TEA PARTY FRACTURED - What Does It Mean?

The Tea Party... is it a political party... or more like a "toga party"? As of today the Tea Party is not an official political party, nor is it seen as such by most Americans. Actually, outside of the Tea Party movement itself, most Americans don't have a real "handle" on what the Tea Party believes, does, or is.

There was a Tea Party conducted here in Grants Pass Oregon, a small town of approximately 30,000, on April 15th of 2009. "TEA", in this case, is an acronym representing the phrase "Taxed Enough Already". You should be able to deduce from that acronym - and the date upon which the nation-wide Tea Party was held - that the primary thrust of the movement is stabilized, preferably reduced taxation, and fiscal restraint demonstrated by our government. In fact, inasmuch as the beast of government survives only off the earnings of We the People, doing the first would necessitate the second.

You can now see that the Tea Party movement is (1) against increased taxes, (2) fiscally conservative, and (3) supports the concept of smaller, less powerful federal government - government within the confines of our Constitution.

The liberal radical left wants the world to believe that the Tea Party movement is not a true grass-roots movement, but rather that those extremely intelligent, "rich Republicans" are behind the whole idea. They few are the puppet masters, manipulating the rest of us poor, ignorant Bible-loving, gun-toting, freedom-addicted, Constitution-following dummies into supporting their desire for power. That's how they say they see us, because that's how they wish we really were. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Tea Party is made up of Republicans, Independents, and even some disenchanted Democrats. I'm fairly certain that some of the Republicans are "rich" - as are some of the Independents and some of the Democrats. However, I didn't see any truly exotic or outrageously expensive vehicles at our Tea Party. A few Cadillacs, a couple of Lincolns and a Mercedes or two. Not a Rolls, Bentley, Ferrari or Bugatti anywhere in sight. There were no YSL suits or A. Testoni shoes on the men. No Louis Vitton handbags or Prada shoes worn by the ladies. I saw one sport coat, and two ties in the crowd of 750. This was a working-class, jeans and t-shirt crowd. This was the backbone of America making itself heard!

The turnout here in Grants Pass for the Tax Day Tea Party was 750 people. That works out to 2.5% of the population. Since total figures for the national Tea Party are quite elusive, lets just use that 2.5% against the national population of 306,000,000. That calculates as 7,650,000 participants nationwide. This does not include those who may have been working, hospitalized or otherwise indisposed and were therefore unable to attend - we can consider them as "Tea Party Sympathizers". I won't even attempt to assign a numeric value to them, because I have no idea how many "sympathizers" there may have been. There could only be ten... or as many as ten million.

How is the Tea Party "fractured"? It is fractured by its very structure - or lack thereof. There is no clearly recognized, single focal point for a "National Tea Party Headquarters". The "leadership" is fragmented within geographical regions and even within states -
(1) Judson Phillips is the founder of the Tea Party Nation
(2) Tom Knapp claims to be founder of the 21st century version of the Boston Tea Party
(3) Eric Odom is the founder of the American Liberty Alliance (ALA), the group that launched and organized the tea party movement across the country
(4) Constitutionalist grass roots activist Chad Peace - as part of the original team of people who organized Boston Tea Party re-enactment protests in 50 different cities in late 2007 - claims to be the co-founder of the movement.
And recently, some moron lawyer/radio host in Florida filed a lawsuit to be granted copyrights to the name of Tea Party. There are even more claimants to founding the Tea Party movement!

Such fragmentation makes centralizing power difficult at best, and impossible at worst. The saving factor is that the goals of all the individual groups are the same - lower taxes, fiscal conservatism, and smaller government within the framework of the Constitution. There is, however, one consistent focal point within the movement - Sarah Palin. Sarah is not an official in any of the multiple branches of the movement, but she is the only physical common thread between them all.

The Tea Party Convention was attended by only 600 people. Perhaps there are only 600 "rich Republicans" in the movement, since - at $549 per ticket - it was out of the question for most of us who are associated with the movement. Had it been free - or even $100 per ticket - I'm sure there would have been thousands of attendees. The Tea Party movement has the potential to become the 3rd nationally recognized, viable political party - but only the potential at this point. What seems most likely is that the Tea Party will put its weight behind those candidates who have either proven track records as conservative traditional constitutionalists, or, those political newcomers who show the most promise of demonstrating those traits.

