Quote of the Day: the Tea Party Movement’s Future
Our political Quote of the Day comes from independent commentaror John Avon’s take on the Tea Party convention in Nashville, which he attended. He begins it this way:
As the National Tea Party Convention concluded this weekend, it’s clear that the Tea Partiers are propelled by two competing claims — a principled commitment to fiscal conservatism and a serious case of Obama Derangement Syndrome.
The first group remains true to the roots of the movement as it emerged almost one year ago amid bailout backlash. They feel like modern Paul Reveres, warning their fellow citizens about the unsustainable nature of our government’s deficit spending and unprecedented debt.
They still have an important civic role to play in our national debate.
The second group reflects the overheated, hyperpartisanship that emerged over the August town halls and the 9/12 march on Washington.
Oddly enough, this group embraced the tactics of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and applied them to the conservative cause, with angry confrontation and street theater protests. They ascribe to Obama every sinister characteristic imaginable — often a secret plot to undermine our constitutional republic and put in a socialist, one-world government in its place.
He ends it this way:
For the Tea Party momentum to continue in a constructive way, it will need to take at least two further steps: First, repudiate the unhinged Obama-haters and then focus its anger at fiscal irresponsibility into policy proposals instead of bumper-sticker platitudes.
With a growing number of conspiracy entrepreneurs trying to profit off populist anger in a recession, it’s also worth keeping the conservative virtue of healthy skepticism in mind.
Remember what the author Eric Hoffer warned in his book “The True Believer:” “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business and eventually degenerates into a racket.”
Now read it in its entirety and give your take on it in comments…
7 Responses to “Quote of the Day: the Tea Party Movement’s Future”
Problem is, we have no idea how they, step-by-step and rationally, plan to bring about the fiscal stability. They're exactly what they whiningly (and unintelligently) accuse Obama of being – lofty goals, fancy words, no substance.
It's as if they cannot imagine that we actually have to hear more before we fall to our knees and sing of their virtuousness and responsibility.
You can't just assume that a virtue or a positive phenomenon belong to you just because it's on your banner – you need to explain to people that you are capable of using your mind.
Even the HC reform – whom these non-thinkers dubbed “ObamaCare” in a flash of bestial hostility and unimaginative hatred – is deficit-neutral. What have these crusaders offered the world apart from a thousand different kinds of warbled pronunciations of the word “socialism”?
Descent, the highest form of patriotic.
Amen, Axel.
I've been called out before by making similar arguments that there is really no consistency just being angry about what has happened since 2008. Fiscal conservatism is fiscal conservatism before or after 2008. Additionally, the anger from this and other groups about the bailouts: who would have “bailed out” the banks, and people with money in the banks, were the industry to collapse (read: FDIC) or if there were massive runs on banks?
Additionally, Sullivan has a good take on what ELSE the movement is about:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily…
This is what the Tea Party supports are tying to prevent:
At the same time, as the movement tries to morph from a true grassroots and loose-knit set of basic ideals to either a force within the Republican Party or even a third-party, it is already being infiltrated by political operatives and unrelated fringe groups, and IMHO will eventually die from self-inflicted wounds caused by fringe elements and becoming that which it was supposed to be against – just another special interest lobbying group.
They already are voting themselves to largesse. They are preventing sweet F A, and MacCauley would have laughed at them and you.
They loved Bush's irresponsible medicare drug bill, and they would rather cut from the very poor and unfortunate in order to sustain medicare. They don't have an ounce of philosophical consistency, and their love for America is merely solipsist – they love it as long as they can identify themselves with it – Obama is “the other”. Your defense of them is irresponsible and disgusting.
Being an organizer in a group that purposely ignored this conference, and knowing that most people's view comes from the media, I can say with some authority that this conference isn't the final word. I'm sure that the choice of Palin as a speaker filtered out which groups, and which representatives from those groups, came to it. To those those of you listening to the media with your pre-biased opinions I say:
There are those who make things happen.
There are those who watch things happen.
And there are those who wonder — what happened?
If you were surprised that the media reports seemed so different from the poll reports, guess which group you're in.
The “tea party” movement has defined itself, or at least has allowed itself to be defined. There's no way to pull it out of the fire. The denials about the “astroturf” nature of the “tax day” protests can now be joined by protestations that Palin and the “Tea Party Nation” don't represent the tea partiers. This is the public face of the tea party movement now. May it soon define the GOP as well. It's hateful, it's ignorant, it's prejudiced, it's mean and vague and irrational. In other words, it's PERFECT.
Personally I think it will go down like this.
GOP wins big in 2010 the Tea Party movement is dead.
GOP loses or breaks even in 2010 the GOP is dead and the Tea Party either takes it over or starts a viable third party to put the final nail in the GOP coffin.
I could be wrong and it may take a loss in both 2010 and 2012 to succeed but I think that gets to the root of the question. Which do they want more, to beat Obama and the Dems or to start a new party from scratch or fully fumigate the GOP. My guess is that they will opt to fight the Dems, since that is what Fox desires which sadly is the loudest megaphone in the movement, and nothing will change but I would love to be pleasantly surprised. Having said that if the person they finally send to the POTUS position acts like Reagan and balloons a different kind of spending to offset the cuts the GOP may lose these voters for a lifetime though. Do not get me wrong Fox is not the movement BUT they do control a large swath of the hearts and minds in the movement which could cause problems for the more intelligent and wise organizers when they hear “but we have to stop Obama and this guy can win.”