Gay Patriot Header Image

Tea Parties:
Channeling Frustration with Ever Bigger Government Into Action

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 2:46 pm - April 15, 2009.
Filed under: Tea Party

One of the standard responses to (and certainly the most legitimate criticism of) the “Tea Party” movement is to question why we didn’t so protest the spending increases of the Bush Administration.

To be sure, while we and many other right-of-center blogs took Republicans to task for his profligacy, we never took to the streets to do so.  Perhaps, as I suggested in a recent post we might have gotten more attention from our elected officials if we had.

In quite possibly the best rant addressing both the legitimacy of the current protest and conservative frustration with out-of-touch Republicans, Patterico wonders about the road ahead:

But it needs to be channeled into action, or it won’t do us any good at all.

The problem is, what action? Bigger donations to the same clowns who let the deficit balloon during the Bush administration? Who were too gutless to fight lawless filibusters of qualified judicial nominees? Who allowed Barack Obama to cruise to victory by hanging the mortgage crisis around the neck of George Bush — without a fight? A crisis that was a product of neglect by both parties, quite notably corrupticrats like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd?

No. We’re not falling back in line with these morons.

But we have to do something.

Exactly.  We have to do something.

Our next task is not to convince the left-wing naysayers of our sincerity.  In their reflexive resentment of any political movement at odds with their ideology, they’ll criticize us no matter how many people show up today to protest.  (And the initial indications are large crowds across the nation.)  Our task is to get elected officials on board, committed to cutting excessive government spending and holding the line on taxes.

Success today is only the first step.

Share

73 Comments

  1. Earlier someone asked the leftists….do you really expect Obama to print 5 Trillion dollars, spend it and not have to pay for it somewhere down the line? Actually leftists do expect not to have to pay for it. Like folks that can’t afford the mortgages they signed for. They expect someone else will ride in and fix it. Or the government will just say, nevermind….and the debts will vanish. When I explain to my young nephews, 26 and 36, that this Obamateleprompter spending will cost them at least $35,000 and a 50% federal tax rate, they start to imagine how their lives will change. Donald Trump today on radio predicted possibly within 2 years, rising inflation that may hit 20%. Riviling Jimmy Carters 22% inflation. That my friends hurts the rich and poor.

    Comment by Gene on Pennsylvania — April 16, 2009 @ 1:02 am - April 16, 2009

  2. Here in Pennsylvania one of the first things we can do is support in everyway a primary challenge to Arlen Spector. If a true conservative, Pat Toomey challenges him we could make a statement.

    Comment by Gene on Pennsylvania — April 16, 2009 @ 1:07 am - April 16, 2009

  3. #21 ILC snarks “…to GOP Establishment “moderates” wanting to pretend that they are somehow relevant to a current issue coming from the American grassroots… to GOP Establishment “progressives” wanting to faux-spin the Tea Party movement as something that could somehow be anti-conservative…”

    Nawh, I don’t think so ILC. I can’t speak for the undisclosed event you supposedly attended, but here in Michigan there were lots and lots of independents, moderates and others touching elbows with hardline conservatives (from the signs being carried) and libertarians –yep, there were the usual RonPaulite “End the Fed” and “The Answer is Gold” signs.

    I didn’t see any moderates try to claim credit for anything… except for a few modest moderates I know who actually did something to help the event succeed. Like yours truly taking a group of high school whiz-kids to the event, kicking in $500 to help pay for Joe the Plumber’s appearance with an eye toward better media coverage and holding a local pre-event organizing meeting in our home.

    But you go on with your with your little digs. You’re right up there with CNN’s reporter, I guess. Full of disdain for those who succeed and contribute and elect to exercise their democratic rights.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOrPzVECSjo

    Next time there’s an event, my advice to you would be instead of leaving the office for an hour, plan ahead and leave the office with 2-3-4 fellow workers… invite family & others to join you… think about helping the effort succeed instead of just using it as an opportunity to selfishly engage in some “feel-good” “I’m doing something important” time.

    And of course, don’t work against those who wanted to defeat the ObamaBus in the first place –I’m not part of the echo chamber here who wanted Obama to win in order to keep their bitching rights fully engaged. You know who they are, by now.

    The question was where does the Tea Party community go from here.

