Posts Tagged ‘Tea Party’

Why the Tea Party Exists

Thursday, February 9th, 2012

This piece by Dan McLaughlin encapsulates why the Tea Party exists, and why it has to fight a willfully heedless Republican establishment, so well that I’m going to quote whopping great chunks from it:

As anyone with a passing familiarity with Republican politics over the past four or five decades knows, conservative magazines and think tanks have been making detailed entitlement reform proposals for most of those years, and Republicans running for offices high and low have been running on platforms of reducing the size and cost of government for just as long. And then nothing happens.

That’s why Congress’ battles over the debt ceiling and related issues provide such a potent example. Basically all Republican Senators profess to be in favor of smaller government, and yet so few are willing to go to the barricades to make it a reality. Now, I’m a realist – there are limits to how much we could expect even a completely united GOP to bring home as long as Obama is the President and Harry Reid the Senate Majority Leader. But the repeated spectacle of leading pundits and Beltway Republicans tut-tutting Boehner and company for even trying to use their leverage to exact real concessions is a sign that the message Republican voters have been sending is not getting through to everyone.

(snip)

The related point here – and one that says much about why RedState has put so much energy into intra-party primary battles rather than the production of white papers – is that personnel is policy. The ideas are already there; what is lacking is the necessary corps of people with the will to fight for them.

(snip)

The point of my essay was not to denounce anyone, but to explain the history and depth of the current popular distrust on the Right of leaders who seem unwilling to lead. The battle to restrain runaway government spending is so much smoke and mirrors unless the people who profess to support it in word are dedicated to it in deed. No wealth of position papers, endorsements and Power Point presentations can demonstrate that. Voters and activists who have figured this out are rightly skeptical of those who don’t seem to “get it”. And they are more than willing to embrace flawed champions – even such a creature of the Beltway as Newt Gingrich – if they demonstrate the willingness to actually do something to stop the runaway train of federal spending. Every time some Beltway figure calls Newt or some Tea Party candidate crazy, voters think again, “he might actually be crazy enough to upset some applecarts to get things done.”

Read the whole thing.

(Hat tip: An American Housewife in London, more about which anon.)

Harry Reid Still Thinks SOPA/PIPA is Awesome, Vows to Bring It Up for a Vote When It’s “Fixed”

Friday, January 20th, 2012

As per the Senate Democratic Majority Leader’s official statement:

Washington, D.C. – Nevada Senator Harry Reid released the following statement today on the Senate’s PROTECT I.P. Act:

“In light of recent events, I have decided to postpone Tuesday’s vote on the PROTECT I.P. Act.

“There is no reason that the legitimate issues raised by many about this bill cannot be resolved. Counterfeiting and piracy cost the American economy billions of dollars and thousands of jobs each year, with the movie industry alone supporting over 2.2 million jobs. We must take action to stop these illegal practices. We live in a country where people rightfully expect to be fairly compensated for a day’s work, whether that person is a miner in the high desert of Nevada, an independent band in New York City, or a union worker on the back lots of a California movie studio.

“I admire the work that Chairman Leahy has put into this bill. I encourage him to continue engaging with all stakeholders to forge a balance between protecting Americans’ intellectual property, and maintaining openness and innovation on the internet. We made good progress through the discussions we’ve held in recent days, and I am optimistic that we can reach a compromise in the coming weeks.”

A “compromise.” That means “we only want to censor you a little. Or, we want to wait until the heat is off before we get back to screwing you. (Hat tip: Penny Arcade.)

Sadly, the Republican leadership isn’t sounding much better. My quick and dirty impression is that the rank-and-file Republican members of the House and Senate closest to the Tea Party have gotten the message, good and hard, but that the leadership is still putting their fingers in their ears and thinking they’ll be fine if they just keep humming until to furor dies down.

They must be disabused of this notion.

I would urge you to contact your representative and tell them you don’t want SOPA/PIPA “delayed” or “fixed,” you want it killed dead and a stake driven through it’s heart. Or, to quote Spinal Tap, “just crank that volume to the point of pain.” They must come to dread your wrath more than the thought of losing campaign contributions from the MPAA/RIAA.

