October 29, 2010
The Tea Party

Posted by Jim Lichtman | What do you think?

In my Honesty and Trust report (Aug. 2006), The Center for Cultural Studies and Analysis wrote, “The survey reflects a growing perception of a large gap between the values of corporations and government institutions and the values of the American middle class. Values gaps are always perceived as threatening, and a perceived threat to the middle class inevitably leads to social action as it did during the Great Depression.

“It will take only one precipitating event,” the Center tells us, “an Ethical 9/11, in conjunction with the rise of a recognized [perceived] champion of the middle class... to gain critical mass.”

On the surface, The Tea Party would seem to be that champion.

While many people have associated the middle-class with The Tea Party, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll (April 2010), “the 18 percent of Americans who identify themselves as Tea Party supporters tend to be Republican, white, male, married, older than 45 [and] wealthier and better-educated than the general public.”

Beginning with protests in Washington in 2009 against the economic stimulus bill, The Tea Party graduated from a few protests to a national movement of angry, loud protestors with a fanatical God, guts and guns fringe element.

Although the movement gained critical mass in their opposition to Wall Street bailouts and President Obama’s health care bill, they have resisted becoming a formalized third, political party. However, their grassroots operation quickly spread from state to state, alternately preaching their gospel of constitutionalism and support for those political candidates that stand for their key concerns: adherence to the Constitution, reduction of the size of government, elimination of wasteful spending, and a reduction in the national debt.

My first reaction to their manifesto: “Who’s not for that?” But, as the expression goes, “The devil is in the details,” and according to a heavily footnoted entry in Wikipedia, contradictory details abound.

“…52% of Tea Party supporters told pollsters for CBS/New York Times that they think their own ‘income taxes this year are fair.’ Additionally, a Bloomberg News poll found that Tea Partiers are not against increased government action in all cases. ‘The ideas that find nearly universal agreement among Tea Party supporters are rather vague,’ says J. Ann Selzer, the pollster who created the survey. ‘You would think any idea that involves more government action would be anathema, and that is just not the case.’

“Seventy percent want the federal government to aid in job creation. Also, nearly half think the government should limit Wall Street executive bonuses, according to the nationwide poll which was conducted between March 19 and March 22, 2010.”

In the midst of a major recession, the mortgage crisis, two very unpopular wars, near double-digit unemployment, not to mention a slew of ethics scandals involving Wall Street and political figures, frustration and loud rallies are understandable.

Although Tea Partiers have tapped into very real anger, it has yet to demonstrate the necessary reason to lead America in a clearly defined new direction. Protesting and crackpot comments by candidates is not wisdom and I question the wisdom of some of those Tea Party-supported candidates. 

Delaware’s Senatorial candidate Christine O’Donnell recently asked her opponent, “Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?”

Nevada’s Sharron Angle, among other strange statements said, “…if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies…”

Tea Party-backed candidate for New York Governor, Carl Paladino said, “Instead of handing out the welfare checks, we’ll teach people how to earn their check. We’ll teach them personal hygiene… the personal things they don’t get when they come from dysfunctional homes.”

Alaska’s Joe Miller lied about his misconduct while serving as a government attorney in Fairbanks.

And Rand Paul, an early Tea Party supported senatorial candidate, believes in a “Constitutionally limited government,” which includes overturning Medicare and other so-called social programs enacted from Roosevelt’s New Deal.

While I support some of the party's goals, and agree that we’ve seen a serious decline in American values in the last several years, the party is going to have to get serious or get out of the business of politics. They’re not going to get far if they keep making choices like Miller, Paladino, Angle, O’Donnell and Paul. 

If they want to be taken seriously, they need to translate their anger into a specific political platform with the necessary national leadership to develop and support those candidates with the requisite background, experience and political smarts to achieve their goals. To do that, they must become a legitimate third party. If they don’t, they’ll simply run out of steam.


 
 

  Reader Comments

Comments by Linda, CA, October 29, 2010

Very good article and your take is spot on, in my opinion. Christine O'Donnell is the catalyst for how this party is not legitimate and having the rock star of Sarah Palin at the helm is a very scary direction for America.

As a Regan Independent, I've yet to come across a single politician that has a handle on the moral code as it relates to all of our issues in America now.....Finance, Education, Employement - - - we are in this mess because of greed and politics.

We need Mayor Bloomberg!

Comments by Joan, CA, October 29, 2010

Today I had an interesting exchange with a young man who works for [Credit Card name witheld] Services.  I had called because I was late by 4 days in sending in my payment.  I paid it over the phone and when he had all the information I asked if there wasn't a "grace" period now.  His reply was no.  I responded well, there used to be - then I remembered that this courtesy probably bit the dust about 20 years ago - time goes so fast.  I just moaned and said "well, I guess I'm just old and you are young".  He didn't say a word so I said "you are voting aren't you?" his response was "no".   I couldn't believe my ears and replied "I'm not telling you who or what to vote for only asking that you vote, it is so important".  His reply to me was "No, it's not something I believe in".  At that point I just shut up - there was really nothing I could say.

I just couldn't believe what I heard - am still dumbfounded by this mentality.  I venture to say that he is not alone in his feelings/mentality.  What has happened to Americans? why are people so complacent? what is there not to believe in?  why do they assume so much? why do they feel so entitled to be Americans without any responsibility or loyalty?  