    It’s not likely, in spite of your spite, that moderates will be claiming anything from the event… or that fake anti-elite populism you’ve glummed onto of “It’s all about the Elites!” Because that doesn’t advance anything except the cynic wing of America.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 16, 2009 @ 7:50 am - April 16, 2009

  4. Dan, spam filter’s got a comment hanging.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 16, 2009 @ 12:59 pm - April 16, 2009

  5. Gene, since I live just the other side of the Mason-Sixon line and both of my senators suck the wax tadpole, I look forward to volunteering for Pat Toomey in the Primary and the General, as well as donating to his campaign and that of Bill Russell.

    Back on topic, there are stark contrasts between right-wing protests and left-wing protests.

    Comment by V the K — April 16, 2009 @ 1:09 pm - April 16, 2009

  6. Gene, I’m a big supporter of the notion that tough GOP contests make for a stronger candidate selection process and welcome primary competition. No serving pol ought to think that they have a “right” to a seat… nor a nod toward nomination and the Party’s candidacy.

    I don’t have a horse in the PA Sen 10 race. Of course, having watched Toomey and his Club cult over the last few years, I’d rather he wasn’t involved with the GOP but if he can win the nomination, then so be it.

    My question is if he can actually win in a GenElection? Given the left-drift of PA voters since Reagan’s ’80 win, given Rendell can’t run as Gov3, I’m wondering if all-the-King’s-men that Toomey can muster will be enough to beat the Dems?

    And that’s not just a recent drift left. AlGore took the State, Kerry took the state, Obama took it in a landslide… the StateSen picked up a seat and kept their majority status much like we did here in Michigan since 1983. But that has more to do with the right candidate recruitment strategy than voter preferences.

    I just wonder if the statement that farRight conservative Toomey might make is that the PA-GOP picks losers in a campaign that fails to appeal to a majority of voters. If it’s Specter -God help PA.

    One good thing is money. It’s pretty clear that given the current conventional 50% Dem, 41% GOP and 9% indie breakout in PA the US SenGOPCaucus isn’t going to be spending $$ on PA unless Specter is the choice… so Toomey’s vast treasure chest of contributors will make that seat even easier to right off by the RNC. That means more RNC $$ for other, more worthy and winnable seats elsewhere.

    Or do you think PA voters have changed since Nov 08, Nov 04, Nov 00 and Toomey’s message can resonate with a majority of voters?

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 16, 2009 @ 4:56 pm - April 16, 2009

  7. …Toomey and his Club cult …
    …farRight conservative Toomey… the PA-GOP picks losers…

    Is it back to the conservative-bashing?

    A blog that calls itself “GOP for Liberty” and whose top 3-4 articles look OK to me, likes Toomey:
    http://gop4liberty.blogspot.com/2009/04/libertarian-republican-pat-toomey.html

    Wiki (not absolutely trustworthy, I know) says:

    In 1998, Toomey ran for the 15th District seat being vacated by incumbent Paul McHale… Toomey successfully flipped the seat from the Democratic McHale and won by an unexpectedly wide ten-point margin… was reelected two more times by relatively comfortable margins. While the 15th has historically been a Democratic district…

    In 2004… Toomey frequently denounced Specter as a liberal spendthrift…

    Sounds good. As for Specter’s great vulnerability, as Toomey pointed out yesterday:

    “In recent months, Senator Specter voted in favor of the unprecedented Wall Street and auto company bailouts and the massive “stimulus” spending bill. Senator Specter is on the wrong side of these critical issues…”

    Toomey sounds OK, so far. We’ll see.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 16, 2009 @ 5:58 pm - April 16, 2009

  8. ILC offers, with a fair dose of snark, “Is it back to the conservative-bashing?”

    I think you missed the operative word in my comments, ILC.

    Sigh.

    Again.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 16, 2009 @ 10:28 pm - April 16, 2009

  9. No snark, MM. Just the truth.

    Actually I think you might be projecting again, too. There was snark, I think, in your words which I carefully quoted.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 17, 2009 @ 1:18 am - April 17, 2009

  10. And P.S. – Care to respond on-point, about Toomey or Spector?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 17, 2009 @ 1:19 am - April 17, 2009

  11. ILC, you seem to have the big-ego penchant for trying to draw anyone –except one of your echo chamber boys– into a tit/tat/tit/tat endless repetition of “you said I said A”, “I meant to say B”, “you’re mean, I’m not” nonsense. But keep up that snark, ILC; one day I’m sure you can grow up and be even more like some of your idols here.

    I already spoke about Toomey and Specter; nice try at snark-laden spin on your part tho’. I spoke fairly and correctly from the position of an ACTUAL GOP activist who actually DOES something to change our political system –unlike some here who, at best, whine and play the village cynic all day because that feeds their needs.