You must teach them fear.

A Few More SOPA/PIPA Tidbits

Thursday, January 19th, 2012

Here’s a visual representation of congressmen supporting and opposing SOPA/PIPA:

(Click to Embiggen)

By my eyeball count, 40 of those 65 congresscritters still supporting SOPA are Democrats (plus one gray box that I assume is Socialist Bernie Sanders), whereas 56 of 101 opposing it are Republicans.

Via Instapundit comes a commentator on lefty site FireDogLake raging about how Republicans have owned the issue:

Those of us charting the protest yesterday were struck by how most of the lawmakers turning against the bill were Republicans. If you look at the latest whip count on PIPA, for example, you see that more Republicans oppose it at this point than Democrats.

(snip)

The Tea Party has struck fear into their party; the progressive movement inspires laughter.

Finally, isn’t it funny how lots of the same people who decried the Citizens United ruling are singing the praises of Google, Wikipdia, et. al. for weighing in on SOPA?

If corporations have no First Amendment rights, why can’t federal or state or local governments single out, say, Wikimedia Foundation for its SOPA/PIPA blackout? Why can’t they penalize or fine or even dissolve it? Why can’t they single Wikimedia Foundation out for disproportionate enforcement of unrelated laws in retaliation for disfavored speech?

(Hat tip: Dwight)

I Would TOTALLY Kick Mike Tyson’s ASS (if he hadn’t left this bar five minutes ago)

Sunday, January 1st, 2012

Insta linked to this Taylor Marsh piece about how she, as a liberal, is Totally Fed Up with Obama and the Democratic Party. I’m a bit less impressed with its significance (or sincerity) than he was, even ignoring the usual parade of liberal straw-man conservatives, mainly because of the sheer cringing cowardice of the timing. It’s like a scrawny guy at a bar going “Did you hear Mike Tyson call that woman a bitch? If he were here right now, I’d totally kick his ass!” five minutes after Tyson left.

Sure you would, champ.

Obama and other top Democrats have proven that their main priority is increasing the size and scope of the federal government, and using the benefits of that increased size and scope to rake off profits and pay off their cronies and interest groups. They’ve been doing that for three years, just like they’ve been ignoring that progressive wish list (closing Gitmo, ending predator drone strikes, ending the Bush tax cuts, etc.) for the same period of time, and now is when you’re finally fed up?

Right.

You know when your cries of outrage might have had an actual effect? Three to six months ago, when it was still possible for Obama to face a serious primary challenge from the left. But for all their theatrical outrage over “secret Republican” Obama, not a single high profile liberal Democrat stepped up to challenge him in the Democratic Presidential Primary. Not one. And now that it’s absolutely too late for that to happen, Taylor Marsh makes high-minded, ego-flattering noises about how she’s willing to leave the Democratic Party.

Sure she is.

You know why the Republican establishment had to take the Tea Party seriously? They took scalps. Marco Rubio kicked Charlie Crist to the curb, Christine O’Donnell knocked off Mike Castle, and Joe Miller forced Lisa Murkowski to run as an independent. That’s when the GOP establishment knew the Tea Party was too dangerous to take for granted. Micky Kaus noted that those challenges are what probably killed the illegal alien amnesty DREAM act: “By my count, Miller’s primary coup may have helped gain around ten votes by terrifying GOP incumbents who might otherwise have been tempted by the prospect of a feel-good, bipartisan, MSM-approved pro-DREAM stand.”

Until liberals are willing to mount real primary challenges to big-name Democrats, all their talk of disenchantment with the party is just so much vainglorious posturing. And as for their votes being “up for grabs” in November? Please. Not a single one of them will be pulling the lever for Rick Perry or Mitt Romney to spite Obama. They know it, we know it, and Obama knows it.

