We have been told repeatedly that the TeaParty is extremist in various ways. Most of those accusations have failed to weather the test of time. One accusation, though, continues to have currency (albeit inflated) -- that the TeaParty is more conservative than the republicans.
Bill Clinton is part of that chorus that the narrative that the TeaParty is extremist. He recently said:
HuffingotonPostHis assessment is wrong.
"A lot of their candidates today, they make him [Bush] look like a liberal," Clinton told an enthusiastic crowd.
The TeaParty falls between the Republican and Democrats in ideology. Their primary concerns are excessive taxation (Taxed Enough Already) and excessive government spending that has lead to deficits that have called into question the strength of our currency.
WSJ
Back in April, the New York Times/CBS did a poll of tea party supporters. When asked, "What should be the goal of the Tea Party movement," 45% said, "Reduce federal government." That is, cut spending. Everything else was in single digits.
These are the people who before there was a TeaParty heled put power in the hands of conservatives in 1994 to fix the spending problem. Those conservatives after a promising start failed them and in disillusionment turned to Obama who promised to reinstate "the spending policies of Bill Cinton" (better defined as the brief success of the 1994 congress who controlled the nation's purse at the time). Within months it was obvious that they had been had and they were pissed. With a nudge from Rick Santelli, the TeaParty was born and with it the Republican Party is being rebooted.
With the recent extreme spending and deficit growth their concerns are of more importance to an ever growing number of people. The debt spending issue unlike many issues is not divisive in the same sense that abortion or Iraq has been. It is an issue that disparate individuals can unite around. As a result profligate debt spending has become a transcendent issue between many conservatives and liberals and with a new home for them being created in the Republican Party the Republican Party has added member at the expense of the Democrat Party.
Dick Morris gets it...
But these days, social issues are in remission and economic/fiscal problems have, understandably, taken center stage. In this environment, purists of the right have a big advantage because nobody doubts the sincerity with which they embrace the goals of limited government, low taxes, and reduced spending. Politicians of all stripes – including most Democrats – vow allegiance to them as does the overwhelming majority of the electorate. In this environment, the distinctions of left and right give way to the difference between sincerity and insincerity, leaving the voters to judge. With candidates like Sharron Angle in Nevada or Christine O’Donnell in Delaware or DioGuardia in New York, voters don’t have to guess. They know real conservatives when they see them.
out
Dick Morris doesn't "get your movement". Dick gets whatever gets Dick in the news and some money in his pockets. If you're going to look to the pundits for justification of your sick movement, look for someone with common sense, and morals, by the way, since you seem to be so hung up on those.
ReplyDeleteIt does seem Dick Morris is something of a political whore after selling his services to the Clinton administration then subsequently entering punditry on his own terms.
ReplyDeleteI am not convinced, though, that being in the employ of an administration that one does not agree with politically, but serve faithfully behind closed doors, equates to political whoring when once freed from employment that person chooses to continue selling the same service publicly.
The point is, that working for the Clinton Administration does not define a person. It is more likely the advice Morris gave to the Clinton Administration was essentially the same as what he delivers as a pundit.
I understand the source of your confusion, though.
As for your reference to "[my] sick movement", it is not my movement. More importantly, though, is your characterization of a movement that seems to be based on fundamental constitutional principals, respect for American tradition, and patriotism.
To define those tenets as "sick" is to reject the foundations of your nation, but sadly that same moral relativism has infected an unfortunately large percentage of our nation.
Truly, there is nothing sick about our Constitution, tradition, or patriotism. I would suggest the sickness lies elsewhere.
Lady, you wouldn't know patriotism, from the left hand side of the road based on your comments above.
ReplyDelete