Tea Party = Rebranded Republican Party

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by MattSepeta, Sep 15, 2010.

  1. MattSepeta macrumors 65816

    MattSepeta

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Location:
    375th St. Y
    #1
    So after checking drudge report [insert remark about drudge not being real news] I saw that Christine O'Donnel won the GOP primary in Delaware. "Good news for Libertarians!" right???

    WRONG. So far off the grid WRONG.

    Lets look at her views.....

    -"O’Donnell opposes abortion. She previously has been a spokesperson for Concerned Women for America, a conservative Christian group that opposes abortion, including in cases of rape."

    -"O'Donnell also served as a spokesperson for Concerned Women for America, a Conservative Christian political action group which seeks to apply biblical principles to issues of public policy."

    -"O’Donnell opposes masturbation and has said, “"The Bible says that lust in your heart is committing adultery. So you can't masturbate without lust.""

    This doesn't sound like a "freedom-loving" person. This sounds like a run-of-the-mill REPUBLICAN!!! She actually wants to use the bible when crafting legislation. She actually wants to prohibit raped women from getting an abortion. This isnt just a republican, this is a republican on steroids. Having recalled a discussion with fivepoint about the "Tea Party" movement and how they are a financial policy movement or something like that, I just had to look at every Tea Party Candidate I could...

    Pulling off of Wikipedia's list of influential 2010 races

    Scott Brown - Ok, he is socially liberal fiscal conservative. Good for him.

    Sharron Angle - Supports constitutional ban on same sex marriage, adamantly pro life

    Nikki Haley - Pro Life, anti gay (IIRC), but in favor of term limits. Interesting.

    Paul LePage - "Supports Traditional Family Values"..... Yeah, ok.

    Anna C. Little - Supports building the fence, more traditional family values, etc.

    Tim Scott - Pro life, build a fence, english official language...

    Joe Miller - I like his fiscal ideas, but he is pro life and I would bet my firstborn that he would love an amendment keeping the gays from gettin' hitched

    Michelle Bachman - YEAH>>>.... We all know too much about her already

    Mike Lee - Pro Life, care to guess on his stance on gay marriage?


    Sure, these candidates all espouse fiscally conservative views, some unlike their republican brethren. Sure, this economy might get quite a few of them elected.

    I have a feeling that when the economy is back on track and this new batch of republicans starts focusing on "strengthening the family" the reality of their political affiliation will smack the voters upside the head....
     
  2. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #2
    The Republican Party created and nurtured these monsters. Now they have to live with what they've done.
     
  3. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #3
    I think you're confusing 'Libertarian' with no morality atomatons who don't think or feel. Libertarians have personal views, they simply feel more than most that the government should be more limited in mandating these types of things. You can be an ultra liberal douche and still be a Libertarian. You can still be an ultra right-wing bible thumper and still be a Libertarian.

    For instance, you say O'Donnell opposes masturbation. Fine, that's a religious person's right to be against masturbation. The question is whether or not she supports the federal government outlawing masturbation. Does she? No.

    You also say that she opposes abortion, as if somehow in your warped worldview a Libertarian can't be pro-life. First of all, their personal view is different from public policy. Second of all, supporting public policy against abortion is not an anti-Libertarian viewpoint. IT does go against the official party planks, but if your position is that life begins at conception than any good Libertarian that the mothers 'right' to choose is easily outweighed by the baby's 'right' to live. The Libertarian position would be to defend the baby's right.

    Stop acting like Libertarians can't have views on topics different than your own. Stop acting like being pro-life is 'anti freedom.' Stop acting like Libertarians can't be religious.

    Also, that's correct, the Tea Party is only 'officially' about fiscal issues. Reducing deficits, reducing taxes, reducing the size of government. There's a huge range of individuals and ideas within the Tea Party, and in my opinion it has unfortunately the average tea partier has strayed too far towards interventionism and pro-military individuals, but the Tea Party has also been a first opportunity for these types of individuals to hear and absorb messages from folks liek Ron Paul, etc. who they had previously ignored.
     
  4. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #4
    Pretty much puts to rest the idea that the TEA Party is all about freedom, which of course, it never was.
     