Maybe at some point down the line liberals really will become fed up with being taken for granted by the Democratic Party (not to mention the endemic crony capitalism corruption), and put some actual skin in the game. Until then, they’re just lap dog Chihuahuas pretending they’re Dobermans.

Jones Bows To The Inevitable, And Out of Senate Race

Tuesday, November 8th, 2011

Trailing in polls, fundraising, name recognition, and stage presence, Elizabeth Ames Jones announced she’s dropping out of the Senate race to run for the Texas Senate District 25 against incumbent Sen. Jeff Wentworth.

Setting aside of the question of why you would want to move from the Railroad Commission to the State Senate (which seems like a slight downgrade to me), the Senate District 25 race already had one Tea Party challenger to Wentworth in Donna Campbell, who may find herself financially outgunned if Jones transfers her U.S. Senate race money. (Naturally, Wenworth wants Jones to return the money.) There have been mutterings in some quarters (at least stretching back to last decade’s redistricting fight) that Wentworth is too liberal for his district. Should all three stay in, this should prove to be a very interesting primary fight.

Clearly Jones was overdue to get out of the Senate race, and had been for some time. Not only were David Dewhurst and Ted Cruz firmly established as the top two candidates, but they and Tom Leppert were all clearly outperforming Jones in every phase of the campaign. From all that I could see, Jones performed poorly at the the various candidate debates and forums and fell woefully behind in the fundraising race. I think there was a much greater possibility that Jones could have come in behind long-shot Glenn Addison in the March primary than that she could overtake Cruz or Dewhurst.

Jones was the very first candidate to declare for the U.S. Senate race, filing her paperwork way back on November 3, 2008, but never seemed to gain any traction once additional candidates jumped in after Kay Baily Hutchison announced she was retiring.

This is good news for the Ted Cruz campaign, and bad news for David Dewhurst, since it gives Cruz a clearer shot at him. Dewhurst clearly has no desire to debate Cruz one-on-one, and the more candidates in the race, the less likely it is for conservative voters to coalesce around Cruz as the anti-Dewhurst campaign.

Now that Jones is out, will Leppert bow out as well? I doubt it. Though he clearly hasn’t caught fire, Leppert has (thanks to a generous measure of self-funding) stayed on pace with the front-runners in the fundraising derby, and he’s clearly a better campaigner, and has a much better organization, than Jones. My hunch says that he stays in until March, and then comes in a distant third. But there’s still an awful lot of campaign left…

Still More Riot Fallout

Monday, August 15th, 2011

A few more reactions to the London riots:

First up is Peter Hitchens:

I am not really very sorry for the elite liberal Londoners who have suddenly discovered what millions of others have lived with for decades.

The mass criminality in the big cities is merely a speeded-up and concentrated version of life on most large estates – fear, intimidation, cruelty, injustice, savagery towards the vulnerable and the different, a cold sneer turned towards any plea for pity, the awful realisation that when you call for help from the authorities, none will come.

Just look and see how many shops are protected with steel shutters, how many homes have bars on their windows. This is not new.

As the polluted flood (it is not a tide; it will not go back down again) of spite, greed and violence washes on to their very doorsteps, well-off and influential Left-wingers at last meet the filthy thing they have created, and which they ignored when it did not affect them personally.

No doubt they will find ways to save themselves. But they will not save the country. Because even now they will not admit that all their ideas are wrong, and that the policies of the past 50 years – the policies they love – have been a terrible mistake.

(Hat tip: John Derbyshire at NRO.)

Second is the indomitable Mark Steyn, who brings his usual pith to bear:

The news shows were filled with scenes of London ablaze, as gangs of feral youths trashed and looted their own neighborhoods. Several readers wrote to taunt me for not having anything to say on the London riots. As it happens, Chapter Five of my book is called “The New Britannia: The Depraved City.” You have to get up pretty early in the morning to beat me to Western Civilization’s descent into barbarism. Anyone who’s read it will fully understand what’s happening on the streets of London. The downgrade and the riots are part of the same story: Big Government debauches not only a nation’s finances but its human capital, too….The London rioters are the children of dependency, the progeny of Big Government: they have been marinated in “stimulus” their entire lives….