The only thing that is OBVIOUS about the Tea Party movement, is that America is still in the mood for "change", and that we are very unhappy with the ones that have been proposed during the past year by our government. Does government respond to those
indicators in a positive fashion? No... instead of adjusting their behavior, they "go to the mattresses" and begin their siege on Americans - insisting that the 535 people in Washington D.C. know better than the other 306,000,000 what is best for the country.

"THESE ARE THE TIMES THAT TRY MENS SOULS."

Those words were penned by Thomas Paine - American - on December 23rd, 1776, in a pamphlet called "The Crisis". Words which are as applicable today as they were 233 years ago. Paine was a true believer in freedom. Freedom from, freedom to, and freedom for all Americans. Freedom from tyranny and government oppression. Freedom to assemble, associate, speak, write and worship. Freedom for all motivated Americans to develop their full potential, or to earn a fair and reasonable wage for their labors. To worship - or not - in the manner of their own choosing, and to be the architects of their own destiny. Thomas Paine, although something less than a social and financial success, was the personification of "the American spirit".

At that time Paine was expressing his opposition to Britain's King George III's tyrannical rule over the American colonies. The wording is a bit archaic, and therefore awkward for today's reader, but tyranny is still tyranny, and revolution is still revolution. "These ARE the time that try mens souls."

In today's United States of America there is a significant political, philosophical, and moral rift between the left-wing "liberal progressives", and the right-wing "conservative traditionalists". There is a second Revolutionary War being fought as I write this blog. Thus far the skirmishes have been restricted to the mass media, the halls of Congress, and the "town hall meetings"... and the fusillades are only verbal. Retaliatory barrages from the White House consist of verbal smokescreens designed to blind and confuse the opposition forces, while simultaneously obscuring the intent of those who wish to rule rather than govern and discrediting those who are most outspoken against the rapid, insidious development of the infrastructure needed to support that rule. Citizens are governed by choice - slaves are ruled by whatever means necessary! Paine also said, "Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has a right (not only to TAX) but "to BIND us in ALL CASES WHATSOEVER" and if being bound in that manner, is not slavery, then is there not such a thing as slavery upon earth." (Two hundred thirty three years is a bit long, but I think that - were Thomas Paine alive today - he would be having a deja vu experience.)

Paine continues, delineating the difference between Tories (conservatives, sometimes called "loyalists") and Whigs (liberals, social reformists, believed in loose interpretation of the Constitution) -"Why is it that the enemy have left the New England provinces, and made these middle ones the seat of war? The answer is easy: New England is not infested with Tories, and we are. I have been tender in raising the cry against these men, and used numberless arguments to show them their danger, but it will not do to sacrifice a world either to their folly or their baseness. The period is now arrived, in which either they or we must change our sentiments, or one or both must fall. And what is a Tory? Good God! What is he? I should not be afraid to go with a hundred Whigs against a thousand Tories, were they to attempt to get into arms. Every Tory is a coward; for servile, slavish, self-interested fear is the foundation of Toryism; and a man under such influence, though he may be cruel, never can be brave."

Today's "Tories" are, politically speaking, primarily Republicans, Independents and assorted impotent-third-party followers. Mostly conservatives, they believe that the Constitution is an enduring document requiring little, if any, "interpretation". They also believe that the best government is the least government.

The "Whigs" of today are the Democrats - and their liberal following of government-dependent entitlement whores, who would sell our freedoms for a big screen TV and a couple of more government give-away programs. They believe the Constitution is a "living document" - one that should be changed as often as they change their minds... or their underwear, whichever comes first. The "blame America first" crowd, whose words and actions echo those of the Pogo Possum cartoon of 1970, wherein he proclaims "We have met the enemy and he is us."
The difference today is that the Tories are the ones who would "protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic", while the Whigs would tremble, quake and hide, while crying out for their nanny-government to protect and save them.

