An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

The obligatory “Look, there’s a tea party” column

Jeff Emanuel has high praise today for the “Tea Parties” taking place at various locations around the country, a topic which thus far I’ve pretty much passed on. First, it’s being covered from hell to breakfast all across the blogosphere, and second… it’s getting blown out of proportion for all the wrong reasons.

To be clear, I’m not “protesting” these protests, nor do I plan on “crashing them” even if I had that much free time on my hands. In fact, it’s important to continue to support the ability of Americans to speak out publicly when they disagree with the actions taken by their government. In this case, they certainly have a point to make. It is not at all unreasonable to disagree with the current administration’s profligate spending and the path they’ve chosen to address the financial crisis.

My lack of enthusiasm, however, was summed up when I called in to Rick Moran’s radio show last night during a discussion of the same topic. The point is, I can still vividly recall standing side by side with more than a million people in New York City in early 2003 to protest the impending invasion of Iraq. (These were numbers that certainly dwarf anything we’ll see today.) Later that year my wife and I were standing with far smaller numbers of folks in more remote areas of New York and Pennsylvania for the same reason.

What came of it? The cruise missiles still fell, the troops still went in and we remain bogged down there to this day.

Why am I bringing up Iraq? Because today tens of thousands of Americans will take to the streets to protest the economic policies of the Obama administration. Tomorrow Barack Obama will still be president. The Republicans will still have less than 180 seats in the House. There will still be nearly sixty Democratic Senators in the upper chamber. Nothing is going to change. Just as with George W. Bush and the Iraq question, the administration is not “worried” about these tea parties, as much as the participants would like to think they are. Polling still shows that a solid majority of Americans are satisfied with the administration’s leadership on economic matters and are not looking to the GOP for alternate answers. The Democrats in Congress are not about to say, “Oh no! Tea parties! We better start voting for fiscal conservatism!

It’s important to have your voices heard, but don’t begin dreaming that it’s going to change anything. You’re only setting yourself up for additional heart-ache.

Are there problems with the concept behind these parties? Yes. The Jeff Emanuel piece I linked above revisits the history of the original Boston Tea Party. It’s worthwhile to remember that those individuals were destroying vast amounts of private property, breaking the law, and fostering an armed revolution which led to all out war and the ouster of the government in charge of the country at that time. If you’re not endorsing actual treason, this really isn’t good branding for the “movement.”

It has also been pointed out that some of these participants may just be doing this because they would take any cudgel to wield against Barack Obama. I’m sure that’s true in some cases, as there are more than enough activist partisans to go around on all sides. But that doesn’t dilute the validity of their message, nor invalidate their right to protest and have their voices heard. And yes, the vast majority of these people were not taking to the streets and organizing these types of protests when George W. Bush ran up the deficit and spent like a drunken sailor, but a lot of them were still unhappy about it. It’s just easier to take to the streets when there’s somebody from the other party in charge.

So I would advise those who disapprove to not try to interfere with these activiites. During the Iraq war protests there were groups of reprobates who actively worked to organize “counter-protests” which included intimidating elderly ladies into leaving the field, rather than simply stating their own opposing point of view. It was despicable then and it would be equally despicable now to do the same to tea party protesters.

This is democracy in action. It’s not going to result in any changes, but it’s an important part of our society and our rights. It should be embraced if you want the same right to object next time the government does something you don’t like.

  • DaGoat
    My obligatory response:

    There are about 5 posts now all with varying points so I'll try to tie them all in here. Some points people are making:

    1. The Tea Parties are useless because the Iraq protests didn't work - I disagree, the reason we have a Democratic senate, congress and president is partially because of opposition to the Iraq war. It's very likely Obama will raise taxes at some point and not just on the uber-rich. These protests will give fiscal conservatives a base for further opposition when the time comes.

    2. the Tea Parties are unfocused - I agree to an extent. The only thing you can really criticize Obama right now for is over-spending and his lack of attention to pork and earmarks. Still the anti-tax and smaller government messages may be useful down the road. Overall though I think there are too many messages trying to compete and a better focus would be helpful.

    3. The Tea Partiers are inconsistent hypocrites - partially true since they did nothing when the GOP raised the deficit. Still I am happy they are pushing for fiscal responsibility even if it took them a while.

    4. The Tea Partiers just don't like Obama - undoubtedly true of some, how much who knows.

    5. The Tea Parties are being organized by crazy loons like Hannity and Beck - partially true, it seems like some parties are organized locally and others are not. There is not a consistent set of rules for all the protests. I personally would not be comfortable participating in anything associated with Beck and Hannity.

    Bottom Line - I think peaceful assembly supporting fiscal responsibility is a good thing, warts and all. I wish the message was more focused, I wish Bush and the GOP hadn't got us in this mess, and I wish we could weed out the obnoxious talking heads, but you can't always get everything you wish for.
  • davemartin7777
    "So I would advise those who disapprove to not try to interfere with these activiites."

    First of all it's spelled "activities".

    Second, the honest thing for you to have done would have been to completely recuse yourself of this issue because you are obviously accepting money from Fox News, aren't you?

    Why don't you disclose that fact you're on Rupert Murdock's payroll?

    Your opinion on this issue could not be more disingenuous.

    Are you getting money from Fox News or not?
  • Rambie
    Davemartin7777, Jazz is far FAR from a Fox News talking head. If you have read his posts it would be clear. Bad form dude, bad form.

    Jazz, "It is not at all unreasonable to disagree with the current administration’s profligate spending and the path they’ve chosen to address the financial crisis."

    Jazz, I know you didn't always agree with the Bush admin so I'm not pointing at you. Like DaGoat I have to wonder were all these fiscal conservatives were during the past 8 years and would they be piping up now if McCain had won.


    DG, "The Tea Partiers are inconsistent hypocrites"

    Agreed DaGoat, I have no issues with citizens using their rights to assemble and have a peaceful protest. Some of these people cheer leading the parties now where nowhere to be seen on fiscal issues for the past 8 years. Great they've arrived at the "Party" late but would they be singing the same tune if Nov worked out differently?
  • Anna
    Rambie said:

    "Some of these people cheer leading the parties now where nowhere to be seen on fiscal issues for the past 8 years. Great they've arrived at the "Party" late but would they be singing the same tune if Nov worked out differently?"

    Kind of sad that this is pretty much a rhetorical question due to the intense partisanship of many of the organizers. I would have to say that no, they wouldn't be singing the same tune if the POTUS had an R for his party affiliation.
  • jchem
    If the POTUS had an R for party affiliation, then these protests would probably just be made up of a bunch of folks from the other side protesting something else. I mean, we just had the 6-year reminder of the Iraq War in March and I didn't see a whole lot of protesting going on compared to years past.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC