostly composed of people that are actually affected by the present economic times. And these people actually expect the people they elect to do what they promised to do. For many politicians this is extremist because it threatens their very existence. IMO, Sarah Palin is a Tea Party squatter. The more you attack the Tea Party the stronger they get. When you demonize people that have never had anything to do with politics before, they become more determined. The Tea Party is not a political party, it's a set of ideas. It's about a constitutional limited government, fiscal responsibility, and honesty in campaign politics. This scares the crap out of dishonest people.
The Tea Party movement would have been a stronger force as an independent party than aligned with the Republicans. In fact it no longer has an independent identity that would avail itself to the Independents that were its lifeline.
Then why is it 50% of Tea Party sympathizers say they are non-Republicans? I will take a non-answer as you have surrendered the topic.
RE: "Poll: Tea party less popular ...." Typical mistake of diehard liberals... listening to each other and thinking the echo means everyone agrees. Another such mistake is thinking "popular" is synonymous with "factual". The tea-party movement is not intended to function as a separate political party, no matter how badly the left wishes it would so votes that oppose them would be split. The tea party is functioning as intended, it's making members of the major parties accountable for their own fiscally irresponsible decisions. That the tea party has been extremely effective in changing the focus of debate scares the living shit out of the hard left, which explains why they (and "they" includes CBS) try so hard to discredit the tea party as some fringe lunatic religious group. It isnt the case, and if the left continues repeating it in hopes of marginalizing the impact... theyre wasting time. The movement isnt likely to go away, and it is having an impact on the national discussion. Watching the left squirm in the light that's being shined on them is btw, hilarious.
Then why is it 50% of Tea Party sympathizers say they are non-Republicans? Since you have no source for your statistic the statement is without merit. The pol you ignored indicates whoever they are, they are a lot less now than they were before the 2010 elections and their declining numbers are attributed to their extreme views other than fiscal responsibility and inclusiveness. It was the House Republicans and Tea Party Officials that stress the Republican alliance with the Tea Party per their legislation in raising the National Debt and the emphasis of its content that in fact was standard Republican policies. There was not an independent voice of the Tea Party during the Summer deliberations for raising the National Debt.
Here is a simple test that should give you an inkling as to whether you may be a closet tea party sympathaizer. [video=youtube;04MNf1YdNxI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04MNf1YdNxI[/video] If that video made you uneasy, you may be a tea party sympathizer.
Pot. Kettle. Black. Since you have no source for your statistic the statement is without merit There are no Tea Party officials, you fool. Since you have no source for your statistic the statement is without merit Since you have no source for your statistic the statement is without merit