Understanding the Tea Party divide...

[Taco John]

This is the best perspective I've read in any media source contrasting the split personalities that comprise the Tea Party... If you care to understand the current political evironment, this article is a must read.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...tml#more-65494

[BIG_DADDY]

Where is the money coming from to support this movement is a really good question?

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by BIG_DADDY

Where is the money coming from to support this movement is a really good question?

For the Palin-wing of the party, it comes from establishment sources trying to basically take over the movement, and direct the energy towards the status quo. For the Paulian wing of the tea party, it comes from individuals like me, who had never dreamed of donating to a political cause, but ended up donating hundreds of dollars to keep the momentum going.

[BIG_DADDY]

Originally Posted by Taco John

For the Palin-wing of the party, it comes from establishment sources trying to basically take over the movement, and direct the energy towards the status quo. For the Paulian wing of the tea party, it comes from individuals like me, who had never dreamed of donating to a political cause, but ended up donating hundreds of dollars to keep the momentum going.

The Palin-wing only wants to use it to divide and conquer, is that what you are saying?

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by BIG_DADDY

The Palin-wing only wants to use it to divide and conquer, is that what you are saying?

The so-called "Palin wing" wants to actually use it to accomplish something realistic.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by BIG_DADDY

The Palin-wing only wants to use it to divide and conquer, is that what you are saying?

That's fair enough. I would say they want to subvert the energy towards establishment aims. You'll find that establishment neo-cons are very favorable to Palin and what she envisions for government (despite a pretty hazy picture of what that is), but will be very hostile towards Paul.

I think you understand that the Neo-cons have controlled the Republican establishment for some time, and have sacrificed social issues to Democrats in order to maintain that power edge so that they can control what is really important to them: foriegn policy, particularly as it relates to Isreal.

Then along came the Ron Paul 2008 campaign, and the birth of the Tea Party. The money that his campaign attracted, coupled with the enthusiasm forced the neo-con establishment to jump into gear. And thus, out of the wild blue yonder, McCain invited Palin to be a part of his ticket... One thing to note, however, is that this was out of the wild blue only if you weren't following the Ron Paul movement from day to day. Those of us who were active in it were well familiar with the name "Sarah Palin" months before because it had been rumored that she was a libertarian, and many in the Ron Paul movement loved her and hoped for her to be HIS VP nominee. Many, to this day, consider her a sell out because of the perception that she had fame and power dangled in front of her and she jumped at it and became their puppet.

In any case, the heart of the movement is about "Restoring the Republic," and reducing the size of government, particularly the federal government. The heart of the movement is anti-war in the tradition of Robert Taft, and Bush Circa 1999 when he talked about having a humble foriegn policy (by the way, Bush II basically won by parrotting fellow Texan, Ron Paul's best campaign lines about small government and reduced military role int he world). Sarah Palin, on the other hand, talks very much in favor of perpetuating the war, and of course, all the big government that goes along with that. And the only way to perpetuate war is to sell out social issues to the left, and then use that budget as cover for printing and borrowing more money in order to keep the war funded, as well as the dependancies created by the social programs filled.

Palin is the Republican establishment's best hope of keeping the tea party in check. But the wheels are coming off of the wagon and the moster that they've created is getting out of control. They never imagined that the Tea Party would make the gains it has so quickly. It's too much for them to manage. The movement hasn't congealed around Palin the way they had hoped - it's far too decentralized. And she's pretty independent-minded in her own right.

But worse, the economy is falling to shambles and the Republicans still haven't managed to find someone outside of Ron Paul who can educate Americans about economics in the simple and easy to grasp way that Ron Paul has been able to. His body of work in this regard is vast. And it's this key point where the Tea Party will likely fall apart. The Paulians will not vote for a Republican who isn't convincing to them on the issue of The Federal Reserve. The Palin group doesn't know enough about the matter to have an opinion, but they see an energetic movement happening, and Fox is covering it, so they want to be a part of it, and since they're going to vote against Obama however they can anyway, they might as well call themselves "tea partiers." Sarah Palin is the center of these types. Ron Paul is the center of the other types.