Our constitution - for all the wonderful rights it does promise us - it does not promise that we will be given anything other than that which we earn! It does not promise that we have a right to take that which another has earned, nor do we have a right to not be embarrassed, inconvenienced or otherwise upset by something we may experience during our appointed time on this Earth. We have the opportunity to fail in our endeavors, as well as the opportunity to succeed! How we exercise those rights and opportunities is entirely up to us.

Thomas Paine was not just a "man of his time"... he was a man for all times, and his words ring as true today as they did on December 23, 1776! Where will you be when the voices of opposition are silenced... right before the other noises begin?

Sarah Palin "Stand Up For Our Nation" - The Third Political Party

It has been my contention for years that what we need in this country is a viable third political party. Yes, we do have several alternative political parties, but none that is really viable. There is the Green Party of the United States, the Constitution Party, and the Libertarian Party. Then there are the lesser-known "fringe parties", such as the American Party, the American Independent Party (I'm still trying to figure that one out, since the word independent means non-aligned), the America's Independent Party (not related to the preceding AIP), the American Nazi Party (there's one we can all be proud of, right?), the American Reform Party, the Communist Party USA (another anathema to the Democratic Republic, as is the Nazi Party), and the Freedom/Socialist Party... plus about two dozen other - virtually unknown outside their miniscule membership - political parties.

This creates a lot of simply wasted votes in any election. When we get to the fringe parties, there is not one of them that is the least bit viable, yet there is a substantial number of people who will consistently vote for a non-starter. (These are undoubtedly the same folks who would bet on a 3-legged horse to win the Preakness.) Let's look at the three main alternatives, which - combined - have never drawn 5% of the vote:

1. The Green Party: The informal US-affiliate of the leftist, environmentalist European Greens movement. Their "champions" tend to draw votes away from Democratic candidates, and their platform noticeably less than all-encompassing.

2. The Constitution Party: If nothing else, I love the name! On the other hand, I believe that every party should be focused on supporting the tenets of our Constitution, since that is the document which allowed this country to achieve world-class greatness in less than 200 years. The party is strongly pro-life, anti-gun control,anti-tax, anti-immigration, trade protectionist, "anti-New World Order," anti-United Nations, anti-gay rights, anti-welfare, and pro-school prayer. Personally, I find little in that with which I disagree, so long as school prayer was voluntary, allowing those who did not wish to participate to leave the classroom for the 60 seconds it might take, and it was anti-gay special rights.

3. The Libertarian Party: The Libertarians are neither left nor right. They believe in total individual liberty (pro-drug legalization, pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-home schooling, anti-gun control, etc.) and total economic freedom (anti-welfare, anti-government regulation of businesses, anti-minimum wage, anti-income tax, pro-free trade, etc.). I see little to argue with here either. However, I believe that some government regulation of interstate commerce is necessary, as it also is in the pharmaceutical industry. Public safety first!

Let's get back to the "viable 3rd party" idea, though. What has been lacking in all of these alternative parties - thusfar - is not just a nationally recognized name... but a national name with positive recognition. We don't need social radicals, whether they be tree huggers, dope lovers, or preachers. We also don't need to be represented by those who would sell out the people of this country to the interests of big business or foreign governments. What we do need is radical Americans in our government! We need those who believe that our Constitution is the basis for all that is good and right with the USA, and that our laws, as they are currently written, provide for "equal treatment under the law". We need to be represented ONLY by those people whose concerns are first and foremost for our country and its citizens.

Sarah Palin is obviously one of those people. Why else would the left spend so much time, energy and money demonizing her? Why is Sarah David Letterman's favorite punching bag? Why do Adriana Huffington - and her cadré of communist co-conspirators - show such disdain for Sarah Palin?

BECAUSE SHE SCARES THE HELL OUT OF THEM!

She is seen as the single most likely American to burst their temporary, socialist bubble in 2012. Team her with a successful businessman - and experienced state's Chief Executive - like Mitt Romney, and the Democrats will suffer immediate bladder control problems. Sarah Palin WILL "Stand Up For Our Nation". God bless Sarah, and God bless America!