  5. Rt&Dzine macrumors 6502a

    Rt&Dzine

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    #5
    The Koch Tea Party isn't exactly the Libertarian Party. It's the current flavor of libertarianism mixed with corporatism and fundamentalism.

    The Koch Tea Party Express only spent around $237,000 on this one. They spent almost $800,000 in Nevada, about $600,000 in Alaska in smear ads, and about $350,000 in Massachusetts.
     
  6. MattSepeta thread starter macrumors 65816

    MattSepeta

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Location:
    375th St. Y
    #6
    Are you sure about that? Did you not read that O'Donnel was a spokesperson for "Concerned Women for America?"

    Here is CWA's "About Us:" "Concerned Women for America (CWA) is the nation's largest public policy women's organization with a rich 30-year history of helping our members across the country bring Biblical principles into all levels of public policy."

    So when she states that she is against masturbation because of the bible, and she has worked for a group that wants to use the bible to make law, you don't get the heeby jeebies?

    She can be against masturbation, eating goats, looking at the sun, I don't care. However, when she has made it publicly known that she wants to use the bible to legislate morality, I do care.

    You say that their "Issues" are different from "Public Policy..." How does that work??? If a candidates issues page says that they believe in a constitutional amendment to keep marriage between one man and one woman, you CANT discount it because "That is just their opinion," they will no doubt use their opinion to shape law.

    I totally understand the pro-life feelings, and I am pretty on the fence about this one. I think it is better left up to the state. Sure, I'll give them all a pass on it.

    However, I do not understand desiring a constitutional amendment that benefits no one and only serves to squash people. That, they can not get a pass on. I can't see how they can argue "Freedom, Liberty, constitutionalism, etc" then support a constitutional amendment designed to oppress freedom and liberty.


    I understand that the movement started (Dont care if Koch funded it, I support the fiscal policies even though I am certainly not wealthy) with smaller government, less taxes, less power in mind, but that is certainly not what I see. I see the same old republicans (Save a few) but now instead of running on their social issues, they are running on their fiscal issues.
     
  7. kavika411 macrumors 6502a

    kavika411

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Location:
    Alabama
    #7
    Sounds like a pitch for a new reality show.
     
  8. OutThere macrumors 603

    OutThere

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #8
    Whatever fivepoint says about these people bein able to have religious ideas but still support personal freedoms is, to me, total bull. The religious right in America has a terrible track record in being quiet about their religious convictions. They get into office and feel that it's their moral obligation to make laws that 'protect the unborn' or stop the gays from 'destroying the sanctity of marriage'. They're all running on a predominantly fiscal platform right now, but that will clearly not be the extent of their actions if elected.

    Unfortunately many people have been deluded into believing that the tea party is somehow different than the republican party, and that they will save America from out of control government and spending. Instead, these people will get into office, discover how much spending goes to their district (and therefore can't be cut), try to cut spending from other districts (which all have their vocal representative), then fall back on old favorites like banning gay marriage, abortion and masturbation (haha).
     
  9. Shivetya macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #9
    better to have a party of values than what they have now or what the other side has now.

    The Tea Party is simply a means of taking their party back from the politicians. It might be more of what the Republican party was back in Reagan's days, but it certainly isn't a segment of the National Republican party.

    No, its a wake up call. True grass roots organizations; and the TP is regardless of the number of attempts by others to co-opt it or designate it as otherwise; and one thing grass roots groups do best is kick the establishment in the nuts.

    If their winning primaries keeps the Republican party from majority then so be it.

    I would hope the left gets their own grass roots group, but the union muscle out there to prevent it will have to be overcome. A few more Christies around and that power base might be pushed aside allowing the progressives a chance to get what they want instead of being delegated into the role of supporting union and political bosses whose loyalty is to the almighty dollar.
     
  10. MattSepeta thread starter macrumors 65816

    MattSepeta

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Location:
    375th St. Y
    #10
    Interesting points, and I wholly agree.

    Here in MN we have a very interesting example of what you are speaking about with our Gubernatorial race. We have Mark Dayton, a famous name from a famus daddy and grandaddy running on the "friend of the unions, make the rich pay" classic Democrat ticket. He defeated RT Rybak, a fresh face with no union loyalties, no old money, and new and exciting ideas in the primary. A lot of my liberal friends are fed up with the same old on their side, so theey are voting independence party. Then we have Tom Emmer, classic party line republican, forcing me to vote independence party as well.