If you were to ask me today who will win the Republican nomination, I'd say it will either be Sarah Palin or Ron Paul. Which is to say that it will probably be Sarah Palin.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by Taco John

That's fair enough. I would say they want to subvert the energy towards establishment aims. You'll find that establishment neo-cons are very favorable to Palin and what she envisions for government (despite a pretty hazy picture of what that is), but will be very hostile towards Paul.

I think it's more that she's becoming a dupe and front puppet for them. A Bushette. Kristol and company can't run on their own—they'd be toast. They need a charmer and good packaging that they can run from behind. Her deal with the devil (Kristol) is a chance to be president so she has sold her soul. Yet this is the wing of the right that was soundly rejected by the electorate. They can only pull off what they want through deception. They're not really going to change anything that matters. One NeoCon has already said if the TP wins they still won't be able to govern anyway.

There's a new article up over at Lew's today by the man who participated in the book Nudge. He claims Beck is a closet socialist as well. I don't know about all his points, but I do think he effectively showed Beck isn't really a libertarian as he seems to think about himself.

[donkhater]

Originally Posted by Taco John

That's fair enough. I would say they want to subvert the energy towards establishment aims. You'll find that establishment neo-cons are very favorable to Palin and what she envisions for government (despite a pretty hazy picture of what that is), but will be very hostile towards Paul.

I think you understand that the Neo-cons have controlled the Republican establishment for some time, and have sacrificed social issues to Democrats in order to maintain that power edge so that they can control what is really important to them: foriegn policy, particularly as it relates to Isreal.

Then along came the Ron Paul 2008 campaign, and the birth of the Tea Party. The money that his campaign attracted, coupled with the enthusiasm forced the neo-con establishment to jump into gear. And thus, out of the wild blue yonder, McCain invited Palin to be a part of his ticket... One thing to note, however, is that this was out of the wild blue only if you weren't following the Ron Paul movement from day to day. Those of us who were active in it were well familiar with the name "Sarah Palin" months before because it had been rumored that she was a libertarian, and many in the Ron Paul movement loved her and hoped for her to be HIS VP nominee. Many, to this day, consider her a sell out because of the perception that she had fame and power dangled in front of her and she jumped at it and became their puppet.

In any case, the heart of the movement is about "Restoring the Republic," and reducing the size of government, particularly the federal government. The heart of the movement is anti-war in the tradition of Robert Taft, and Bush Circa 1999 when he talked about having a humble foriegn policy (by the way, Bush II basically won by parrotting fellow Texan, Ron Paul's best campaign lines about small government and reduced military role int he world). Sarah Palin, on the other hand, talks very much in favor of perpetuating the war, and of course, all the big government that goes along with that. And the only way to perpetuate war is to sell out social issues to the left, and then use that budget as cover for printing and borrowing more money in order to keep the war funded, as well as the dependancies created by the social programs filled.

Palin is the Republican establishment's best hope of keeping the tea party in check. But the wheels are coming off of the wagon and the moster that they've created is getting out of control. They never imagined that the Tea Party would make the gains it has so quickly. It's too much for them to manage. The movement hasn't congealed around Palin the way they had hoped - it's far too decentralized. And she's pretty independent-minded in her own right.

But worse, the economy is falling to shambles and the Republicans still haven't managed to find someone outside of Ron Paul who can educate Americans about economics in the simple and easy to grasp way that Ron Paul has been able to. His body of work in this regard is vast. And it's this key point where the Tea Party will likely fall apart. The Paulians will not vote for a Republican who isn't convincing to them on the issue of The Federal Reserve. The Palin group doesn't know enough about the matter to have an opinion, but they see an energetic movement happening, and Fox is covering it, so they want to be a part of it, and since they're going to vote against Obama however they can anyway, they might as well call themselves "tea partiers." Sarah Palin is the center of these types. Ron Paul is the center of the other types.

