In all seriousness William, what is the point? Objectively, I've watched the Tea Party amass enough power to handcuff Boehnor, amass enough power to make incumbents afraid of challenges, and yet, they seem to have accomplished little else. It looks like Republicans are going to score another "major" victory with more cuts to food stamps, but 5 years from now, we will likely be no better off in terms of our debt than where we are now. Just sayin
I agree Max the Tea Party is still a bit player. Having begun to infiltrate the GOP as the path of least resistance it has become apparent that both party's share deep progressive roots.
It will take some time. Crawling before baby steps. Baby steps before walking. Walking before running.
William, I have to disagree concerning both party's progressive roots. In fact, both parties recognize that extremists can't be elected as President. Therefore, both parties must appeal to the moderates who make up the majority. Remember Goldwater, Remember McGovern?
Objectively William, I believe the Tea Party has several problems. Like I said, there is something in the movement that is real and I continue to find areas of agreement with them. However, if your manner of operating here is a bellweather, than I see them as a group who will accept nothing short of absolute purity for legislation they participate in. Throw in a stated goal of undoing Roe v Wade and the crazy shit that people like Åiken said, and I feel like I don't even want to bother talking to them.
Contrary to what it may seem, I am very concerned about the debt, and I believe there are social programs that are taken advantage of that should be ended. Still, I accept the world as it actually is today and want to see solutions that acknowledge reality and offer what seems like a reasonable plan forward. The Teas are never going to get a chance to pass ideologically pure legislation. If they are content to block Boehnor from doing anything except passing debt ceiling raises with Democrat help, well, that's something I guess.
People like Ross Perot, and Ralph Nader gave frustrated people a choice to vote for and arguably and ironically, they each succeeded in tipping the election away from their views rather than towards it. I don't see how they ever take control of the whole process
So much of it Max is a matter of perspective. I look at it as a movement similar to the anti-war movement while I think you see it as an actual Party seeking control, power. I could care less about power. I want to live my life. Fix some things and go home and live my life with my family.
I think the Republican Party used to be like this. In 2009 I realized both Parties are actually progressive. Yes there are pockets of people within the Party that still think like me, and many new representatives that we have promoted. Most of the leadership after having lived the DC lifestyle for a time fall into the roll of nobility.
Fix the debt and a couple of things and go home. That's where the Tea Party I know is, I think.
In all seriousness William, what is the point? Objectively, I've watched the Tea Party amass enough power to handcuff Boehnor, amass enough power to make incumbents afraid of challenges, and yet, they seem to have accomplished little else. It looks like Republicans are going to score another "major" victory with more cuts to food stamps, but 5 years from now, we will likely be no better off in terms of our debt than where we are now. Just sayin
ReplyDeleteI agree Max the Tea Party is still a bit player. Having begun to infiltrate the GOP as the path of least resistance it has become apparent that both party's share deep progressive roots.
DeleteIt will take some time. Crawling before baby steps. Baby steps before walking. Walking before running.
William, I have to disagree concerning both party's progressive roots. In fact, both parties recognize that extremists can't be elected as President. Therefore, both parties must appeal to the moderates who make up the majority. Remember Goldwater, Remember McGovern?
DeleteObjectively William, I believe the Tea Party has several problems. Like I said, there is something in the movement that is real and I continue to find areas of agreement with them. However, if your manner of operating here is a bellweather, than I see them as a group who will accept nothing short of absolute purity for legislation they participate in. Throw in a stated goal of undoing Roe v Wade and the crazy shit that people like Åiken said, and I feel like I don't even want to bother talking to them.
DeleteContrary to what it may seem, I am very concerned about the debt, and I believe there are social programs that are taken advantage of that should be ended. Still, I accept the world as it actually is today and want to see solutions that acknowledge reality and offer what seems like a reasonable plan forward. The Teas are never going to get a chance to pass ideologically pure legislation. If they are content to block Boehnor from doing anything except passing debt ceiling raises with Democrat help, well, that's something I guess.
People like Ross Perot, and Ralph Nader gave frustrated people a choice to vote for and arguably and ironically, they each succeeded in tipping the election away from their views rather than towards it. I don't see how they ever take control of the whole process
So much of it Max is a matter of perspective. I look at it as a movement similar to the anti-war movement while I think you see it as an actual Party seeking control, power. I could care less about power. I want to live my life. Fix some things and go home and live my life with my family.
DeleteI think the Republican Party used to be like this. In 2009 I realized both Parties are actually progressive. Yes there are pockets of people within the Party that still think like me, and many new representatives that we have promoted. Most of the leadership after having lived the DC lifestyle for a time fall into the roll of nobility.
Fix the debt and a couple of things and go home. That's where the Tea Party I know is, I think.