A big question for all of us who really do care and remember an America for which which we were so proud.

Comments by Terry, CA, October 29, 2010

The Tea Party baffles me, for while I agree in many of their purported aims -- personal responsibility, less wasteful spending -- those aims seem to be a veneer for something more insidious.  When I read in today's NY Times that Haley Barbour wants to "take our country back," I think, "Really?  Haley Barbour?"  My sense is that anyplace Haley Barbour wants to "take our country back to" is not the visionary, diverse, vibrant country many of us longed and hoped for when we chose Obama.  That there has been such a backlash against what the President represents may not be surprising, but it's hardly compelling.

I thought David Brooks wrote a good column today.  I don't always agree with him and find it grating when he resorts to sarcasm, but his kind of conservatism resonates with me.  Where are these Republicans?

Comments by Frank, CA, October 29, 2010

Pssst.  (said in low voice) "Jim.  Get rid of the word 'ethics' in your correspondence going to anyone politically inclined.  Makes 'em nervous.". (said in boisterous voice)  "Son, 'em Tea Partyers are jest too busy fer ethics.  Sides, they's busy looken' to see Russia from here."

(In normal voice). What a worrisome group.  There is talk that this movement will pick up 30 seats this year.  Their combination of geniuses and morons is frightening.

Comments by Martin, CA, October 29, 2010

Excellent comments and observations! I haven't found anyone yet who
openly admits to even being a member or convert.

Comments by Sue, CA, October 29, 2010

Your blog is a great analysis of the Tea Party's shoutout and mindless harangue against the party in power.  A few avoid the " commie pinko liberal" epithets, but they all use the knee-jerk anti-liberal mantra that says nothing constructive and offers no solutions.  It is OK to use federal assistance,  government controls, intervention, war without the vote of the people, and,  when it appears in their mailbox, a tax relief check.  They say they want no government  control unless it is to promote their religion and dictate womens choices.

According to "the patriots," you are in the wrong camp, you knuckle-head. 

Comments by Julian, CA, October 29, 2010

Yes. I know some of those "over 45, financially secure, well educated, white males" who are voting for Tea Party wackos and nearly-Tea-Party "Republicans" in this election. They are worried about their personal wealth being taken away by Obama in his "socialist" programs. I have never identified as a party member. I vote regarding issues, policies, props, and unfortunately...the least awful of the candidates running. Or, the lesser of two evils. No matter who goes to office, once they enter the chamber and the veil drops, and they get sucked into that drug of power, enter the ranks of the good ol' boys and girls... Well. I don't expect much from any of them. I just hope that their Monopoly game doesn't bring our whole civilization to a crunching halt.

Comments by Gary, CA, October 29, 2010

Good review Jim. One other article said there is a resurgence of the Tea Partiers after a group doesn't like a current administration. 

Comments by Jeremy, CA, October 29, 2010

I enjoy reading your posts.

Comments by John, CA, October 29, 2010

My take on all of it....."completely out of my control.  I am nothing, my opinion is nothing, and an 18 year old pot smoking punk's vote counts the same as mine."  I am focused on my life, my kids, my wife and influencing others around me by example, without placards.  As I turned 76 this week, I realized that very few years since our national greatness after World War II have been inspiring, admirable or moving forward.  Guys like you perform a service for the rest of us, analysing the mellieu of BS out there, but in the long run, I doubt if we move many molecules in the right direction. 

Comments by Leonard, CA, October 29, 2010

I think that in some locales there is also a strong racial dimension to the Tea Party movement which comes from a perception on the part of its activists that they must "take back" a country that they no longer recognize as their own.  Sometimes their animus is directed toward an African-American president and other places it is directed toward Mexicans crossing the U.S. border.  See Amy Gardner, "Gauging the scope of the tea party movement in America," The Washington Post Sunday, October 24, 2010.

Comments by Terry, CA, October 29, 2010

Those people are smart enough to know they're not smart enough to answer the questions.

Comments by John, CA, October 31, 2010

Related to your comments on some luminary not understanding that the First Amendment meant "separation of church and state"...

Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press....etc"

As I see it, and as it so clearly reads...the word "separation" never appears, nor did it occur to the writers of the Constitution and Declaration, in both of which God is mentioned often, and in the Declaration: "all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights...."  

Separation is an invention of the recent movement which has removed the Pledge of Allegiance, taken "so help me God" out of a court swearing in, mangers out of parks, "Easter Vacation" becoming Spring Break, "Christmas vacation" becoming Winter Break, and would remove "In God We Trust" from wherever it now exists.

I have already lost a former friend over this, so let's just let it lie and someday after we have left this earthly realm, we can discuss it from a more informed standpoint. 

Pretty clear that the Founders believed America was being created by a Creator and was a special place.

That's where I come from and would bet that fewer than half of any Senator or Congressmen have EVER read both documents in full.  They read their incoming campaign check donations but toss out the IRS requests (Geithner and Rangel).....they know NOTHING. 


 

 

  HOME | about-jim | archives | articles | be-honest | books | excerpt | fame-shame | hero | quotes | suggested-links | Site Map | FAQ  
  copyright © 2010 Jim Lichtman