If you were to ask me today who will win the Republican nomination, I'd say it will either be Sarah Palin or Ron Paul. Which is to say that it will probably be Sarah Palin.

Great post, but I differ with your last take. I think someone who is palatable (not perfect, but palatable) to both branches of the movement will emerge to secure the nomination. I know he has routinely denied that he is interested, but I really think Mitch Daniels is on the move.

My guess is that Tea Party supporters like yourself will be very suspicious about Daniels getting the backing of the RNC. Anyone that they support will likely be seen as a 'puppet'. But of all the candidates likely to get backing form the RNC and media spin as a 'electable' candidate' Daniels comes as close as anyone to what the Tea party wants to represent them.

I love Paul. He makes a ton of sense. I have and will vote for him. Palin is a campaigner and we've seen the results of electing someone like that the last two years. If the Republicans can somehow break out of their traditional mold of nominating the next guy in line, I think Daniels is the guy, IMO.

[BucEyedPea]

I see Daniels with pros and cons:

Cons:
• proposed a number of tax increases in Indiana
• Director of the Office of Management and Budget under George W. Bush
• Establishment leaders in the R national party have courted him which doesn't bode well. This is the same process that brought us two Bush'es. The select the anointed and that's our choice. This is not grass roots but more top down. That does not bode well for a revolutionary
• The Economist threw some backing behind him for president which is Keyenesian with a Mercantilist flavor—just more of the same bs
• lacks charisma-although this is not the biggest problem; it can be overcome since two Bushes have won

Pro:
• has done some govt reform at his state level
•he balanced his budget but I think the states have options that the Federal Constitution doesn't provide presidents and he did this with tax increases
Plus states can't print money to get out of their messes.


I'd have to know more.....but I am deeply suspicious of his endorsements coming from the top down as opposed to from the bottoms up in the grass roots. Establishment Republicans are the problem —not the solution. I'd need to know more and see who he gets surrounded by. I like Gov Christie more....I think his personality is more engaging in it's no nonsense style and he makes unpopular decisions. Then again, states cannot print money so he is compelled to make those cuts.

[Ugly Duck]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Understanding the Tea Party divide...

The Tea Party is little more than a collection of ultra-rightwing nutbags whose wild anti-government rants are reminiscent of their funders - the super-rich Koch Brothers & Fox Murdoch. The Kochs (Dixie Cups & Lycra) sit on the highest board of the freak show John Birch Society. Koch, Sr. was a founding member. TPs squeal about the "death panels" of the Obama health care plan even though its very similar to those proposed by Nixon, Romney, & the Heritage foundation. When right wingers propose it - not a peep. When Obama proposes it, all of a sudden its a big-government assault on the very foundation of American freedom. Obama is a foreigner. Obama is a Muslim. Obama wants the terrorists to win, blah, blah, blah. Nobody thinks the vast majority of ranting Tea Party nutbags used to vote Democratic... they are the extreme right-wing fringe of the Republican Party.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Ugly Duck

The Tea Party is little more than a collection of ultra-rightwing nutbags whose wild anti-government rants are reminiscent of their funders - the super-rich Koch Brothers & Fox Murdoch. The Kochs (Dixie Cups & Lycra) sit on the highest board of the freak show John Birch Society. Koch, Sr. was a founding member. TPs squeal about the "death panels" of the Obama health care plan even though its very similar to those proposed by Nixon, Romney, & the Heritage foundation. When right wingers propose it - not a peep. When Obama proposes it, all of a sudden its a big-government assault on the very foundation of American freedom. Obama is a foreigner. Obama is a Muslim. Obama wants the terrorists to win, blah, blah, blah. Nobody thinks the vast majority of ranting Tea Party nutbags used to vote Democratic... they are the extreme right-wing fringe of the Republican Party.

You're forgetting about a whole lot of independents whose thinking is a lot more in line with the tea party's economic platform than either the dems or reps.