One-fifth of children are raised in homes in which no adult works – in which the weekday ritual of rising, dressing and leaving for gainful employment is entirely unknown. One-tenth of the adult population has done not a day’s work since Tony Blair took office on May 1, 1997.

If you were born into such a household, you’ve been comprehensively “stimulated” into the dead-eyed zombies staggering about the streets this past week: pathetic inarticulate subhumans unable even to grunt the minimal monosyllables to BBC interviewers desperate to appease their pathologies. C’mon, we’re not asking much: just a word or two about how it’s all the fault of government “cuts” like the leftie columnists argue. And yet even that is beyond these baying beasts. The great-grandparents of these brutes stood alone against a Fascist Europe in that dark year after the fall of France in 1940. Their grandparents were raised in one of the most peaceful and crime-free nations on the planet. Were those Englishmen of the mid-20th century to be magically transplanted to London today, they’d assume they were in some fantastical remote galaxy. If Charlton Heston was horrified to discover the Planet of the Apes was his own, Britons are beginning to realize that the remote desert island of “Lord Of The Flies” is, in fact, located just off the coast of Europe in the northeast Atlantic. Within two generations of the Blitz and the Battle of Britain, a significant proportion of the once-free British people entrusted themselves to social rewiring by liberal compassionate Big Government and thereby rendered themselves paralytic and unemployable save for nonspeaking parts in “Rise of The Planet Of The Apes.” And even that would likely be too much like hard work.

Third, the redoubtable Theodore Dalrymple weighs in again on the appalling state of British youth:

In Britain nowadays, the difference between ordinary social life and riot is only a matter of degree, not of type…

If the authorities show neither the will nor the capacity to deal with such an easily solved problem—and willfully do all they can to worsen it—is it any wonder that they exhibit, in the face of more difficult problems, all the courage and determination of frightened rabbits?

The rioters in the news last week had a thwarted sense of entitlement that has been assiduously cultivated by an alliance of intellectuals, governments and bureaucrats. “We’re fed up with being broke,” one rioter was reported as having said, as if having enough money to satisfy one’s desires were a human right rather than something to be earned.

But while the rioters have been maintained in a condition of near-permanent unemployment by government subvention augmented by criminal activity, Britain was importing labor to man its service industries. You can travel up and down the country and you can be sure that all the decent hotels and restaurants will be manned overwhelmingly by young foreigners; not a young Briton in sight (thank God).

The reason for this is clear: The young unemployed Britons not only have the wrong attitude to work, for example regarding fixed hours as a form of oppression, but they are also dramatically badly educated. Within six months of arrival in the country, the average young Pole speaks better, more cultivated English than they do.

The icing on the cake, as it were, is that social charges on labor and the minimum wage are so high that no employer can possibly extract from the young unemployed Briton anything like the value of what it costs to employ him. And thus we have the paradox of high youth unemployment at the very same time that we suck in young workers from abroad.

Speaking of Dalrymple, the folks behind The Skeptical Doctor, a site dedicated to his writings, dropped me a line, and their site is well worth pursuing for those who can’t get enough Dalrymple, and for anyone interested in what lead the UK to it’s current state (among many other topics).

Remember, looters are “disenfranchised members of the working class” but Tea Party protesters are bigots.

Finally, in what may be vestigial traces of a spine, British courts have been ordered to ignore the usual sentencing guidelines and actually send rioters to jail.

Texas Taxpayers Defeat Liberal Interest Groups

Saturday, May 7th, 2011

Over on BurkaBlog I chanced across this framing of the debate over passing the state budget:

Who has more clout: A fictional Texas Ranger and a former major corporate CEO or a cadre of right wing interest groups?

Texas Senate Republicans gave an unabashed nod to the interest groups this week by passing a state budget that balances without tapping the rainy day fund. Instead, the Senate budget relies on accounting tricks and contingent spending. If an economic recovery fails to materialize, even deeper cuts to public education will occur.