    I dont think much of anybody is happy with the current political spectrum.
     
  11. OutThere macrumors 603

    OutThere

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #11
    You still believe that the tea party is a 'real' grassroots movement? I thought this had been thoroughy debunked. The party is more rooted in oil and ignorance than in grass.
     
  12. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #12
    Egalitarianism, tolerance and a sense of community* are three critical values that the Tea Party lacks. Also, their extreme phobia towards socialism prevents them from forming coherent ideas about economic policy or funding social programs.

    *not just white Christian community

    How do you take a political party back from politicians? However you slice it, someone who holds elected office is by definition a politician.

    The state that you are trying to "get back to" never existed in the first place.

    But to what purpose? I question the ability of the Tea Party to provide a viable alternative to the established parties. They want to trim government, but to all questions they only answer "let the private sector take care of it" - except for social issues, where they seem adamantly committed to interfering in things in order to re-create a Christian, white America that never existed. I reject the notion that the Tea Party's brand of politics is merely fiscal. They have a very strong, very conservative social agenda.

    Greed is rife in both parties, but in the long run I think the Tea Party will hurt the right more than the left, because moderates will move left as a reaction to the Tea Party.

    The Tea Party is nothing less than an attack on moderate politics.
     
  13. jonbravo77 macrumors 6502a

    jonbravo77

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #13
    So then what about the Right and the almighty oil dollars that they are bound by? You only look on one side of the spectrum, attack the left and the union dollars but ignore the right being in bed with big corporate and big oil.
     
  14. Rt&Dzine macrumors 6502a

    Rt&Dzine

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    #14
    The Koch Tea Party was created and owned by big oil. Koch got some of his people in the EPA during the Bush administration and look what happened. :eek:
     
  15. Tomorrow macrumors 604

    Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Location:
    Always a day away
    #15
    Nope. Not even a little bit. Hell, she's pretty good-looking, too - she can even watch, as far as I'm concerned.

    I think you're stretching a bit to say that she's interested in passing a law outlawing masturbation. Just because someone opposes something, that doesn't mean they support legislation banning it.
     
  16. PerfSeeker macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    #16
    Oooooh oooooo EVIL tea party, EVIL Republicans! yeah we Macrumors liberals are FIERCE culture warriors!
     
  17. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #17
    Love the excuses fivepoint tried to make for these people. They are theocrats, nothing more, nothing less. And they are as anti-American as they come.

    You're defending people who wish to use the Bible as basis for law? You don't see a problem here at all? I might remind you that the OP is a conservative.
     
  18. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #18

    Thanks for the laugh. From strength to strength, keep the good work up. It can only end in a good way. :D
     
  19. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #19
    I'd say pro "America", anti "American Ideals" in certain scenarios.

    In other words, pickers and chooses when it fits their worldview, like many of us. The difference is some of us recognize our perception is skewed and at least try to use reason.
     
  20. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #20
    Anyone who tries to take the rights of others just because they don't like them is anti-American. PERIOD.
     
  21. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #21
    America does the same thing to other countries by use of force or other deceptive ways (like economically for instance) does that mean the country itself is Anti-American?

    Our ideals and the country itself seem to be two different things.
     
  22. OutThere macrumors 603

    OutThere

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #22
    This has not been at all true of the Christian right in America for pretty much our entire political history.

    Abortion
    Alcohol
    Gay marriage
    Marijuana
    Pornography
    'Obscenity'

    ....etc
     
  23. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #23
    The people in this country who do those things are indeed anti-American.

    You've got to be kidding. Come on tomorrow, she wants to use the Bible as basis for law for EVERYONE. Believe me, she would support legislation banning masturbation if she thought she could get away with it. The woman is a nut case.
     
  24. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #24
    Maybe its just semantics, I'd argue they are anti "American Ideals". Otherwise it seems they are completely American.
     
  25. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #25
    I never thought I'd see the day when you split hairs in such a manner. ;)
     

Share This Page