[bkkcoh]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

You're forgetting about a whole lot of independents whose thinking is a lot more in line with the tea party's economic platform than either the dems or reps.

Let them keep thinking that. Then they will wonder what happened to them the day after the election.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Ugly Duck

The Tea Party is little more than a collection of ultra-rightwing nutbags whose wild anti-government rants are reminiscent of their funders - the super-rich Koch Brothers & Fox Murdoch. The Kochs (Dixie Cups & Lycra) sit on the highest board of the freak show John Birch Society. Koch, Sr. was a founding member. TPs squeal about the "death panels" of the Obama health care plan even though its very similar to those proposed by Nixon, Romney, & the Heritage foundation. When right wingers propose it - not a peep. When Obama proposes it, all of a sudden its a big-government assault on the very foundation of American freedom. Obama is a foreigner. Obama is a Muslim. Obama wants the terrorists to win, blah, blah, blah. Nobody thinks the vast majority of ranting Tea Party nutbags used to vote Democratic... they are the extreme right-wing fringe of the Republican Party.

Yeah, I read the Huffington Post too. I'm aware of the boilerplate that has been made up to pass around.

[Taco John]

It's funny how every site I visit where leftists hang out, I'm always given the same buzzwords about the movement. "collection" "ultra-rightwing" "wild anti-government" "nutbags" "Koch Brothers" "Fox" "Murdoch." As though if they repeat these things enough time they'll suddenly become the reason why I started supporting Ron Paul and got active enough in politics to register for the Republican party and take my time to caucus locally with them.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by Ugly Duck

The Tea Party is little more than a collection of ultra-rightwing nutbags

That's pure and total subjective opinion which is typical from a left-wing view.

....whose wild anti-government rants are reminiscent of their funders - the super-rich Koch Brothers & Fox Murdoch.

I hate to break it to you but those two are NOT Tea Partiers. Murdoch is a NeoCon.

There's nothing wrong with being anti-govt with the kind of govt we have today—virtually unrecognizable as a free country with a govt restrained by a Constitution. It was anti-govt radicals that were the people who broke from England and later formed the freest govt in the history of man.

The Kochs (Dixie Cups & Lycra) sit on the highest board of the freak show John Birch Society.

Pure opinion again. Come on Ugly Duck you can to better than a vitriolic diatribe that's all opinion.

TPs squeal about the "death panels" of the Obama health care plan even though its very similar to those proposed by Nixon, Romney, & the Heritage foundation.

Yes we know. I've posted how Obamacare is the same as Nixon's proposal but THAT is what we don't like about current Republicans. They are the same statists as the far left only covered with right wing clothing. If you're not a small govt person who supports the Federalism our country is supposed to be based on then you cannot possibly understand that it is the Nixons, Romneys and Heritage Foundation ( which is NeoCon) that we no longer want in our party. We want the two parties to offer a true choice.

But the "death panels" are true....they just don't call them that.

When right wingers propose it - not a peep.

That's not true. People here have criticized Romney-care. Witness who says what in the TP because it is said by some. It is just not mentioned by Establishment Rs who are posturing to gain power just as the hard-left did under Bush and now Obama's continuation of the Bush wars are okay. No DIFFERENCE between the two parties at the core beliefs.

When Obama proposes it, all of a sudden its a big-government assault on the very foundation of American freedom. Obama is a foreigner. Obama is a Muslim. Obama wants the terrorists to win, blah, blah, blah. Nobody thinks the vast majority of ranting Tea Party nutbags used to vote Democratic... they are the extreme right-wing fringe of the Republican Party.

I resent labelling TPs as nutbags. I see the hard left as the nutbags. That's just opinion. I don't think Obama is a Muslim or a foreigner but he is a socialist. 'Er scrap that....technically he's a corporatist. His FP isn't much different than Bush.

You missed a lot of debate about these things and are choosing to ignore the complaints from the right about the progressives in their own ranks. But you are accusing the other side of doing the very things your side has done or is doing.