The battle was for the senators’ heads and hearts on one side and fear of political retribution on the other. The public school coalition Raise Your Hand Texas ran television commercials featuring Tommy Lee Jones, who starred in the classic mini-series Lonesome Dove, and former GM and AT&T executive Ed Whitacre urging Texans to press against cuts to education. However, when the smoke cleared from the Senate’s budget debate, it was Michael Quinn Sullivan of Empower Texans, Peggy Venable of Americans for Prosperity, and Brooke Rollins of the Texas Public Policy Foundation who had carried the day.

The trio also ran commercials urging Republican senators to stick with state spending cuts proposed by the House. But lobbyists and lawmakers tell me the deciding factor was really the threat that the groups would find Republican primary opponents to run against incumbents and make sure the opponents were well financed. “It’s just intimidation,” said former Lieutenant Governor Bill Ratliff, one of the lobbyists for Raise Your Hand.

Well, that’s one way to spin the story. Here’s another way: Liberal pressure groups defeated by actual Texas taxpayers. And the possibility that an incumbent might actually be challenged in their primary? That’s not intimidation, it’s called democracy.

The underlying attitude of that piece seems to be: How dare elected representatives vote for limited government the way their constituents actually want rather than vote for big government the way liberal interest groups I agree with lobby for?

For years Republicans could get away with breaking their pledges to control government spending, knowing that the MSM would fall all over themselves to praise them for their “courage.” What’s changed has been the Tea Party and similar groups actually paying attention and challenging Republicans who break their promises. That’s what’s changed, and that’s what’s helping hold down spending.

No wonder liberals hate it.

Taxpayers can see the end results of the blue state model of big government, higher taxes, and caving in to unions and other liberal interest groups in California. Given the statements of some of the commentators here, California should be doing much better than Texas.

It isn’t. California businesses and taxpayers are leaving in droves to settle in Texas, because our red state economy is weathering the current recession much better than bankrupt, free-spending California.

The red state model is a success and the blue state model is a failure, and making an environment that is friendly to businesses and taxpayers is a far more effective strategy for states than making an environment that is friendly to big government, bureaucrat unions and liberal interest groups.

This is why Republicans are so firmly entrenched in Texas, and why Democrats haven’t won a statewide race in nearly two decades: The red state model works, the blue state model doesn’t.

Texas 2012 Senate Race Updates for April 18

Monday, April 18th, 2011
  • Texas Iconoclast examines Ricardo Sanchez’s chances.
  • Paul Burka doesn’t think any Democrat has a chance:

    Patty Murray’s explanation for why she thinks Texas might be in play is “demographic change.” We have been hearing that line for many years now, and there is no evidence that demographic change has changed voting patterns. Democrats make the mistake of looking at Hispanic participation in California, in Colorado, in Arizona, in New Mexico, and thinking that Texas could be just like those states. I disagree. Hispanics in those states are alienated. Angry people vote. Hispanics in Texas are not alienated. Unless the Democrats have some pretty good polling that shows the Republicans are overreaching with their budget cuts–and I doubt that they do–they should continue to regard Texas as a lost cause.

  • National first quarter fundraising winners and losers from both the Washington Post and Hotline on Call. I’ve been checking the FEC site regularly, and the numbers for Texas Senate candidates (beyond the withdrawn Florence Shapiro) still aren’t up yet.
  • Moe Lane on Sanchez:

    If Sanchez runs as a Democrat, the groups that would have been most likely to push for further investigation at this late date–the antiwar Left–will not be interested in pursuing the issue. The antiwar Left will, in fact, enthusiastically support the man who was their head devil in their designated Hell on Earth…because to do otherwise would be to show some elementary sense of self-worth and dignity, and the antiwar Left has neither. So–when your Democratic masters get around to picking your candidate for you–go ahead and endorse Sanchez, ye progressives. Get on the floor and lick those boots. Not that Sanchez will win, anyway; 2012 will be a bad year for a Democrat in Texas. But it’s always fun to watch the antiwar movement futilely beat its own ‘principles’ to death on command for the benefit of their masters. You’d think that it’d get old eventually, but no.

