Government Corruption and Treason

Tea Party Offers GOP a Mixed Bag

November 3, 2010

The Upshot via Yahoo News! - In its first major electoral test, the tea party proved its value to the Republican party Tuesday night -- mobilizing support and electing a new crop of political leaders. But the final results also placed some weaknesses of tea party candidates on full display.

The GOP won majority control of the House but not the Senate, and some Republicans were quick to blame the tea party for the failure to clinch both chambers in an election trending strongly against the Democratic majorities in Congress.

"The Tea Party has helped in the House -- [but] probably cost us the Senate," longtime Republican campaign guru Stu Spencer told the New York Daily News Tuesday.

Losses in the Delaware and Nevada Senate races kept the GOP from winning a Senate majority even though both races were opportunities for Republicans to pick up key gains. And early Wednesday, the Denver Post called Colorado's hard-fought Senate race for incumbent Democrat Michael Bennet. The sitting Democratic senator, who had been appointed to fill out Ken Salazar's term, might have proven more vulnerable to a GOP challenger with a broader appeal to independent voters than the tea party-backed nominee in the contest, Ken Buck, proved to have.

In Nevada, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had always been a major GOP target. Republicans had always prepared to invest heavily in a race against Reid, given the significance of knocking out a powerful Democratic leader in his home state. But having tea party candidate Sharron Angle as their nominee was not part of the Republicans' plan.

Republicans originally backed former state party chairwoman Sue Lowden for the race, but Angle beat her this summer in a surprise primary win.

Angle ran a conservative campaign that caused many detractors to characterize her as an extremist -- and Reid used this image to his advantage. Reid labeled Angle "crazy," "dangerous," and "extreme" in his ads, and by his own account, the strategy of persistently pushing Angle's image as a fringe figure worked. [See: Did Harry Reid Steal Nevada?]

Dave Weigel reported for Slate that Reid believes his message resonated with many voters, including key Republicans.

"They do not want a Republican Party with her [Angle's] brand on it," Reid said. "They want a Republican Party that is one like their mother's and father's Republican Party, one that Ronald Reagan would support or the first George Bush would support."

In Delaware, much the same dynamic played out -- again to the detriment of the GOP's fortunes in the general election. Republicans wanted former Rep. Mike Castle, an established statewide GOP leader, to vie for the open Senate seat. But tea party candidate Christine O'Donnell took the primary in an upset and went on to lose handily in Tuesday's election. Sarah Palin, an O'Donnell supporter, argues he wouldn't.

"When given a choice, why in the world would I have supported" Mike Castle, Palin said on "Fox News Sunday" on Oct. 31. "Who was going to guarantee Castle was going to win?" she asked host Chris Wallace.

But others argue that if any Republican could have clinched a win in a statewide general election in Delaware, it was Castle, who had won statewide elections 12 times in his political career.

The GOP also forfeited a good deal of potential mainstream support in the Colorado race, which was tight throughout the general election campaign. Republican nominee Ken Buck, who'd enjoyed strong tea party support during the primary, garnered headlines for claiming that global warming was "a hoax," suggesting that homosexuality is "mostly a choice" (albeit with some genetic predictors akin to those associated with alcoholism), and opposing abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

In Alaska, meanwhile, the Senate race remained too close call Wednesday morning. In the GOP primary, incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski was ousted by tea party candidate Joe Miller. But Murkowski elected to wage a write-in campaign against her former GOP opponent.

Murkowski led in early results -- and Sitka Mayor Scott McAdams, the Democrat in the race, attributed her initial advantage to the tea party's influence.

"A lot of people have recognized that the tea party movement does not represent them," McAdams said on MSNBC.

I Don’t Trust the Tea Party (Excerpts)

November 2, 2010

LewRockwell.com - ...The exodus away from ideals and towards power that follows an election is repeated almost cyclically. Having a memory is my main “impediment.” It’s the main reason that I’m not able to think highly of the Tea Party movement.

I recognize a man must not be judged based on his words, but instead on his actions. Therefore, I see recent Johnny-come-latelies to “freedom” as untested. If the Tea Party movement lasts a few election cycles, I’ll start to take an interest in them...

No matter how we try to avoid being pulled into a desire to be on the winning team, it’s sometimes hard to recognize changes in ourselves. I watched a good friend turn into a Bush II devotee a few years back, and who has amazingly lost all recollection of the rage he had for the former president... I’ve also watched beloved peace activists turn into Obama devotees, forgetting that they once despised anyone who would not preach and act in the most peaceful of ways...

Sometimes we take ourselves too seriously, which is not that great of a thing when we also tend to be very forgetful of our past beliefs and behaviors. That aspect of human behavior leads me to not take the Tea Party too seriously...

Regardless of the name put on the movement, whether it be Tea Party, or the Pink British Scones, the principles at the heart of the movement are meaningful to me. In the Wall Street Journal earlier this year, pollster Scott Rasmussen claimed to be able to use three questions to identify a person as a member of the “political class” as opposed to a member of the “mainstream public.” Those who identify with the government on two or more of the following questions are defined by Rasmussen as a member of the political class:

1. Whose judgment do you trust more: that of the American people or American political leaders?
2. Has the federal government become its own special interest group?
3. Do government and big business often work together in ways that hurt consumers?

These questions show a clear bias. Scott Rasmussen claims that it is a bias that is growing in the U.S.

“The major division in this country,” says Rasmussen “is no longer between parties but between political elites and the people.”

Rasmussen claims that less than 10% of Americans are part of the political class. About the Tea Party, Rasmussen commented:

“Americans don’t want to be governed from the left or the right. They want, like the Founding Fathers, to largely govern themselves with Washington in a supporting — but not dominant — role. The Tea Party movement is today’s updated expression of that sentiment.”

“The political class overwhelmingly supported the bailouts of the financial and auto industries, the health-care bill, and the Justice Department’s decision to sue Arizona over its new immigration law. Those in the mainstream public just as intensely opposed those moves,” stated Rasmussen.

You know the political elites that Rasmussen is talking about. You recognize them. You know how they react to the newest government solutions for improving our lives. They are the type of people who like to wear shackles binding their wrists because it makes them feel secure. “Elites” is a word that makes people unhappy at present...

As far as I can tell, the elites are those who believe that people should be controlled and not left to their own decisions. This puts them in a dastardly category of “those deserving of raging tirades.” Believers in democracy think that the majority should be allowed to abuse minorities in society. They belong in that category. So do proponents of socialism, communism, fascism, Nazism, who believe that the state is justified in interfering in the lives of others. They all belong in the same boat because they don’t acknowledge the full spectrum of rights that free individuals have...

Democrat and Republican have ceased to be meaningful distinctions. Both groups are filled with the slithering elite. (Rasmussen’s “political class” and “mainstream public” seem to be good monikers for the division that many have intuitively noticed.)

Some will say that the Tea Party’s success can measured on Election Day, which means the key question is — Will those who seek to control us be shown the door on Election Day?

And my answer to that key question is — No, I doubt it. It’s more likely that they will continue to control us just like some of the communist parties of central and eastern Europe controlled their societies for five decades last century — with their single digit percentage party membership. But Rasmussen’s data gives me a good feeling by informing me that more people are getting keen to the idea that DC is not run in our interest.

For right now, I simply see the Tea Party as a safety valve in our system. People use the Tea Party as a way to let off steam. If it lasts through a few bi-partisan movements (BM) of power, then I’ll start taking this whole talk of freedom that comes from them a bit more seriously. Until then, it’s free entertainment.