When the “Tea Party” movement began last year, it was refreshing and exciting to see citizens rise to challenge the lords of government.
Fed up with taxes, unabated government spending and increasing intrusions into their lives, the electorate got mad as hell and weren’t gonna take it any more. Protests sprang up across the country in groups small and some massively large. In September of last year, hundreds of thousands – maybe even a couple of million – stormed the gates in Washington in a loud and visible blast of outrage.
Groups were organized in states and counties across the continent as government ignored the masses and pushed on with health care “reform,” trillions of dollars of debt and big-brother policies that were perceived to strip individuals of their liberty.
It was cool.
However… (C’mon. You KNEW there had to be a “however.”)
In South Carolina, what started as a united outpouring of citizen demands has devolved into regionalized infighting for control and candidate endorsements.
I wrote about some of the problems three months ago and things don’t seem to have improved. My posts were met with varied responses with the state movement.
I was sent emails that had criss-crossed the state. Some of them read like Bolshevik manifestos tinged with John Adams. Others reminded me of diatribes from the SDS of the ’60′s. There was a lot of anger, mostly – in my opinion – misdirected and personality based. But there was also a genuine passion for the liberties that need protecting.
Truly concerned about the direction and ultimate success of tea parties in the state, I sent an unsolicited email to some of the local leaders and a number of members across South Carolina. Since I had become the focus of some disdain by certain members of the movement, I offered the following:
If y’all keep up this high school squabbling, the bad guys are gonna win.
Stay focused on issues. Do you REALLY need chapters? Would it work to have a database of names and email addresses so you could “marshall the troops” for rallies, petitions and protests?
That way, you might avoid personality conflicts and stay concentrated on your real strength – the power of numbers visibly presented by masses of people.
A photo of a couple of thousand sign-carrying tax payers is much more powerful and valuable than meetings. Politicians and the media don’t give a flying damn about your meetings, but they DO pay attention to THE MOB.
Don’t blow your chance to make a difference.
I got only one response and I’m not sure what it means:
“Thank you for your reply! I will take your suggestions under advisement, and leave you with this one quote, ‘Many are called, but few are chosen.’”
I’m concerned about the core of the tea party principles because they are the core of our nation’s beginning. It’s not in the best interest of this, or any ideological movement to pick and choose candidates. Rather, these activists should concentrate on those principles – promote them – demand them – and let candidates and officials come to them.
As we saw with State Senator Larry Grooms and the endorsement of his gubernatorial candidacy by some tea party folks, those sanctions are fragile. What happens when a candidate drops out, as Grooms did or, worse, if a selected office seeker is revealed as a phony or involved in some scandal? Any of those can minimize those who have actively supported that candidate and, with it, the agenda in which they believe.
There is also the very real problem of “infiltration” by those who want to either get information from the organizations, guide their operations or sabotage them. The idea of a “Stepford Candidate” is not far-fetched. Moles and other intrusions in campaigns and factions are as old as political campaigns themselves. Whether it’s Watergate or the FBI and the peace movement of the ’60′s and ’70′s, getting into organizations for purposes counter to those of that organization are very common. As good as their hearts are and as committed as they are to honest ideals, organizers are usually amateur campaigners and naive to the brutality that is politics.
Tea party activists DO agree on lower taxes, less government, transparency and individual freedoms. THAT’s what should be their concentration. If they do that and eschew personalities – either their own or those running for office – they’ll be successful.
And we all need for them to be successful.
Pingback: Unsweet Tea « The Political Inquirer
I believe that certain groups of the SC Tea Party are receiving funding from some of the politicians running for State level office. Before supporting a candidate there should be a vetting process agreed upon by the members. We can do the same as NY 23rd and MA did, even though the NY 23rd ended up with the RINO Scoffafava endorsing the Democrat candidate. I would caution that the Tea Party not become an extension of the candidate’s campaign team and blindly follow him/her. We need to support fiscal conservative candidates at a minimum, regardless of their political party. I personally was set against supporting Grooms. Let the members do their own independent research as to the candidates voting record and stand on the issues
Mr. Garnetspy,
I would like to sponsor the National Tea Party Organization (NaTPO for short while we’re discussing national strategies and optimizing our human stockpiles).
The next move, obviously, should be a purge of the ideologically unsound and fringe (Ron Paul and those mean libertarian) members within NaTPO. If they do not agree with every candidate endorsement, they are against making progress and should be shown the door. I know you can’t see me but I’m pointing at the door as I type these words.
Did I mention that I can get federal funding for all of this? We’ll be considered a community organizing group and eligible for all sorts of goodies. I’ve talked it all over with Obama and we have his permission!.
With a bipartisan agreement, we can move this organization forward. However, it will require that I’m your sponsor and can call all the shots.
I’ve written up an agenda with John Kerry and Joe Lieberman guaranteed to establish NaTPO as a permanent part of the American political establishment and reserve to it a special role in routing out false patriots and others who might spread disinformation against those working so hard for America.
Remember the crowds that showed up! Remember the tens of dozens that marched on Washington and the two or three that showed up at what must have been nearly a half dozen local tea parties all over the country. We cannot let these angry white men down!
I understand that in organizing within a strict and well-ordered structural framework, that there may be those of you who may consider this a compromise of NaTPO’s general overarching goals, but, under the political reality of the current crisis, there is nothing more that can be done and we must stay in the game or we risk not having a voice at the table.
I recently wrote the following comments. Everyone else should read and memorize these brief remarks in case any reporters ask for your thoughts or motivations:
“The National Tea Party Organization is coming. We can either follow or lead. And those people who follow will pay a price. Those people who lead in creating the National Tea Party Organizatin for the world will make money.
“If you can’t participate in solving a hard problem, why are you up here? I’m a NaTPO member who will reach around the aisle and solve problems. Our partnership represents a fresh attempt to find consensus that adheres to our core principles and will perhaps lead to stopping a few of Obama’s goals.”
Your US Senator,
Lindsey O. Graham
Tea Party is a populist movement. Like just about all of them in in American history, they tend to eat themselves, usually over arguments over purity and who is the most “tea partish”.
As it is, this populist movement is an awful lot like the Ross Perot movement in the early 90′s, without the moneybags leader to rally around. So, it’s hard to say where this movement will end up; yet inevitable infighting over who is the most pure will probably kill it.
Pingback: Archive 2/2/2010 PM — Curtis Loftis eying bid for SC treasurer «
Pingback: Archive 2/2/2010 PM — Curtis Loftis eying bid for SC treasurer | Latest News India | Education News | Technology News | Entertainment News | Business News | Sports News
@Andrew I am guessing that you are not directly involved with the Tea Party movement since you refer to it as a “Populist” movement? This is horribly inaccurate.
From Wikipedia:
“Populist may refer to A supporter of Populism, a political philosophy urging social and political system change that favours “the people” over “the elites”, or favours the common people over the rich and wealthy business owners. Populists are against big business owners.”
Wow! That just could not be more wrong. The Tea Party movement may favor the people, but it is not focused on an attack of “the elites” or really even disdain for “the elites.” The Tea Party movement also is not against big business owners. This assessment just could not be more wrong.
Any movement is going to have some cracks. Heck, almost have of the colonists supported England instead of the revolution! This is normal stuff if ya ask me (and I know you did!), so I’m not too worried about it.