  • Over at Wired, Spencer Ackerman is also not enthused about Sanchez.
  • Article on the Waco Tea Party event, including snippets from Michael Williams’ speech.
  • Jared Lee Loughner is a Left-Wing Extremist Raving Nutbag

    Sunday, January 9th, 2011

    The evidence is now in, and what little seems to be known about accused Arizona shooter Jared Lee Loughner from people that knew him was that “he was leftwing” and “liberal in wanting to change the way the world was run, we both wanted to. He took it to an extreme I never would’ve.”

    Does that mean that Arizona Democratic Congressman Gabrielle Giffords was shot by a “left wing extremist?” No. When you read his manifesto, you see that his political leanings, such as they are, were not “left” or “right” so much as “completely farking loony toons batshit insane.” His manifestos jump from subject to subject more quickly than a jittering tweaker flips channels on a TV remote. To paraphrase an entry in the Bulwer-Lytton contest, ideas seem to tumble around randomly in his head, making and breaking connections like a load of laundry in a dryer without Cling Free. They have some of the same quality of argument as Time Cube Guy: It’s less that his manifesto is wrong than that you can’t actually understand what he’s trying to say.

    (Boing Boing has even more of his manifestos up, and the Time Cube Guy vibe only gets stronger. Except for the fact that Gene Ray never killed anyone…)

    Loughner’s liberalism didn’t make him crazy, his crazy made him crazy.
    I mean, how crazy do you have to be to expelled from a pre-algebra class? “Solve for X.” “Admit it! X is a total lie!!!! There is no X, only Zuul!”

    Which makes it all the more galling how quickly The Usual Left Wing Suspects tried to pin his deeds on the Tea Party in general and Sarah Palin specifically. Never mind that military terminology has been in politics for a long time, or that liberals have done the exact thing they’re now jumping on Palin for.

    Every time anyone even remotely connected to conservative causes commits a violent act, the nutroots and their media enablers are quick to label them a “right wing extremist,” but anyone with demonstrable left wing sympathies is a “lone nut.” (Indeed, they’re pretty blatant about it.) Indeed, one of the most famous assassins in American history was a known communist sympathizer who defected to the Soviet Union, but you never hear Lee Harvey Oswald described by the media as a “left-wing extremist.”

    And don’t forget that the far left’s open and oft-stated desire to assassinate George W. Bush. Thus the attempt by prominent liberals to make Loughner a Tea Partier is more than a little contemptible. But such contemptible behavior is no longer surprising; it’s merely what they do.

    (Hat tips to Instapundit (more than once), Powerline, and a few random Fark posters.)

    Breakdown on how the DREAM Act Illegal Alien Amnesty Failed

    Sunday, December 19th, 2010

    This post from Roy Beck of the anti-amnesty NumbersUSA, which is further analyzed by Mickey Kaus here, goes into detail about which Senators flipped from pro- to anti-amnesty. Short version: Republicans were a lot more scared of a Tea Party primary challenge in 2012 than Democrats were of general election challengers. Sayeth Kaus:

    Score one for losing Delaware Tea Partier Christine O’Donnell, who knocked off establishment pick Rep. Mike Castle (who voted for DREAM) in the GOP primary. Even score one for Alaskan Joe Miller. He probably alienated Republican Lisa Murkowski by beating her in the primary, and ultimately she won reelection anyway as a write-in. But that’s just one lost Senate vote. By my count, Miller’s primary coup may have helped gain around ten votes by terrifying GOP incumbents who might otherwise have been tempted by the prospect of a feel-good, bipartisan, MSM-approved pro-DREAM stand.

    Beck also noted at least two Democrats, Conrad of North Dakota and McCaskill of Missouri, who voted for an amnesty despite coming from deep red states and being up for reelection in 2012. Those two seats should be big, juicy GOP takeover targets two years hence…