Oh No! The Tea Party Won!
“Woe is me” they cry. Who are “they”? Republican Party leaders and groupies. What is the cause of this despair? Why it’s the sound of jubilation from some of the tea partiers… mostly from Nevada, but all around the country. Many of them supported Sharron Angle to carry the Republican standard against dingy Harry Reid. It should be added that various other tea partiers supported her opponents. There are several lessons we can learn from this little drama, let’s have a look at some of them.
Just like some big-tent Republicans like to tell us about the party they believe they control, the tea partiers are not a monolithic army goose stepping toward conquest. They are people who believe in smaller, less intrusive government that protects rather than restricts freedom. Unlike the other party, pursuing this goal by various approaches, with, sometimes, various candidates, is actually permitted. That’s one of the funny things about freedom – not everyone wants the same thing or goes about it in the same way.
But Republican establishment insiders say they believe in smaller, less intrusive government as well. This may be true, in comparison to the progressive extremes now in power, but the people in Peoria, Paducah and Petersburg often have other ideas. What scares many party leaders is that these “true believers” give the public a point of comparison… and the old timers don’t show up to well. They tend to look like stodgy old men content with their elevated place in the system. Beyond this, these candidates owe their allegiance to the grassroots, not party insiders who paved they way for them… in exchange for loyalty, favors and who knows what else.
But what about those not on the inside with nothing in particular to gain from compliant candidates and legislators? They are the ones who think conservatives should quietly come along and support their moderate, but humdrum choices. Some sincerely believe that only the party anointed are worthy and suited to serve. They believe in the wisdom of the party… something the freedom fighters find anathema. Yet somehow, to succeed, everyone under this “big tent” needs to be pulling together. This often works in practice as unenthusiastic conservatives still carried the water for an uninspiring candidate against Barack Hussein Obama. Cooperation such as this, with the wrong candidate still results in a second place finish… and there is no prize for that.
It would seem that even though the establishment candidate did not win in places like Nevada, Kentucky and South Carolina, it would be to everyone’s benefit for the more reserved Republicans to come out and work to get these fine small government candidates elected. It’s been said that many “fiscal conservatives” don’t care how many abortions their daughter gets as long as their taxes are low. I would suggest, no I would scream at the top of my lungs, that the tea party people want low taxes too, and they are leading the way. Can’t we all agree that less money taken by Washington would be a good thing? And can’t we agree that we are in a financial crisis because the government has spent and spent and borrowed and borrowed beyond our ability or desire to pay… and THAT needs to be stopped and reversed. That is the big picture!
Social conservatives are usually asked to set aside their beliefs for “party unity”. Can’t those with more “moderate” mind sets do that also. The price of failure is the survival of our country. Both the tea partiers and establishment types tell us they want smaller government with less spending and debt. Some are just willing to go to greater lengths to achieve this critical goal. Barry Goldwater, a conservative who was left hanging by many in his own party told us, “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”
The stakes are even higher now than they were in 1964 when Sen Javits led much of the New York delegation from the Republican convention floor on hearing Goldwater’s remark. Defeating the progressive agenda that would turn our wonderful country into a an effete European style socialism is something that must be accomplished at all costs… even supporting hard core conservatives, maybe even a libertarian or two.


















Scott said,
Great points, but still missed the biggest point of the original Tea Parties as I knew them. The original Tea Parties I attended in 2007 were about foreign policy, immediate withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, legitimate support of the 1st AND 2nd amendments, and the only true fiscal conservative on the ballot at the time. That Candidate was Dr. Ron Paul. The Tea Parties have been “taken over” by those who wish to discredit them under single issues banners of “Pro-Life”, “Traditional Marriage”, and other pseudo-Christian extremism. In my mind the Tea parties are supposed to be about freedom for everyone, not the advocates of Federally imposed morality.
Larry Miller said,
Actually what Scott is observing and being critical of is the transformation if rallies for one candidate who has some good ideas to contribute to events attended by main stream America. I’m not sure what brand of Christianity he subscribes to, but caring for the weakest among us and respecting the sanctity of what “God has joined together” are certainly not pseudo-Christian values.
All laws deal with some sort of morality no matter what those who say you can’t legislate morality would have us believe. Why do we have laws against killing people, stealing from them, or slandering them. The answer is, that it is wrong… why is it wrong? There is a moral code behind these prohibitions. We may argue where the line is drawn, but there is a moral line drawn every time a law is enacted.
If he wants to actually see a smaller government, Scott had better be open to the Christians he belittles as few others will be by his side.
As an additional point, please read about the Myth of the Fiscal Conservative at http://bizy.be/qIDu1
Add A Comment