Who are Tea Party Activitist, really?

[whell]

Perhaps the most detailed and unbiased look to date at who comprises the "Tea Party", what motivates them, and what they really want to accomplish:

http://www.congress.org/news/2010/09...re_mad_as_hell

[merrylander]

So the teabaggers are dis-affected Republicans, that may explain why they were silent when Bush and Cheney were spending money like drunken sailors.

[BlueStreak]

When I think of teabaggers, I think of my brother-in-law, Dennis.

Easily swayed with the most obvious of propaganda techniques, and the allure of easy money---When he worked a GM, he was Mr. Unionman, because the UAW kept winning him pay raises. When Ronnie the Corporate Spokesman came along and started baiting him with promises of taxcuts, predictably, he became a Republican. When "the ni**er" walked into the Oval Office he became a Horrified Republican and joined the Tea Party. Also a wholely and entirely predictable move. The first time I heard of the Tea Party was from my dear sister, who called to ask what I thought of it because Dennis had joined. My response? "Dennis has joined? That's all I need to know."

Now, there may be some with loftier ideas than Dennis. But to my mind, the average Joe Six Pack that joins up with the Tea Party? Dennis. Not a doubt in my mind.

Dave

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by whell

Perhaps the most detailed and unbiased look to date at who comprises the "Tea Party", what motivates them, and what they really want to accomplish:

http://www.congress.org/news/2010/09...re_mad_as_hell

They clearly do not know what they want to accomplish. That is part of the movements allure.
They rally around a sense of "old times were good times" with no vision or path.

[BlueStreak]

Yep, the whole dreamy, "I want a President like George Washington.", thing. I'm sure most of them really have little to no idea what that really means. Or at least some Beckian delusion of what that means, and he seems to think Sister Sarah is the modern day Washington..............

Dave

[merrylander]

Maybe they have forgotten that Washington once used the army to collect taxes?

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Maybe they have forgotten that Washington once used the army to collect taxes?

And my great, great, great, great grandfather got a judgeship out of it.

John

[whell]

Originally Posted by merrylander

So the teabaggers are dis-affected Republicans, that may explain why they were silent when Bush and Cheney were spending money like drunken sailors.

I think this, and subsequent posts, miss the point. Here's the quote that really got me:

Is this a new phenomenon?
RASMUSSEN: This is clearly a different version of a phenomenon that has been seen throughout American history. The nation was founded with basic instincts that are distrustful of concentrations of power, whether that power is in corporate hands or in government hands. You can't read through the Federalist Papers without seeing some echoes to what we're seeing in the tea-party movement today.

I do think the current version has very strong ties to the Ross Perot era. Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, and the majority of Democrats in Congress lost control of Congress. George W. Bush came in, and he lost control of Congress. That's never happened in back-to-back administrations before, and it's a rejection of both political parties.

We saw the same thing accelerate in 2006, 2008, and 2010. All three cycles, voters were voting against whoever is in charge. I tend to look at their actions as enormously consistent rather than flipping from one party to another. They are simply saying, "We don't like the way things are going, and we want to take down whoever is in charge."

XXX

Therefore, this isn't about Obama. Its not about Republicans or Democrats, per se. Its about power, and who controls it, and how its used. Those who might align with the Tea Party, if polling is correct, are saying that those in power, whomever they may be, aren't listening to those who elected them.

Coincidentally, I heard Rassmussen interviewed as I was on a long drive this morning. He made the point, and its alluded to in this post, that while in-roads are being made in Repub primaries with Tea Party candidates, there is also an effort towards making in-roads on the Democrat side. This suggests that the "populist" message of the Tea Party is resonating with moderate Dems.

[piece-itpete]

Neither party today has any claim on the mighty Washington - he would say a pox on both houses.

Pete

[d-ray657]

The article mentioned that one concern by the protesters is corporate power. For those who believe that we are living under a corporatocracy, the type of people the tea partiers are putting up for election will do nothing to address that problem. I doubt that the lobbyists are extremely interested in the tea party, unless some of them win an actual seat. If that happens, the lobbyists will take advantage of their newness to the political game and own them before they know it.

Regards,

D-Ray