    Now, to answer the question raised in # 57; the operative word above was “Gene”. My comments were addressed to Gene of PA, not you.

    Maybe you can post comments about the thread? Or the issue the Gene raised? Or maybe something that doesn’t require your snarky, petty back-biting tricks? Of course, that would require hope you can change those spots… I’m not sure anything in your past practice warrants hope.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 17, 2009 @ 7:53 am - April 17, 2009

  12. MM, I raised the following fair points about Toomey and Specter:

    1) Whatever Toomey’s present flaws, real or imagined, he has, in fact, beaten Pennsylvania Democrats before.

    2) Specter is one of the capitalism-destroying big spenders that many in the Tea Party movement are protesting.

    Again: Do you have an on-point, substantive response to those? It’s starting to look like you don’t.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 17, 2009 @ 10:16 am - April 17, 2009

  13. My comments were addressed to Gene

    So what? This is an open blog, MM. The entire point is for people to read what’s written and respond if and when a response occurs to them. I made substantive points about Toomey, Specter and the Tea Parties. You have made the choice to address me now – twice. But you still haven’t responded to my points. Toomey… Specter… Tea Parties. Focus.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 17, 2009 @ 10:35 am - April 17, 2009

  14. Reading up more about Toomey here… still liking him. He might get a donation from me. 🙂

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 17, 2009 @ 11:41 am - April 17, 2009

  15. ILC offers: “But you still haven’t responded to my points. Toomey… Specter…”

    So what? The question was addressed to Gene. I don’t jump when the junkyard dawg barks, ILC. You seem to be under some impression that you can inject yourself into any argument and like with American Elephant or Ignatius or countless other commenters here, you can badger and harrass until your need for attention is satiated. Go get your rub-on elsewhere. BTW, ILC, it’s a persistent problem you need to work on.

    I spoke about Toomey and Specter already. Your question and need for attention is irrelevant to me.

    Counting down to a self-congratulatory self-backslapping comment from ILC in 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 ,1…

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 17, 2009 @ 11:57 am - April 17, 2009

  16. I’m looking for an on-point reply to what I had to say about Toomey, Specter and Tea Parties… namely:

    1) Whatever Toomey’s present flaws, real or imagined, he has, in fact, beaten Pennsylvania Democrats before.

    2) Specter is one of the capitalism-destroying big spenders that many in the Tea Party movement are protesting.

    Sorry MM, that was your third attempt, but still “not it”. *Sigh*

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 17, 2009 @ 12:17 pm - April 17, 2009

  17. ILC, thanks for proving even old dawgs can’t learn new tricks… once again.

    “Counting down to a self-congratulatory self-backslapping comment from ILC in 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 ,1…”

    You never fail to disappoint.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 17, 2009 @ 12:45 pm - April 17, 2009

  18. BTW, I did answer you in #64 –immediately above your last post.

    To wit: “So what? The question was addressed to Gene. I don’t jump when the junkyard dawg barks, ILC. You seem to be under some impression that you can inject yourself into any argument and like with American Elephant or Ignatius or countless other commenters here, you can badger and harrass until your need for attention is satiated. Go get your rub-on elsewhere.”

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 17, 2009 @ 12:46 pm - April 17, 2009

  19. #64 is my comment. And your comment that you just re-quoted may be chock full of your trademark wild accusations on people who disagree with you, MM, but still doesn’t answer my points about Toomey, Specter and Tea Parties… which were:

    1) Whatever Toomey’s present flaws, real or imagined, he has, in fact, beaten Pennsylvania Democrats before.
    2) Specter is one of the capitalism-destroying big spenders that many in the Tea Party movement are protesting.

    Looking for an on-point reply. Your fourth and fifth addresses toward me… still “not it”. *Sigh*

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 17, 2009 @ 1:21 pm - April 17, 2009

  20. Asked and answered already, ILC; you just can’t handle the truth.

    I’m growing tired of your stunts for attention and junkyard barking.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — April 17, 2009 @ 5:50 pm - April 17, 2009

  21. Still not it, MM. Toomey… Spector… Tea Parties… focus.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 17, 2009 @ 6:14 pm - April 17, 2009

  22. Here are my points again, that you still haven’t answered meaningfully:

    1) Whatever Toomey’s present flaws, real or imagined, he has, in fact, beaten Pennsylvania Democrats before.
    2) Specter is one of the capitalism-destroying big spenders that many in the Tea Party movement are protesting.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 17, 2009 @ 7:59 pm - April 17, 2009

  23. *crickets chirping*

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 19, 2009 @ 9:59 am - April 19, 2009

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.