Today’s posting is apropos for a variety of reasons.
First, and most obvious, is the fact that we are now well into the process for choosing nominees, all across this country, for the 2010 midterm election cycle. Several of these nomination fights have already been going on for quite some time.
And a few have, even at this early stage, already escalated into what we used to call “hot shootin’ wars” that are beginning to claim their first casualties. This one, from May of ’09, makes great strides toward identifying a growing rift on the right. And this is my main focus here.
The idea that the Washington elite and party establishment hacks should be the supreme arbiters of political viability in regards to specific local races & candidates is coming under heavy fire. Taking up the banner in this fight is, essentially, the logical next step for the Tea Party Movement. (Lest we forget, the Tea Parties were FOUNDED, in large part, on a burning resentment toward the stench of arrogance rising from the Cess Pool on the Potomac.) And, we would do well to remember, this resentment began LONG before noon on January 20th, 2009.
Whatever your past or present party affiliations, it is of utmost importance to recognize that our two-party system, for all its failings, is very deeply entrenched in American culture. There have been glimmers of hope for the die-hard Independents and third-party loyalists in years past, but they have always been few & far between. I do not point this out in an attempt to dash anyone’s hopes on that score. Quite to the contrary, in fact. It is my sincere belief that the Tea Party Movement has the potential to change that dynamic.
I say “potential,” because that outcome is becoming increasingly more uncertain. I have seen and heard rumblings, both here in Virginia and elsewhere, of Tea Party “leaders” (as if a grassroots movement of regular citizens could ever really HAVE “leaders” and still be considered a principled movement) and even whole groups essentially being absorbed into the Republican Party. In some instances, this has taken place surreptitiously, with Republican operatives moving in and assuming positions of authority. In other cases, Tea Party members have intentionally diluted their ranks by attempting to overrun the Republican Party, and deluded themselves into thinking this will actually make a difference OR keep their Tea Party viable.
But why, you may ask, do I deem the latter strategy delusional? Precisely because it is being condoned, sanctioned, and in some cases even carried out by Tea Party groups. This completely undermines any credibility those groups may have gained in the future as citizen watchdogs. Why? Because it sets up the “snake devouring its own tail” scenario. How can you then point out the corruption in the party that you have willingly aligned yourself with? There’s no room left in the gaping maw of the “Don’t Tread on Me” serpent to devour or even hiss at potential threats (or prey). By sactioning and publicly and actively supporting a takeover of the Republican establishment, these groups are also removing the fangs they may once have had.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I encourage activism to the fullest, and at all points on the political spectrum. Discourse leads to engagement, and having more people engaged, active, and paying attention is ultimately, and always, a good thing. And, yes, I agree that some local Republican units need to be taken over by more principled conservatives. That being said, it is NOT the job of the Tea Party movement to facilitate this. Can individual members be active in the effort? Sure. But it cannot and MUST not be officially endorsed and sanctioned by the Tea Party.
But some folks locally are even going so far as to develop strategies for this attempted takeover AT official Tea Party meetings. This must be discouraged. Again, the Tea Party’s role should be as a watchdog group, pointing out (and broadcasting LOUDLY) corruption and arrogance on the part of ALL politicians, party hacks, and establishment shills. That is the only chance we have to actually effect some real change in the political games we have, unfortunately, come to expect (and, worse, accept).
Inexplicably Simple, Indescribably Plain
Bradley, everyone in the tea party movement, and either political party is engaged in the political process of attempting to either change something about the existing status quo or to maintain it for their own self-interest. In a diverse nation, the ever swinging pendulum of political power and influence always has the potential to move too far in any one direction before it engenders a necessary correction. This to me, is the primary reason why I am involved not in just one political organization but several, including one of the primary political parties along with many other largely like minded fellow citizens who appreciate and valve our constitutional duty and responsibilities as residents of the greatest country on earth even with all it’s faults. By doing so, I believe and hope to make the “outcome ” you allude to more certain, not less to alter our political system and the political environment as the founding fathers themselves debated and envisioned.
Is this delusional? Perhaps it is, but I am a dreamer and also a tempered realist not a “snake devouring my own tail.”
Does it undermine my credibility? No, we all have logs in our own eyes that we should be removing before attempting to do the same with the speck in the eyes of our political opponents and friends alike.
Yet although you “encourage activism” in your article and even advocate as I do “that some local Republican units need to be taken over by more principled conservatives”, to dismiss the efforts of tea party members to do so yet allow “the Washington elite and party establishment hacks to be the supreme arbiters of political viability” would be a disaster much like the Washington Redskins playing their defense only with no offense.
James Madison said that “Conscience is the most sacred of property.” In light of this truism, I have as clear a conscience about my own individual involvement as I can maintain. The only thing I or you or anyone else we engage with in this discourse actually has or loses in the process at the end of the day is our integrity. In this regards, I disagree with you that whether the Tea Party movement becomes an actual political party or remains a movement only that grows in influence at an hour that it is most needed, we can and should remain both a watchdog group and an offensive weapon for change.
This has been THE problem we have always faced as a political nation. If a third party is injected into this, it invariably ends with a split vote for one of the “large tent” participants, which is largely supported by the out of favor “tent”. I know we have all seen this movie before, and it doesn’t change just because we are watching it again, or because the third party has an invigorated, grassroots base.
If this conservative move is going to be a success, we (Tea Party) have to remain not a party, but a movement. It MUST remain an all inclusive move toward very simple and somewhat universally accepted principals of common sense, integrity, freedom (as even we now perceive it), and law. That’s what I and many others see this movement as, so if we loose that integrity of “grass roots” we loose the meaning, and integrity of “Tea Party”.
How do we do that you will no doubt ask. I don’t have a real answer to that question, but I can say that it will be apparent as the pieces fall where they may. I can say that as a beginning we absolutely must have verifiable integrity of our voting system, or systems. That is the strength of grass roots movements, to be engaged at the local level. City, county, and perhaps state levels.
Where it starts to blur for me is in choosing a candidate. I don’t believe most viable candidates can really be vetted to the acceptance of most Tea Partiers. That really is the question for us. How do we have enough influence to really be sure the candidate is for real, and not just the stuffed shirt we have become accustomed to. I certainly don’t trust the current Republican “system” of choosing our candidates for us.
So, I would submit that those two, not tiny, problems be addressed with vigor, and let the pieces fall.
Beyond that rambling, I feel quite helpless, and clueless. May God, and the Constitution save us all.
First of all, thank you both for your reasoned & thoughtful comments here.
Let me respond in chronological order. Roger, I understand your sentiments, and both respect & encourage your chosen courses of action. I think there may have been a slight disconnect between the point I was making in my original post and what you got from it. To reiterate, any individual has the right to undertake whatever action they so choose (short of violence, force, or fraud), and whether such action is political, personal, or public.
Likewise, the Tea Party Movement has every right to attempt a takeover of the GOP. My point was, quite simply, that if they choose to do so, I am convinced that it will backfire and render them impotent in the eyes of the grassroots independents who may once have participated in the movement.
The tide in this country is turning toward an overwhelming anger at corruption & arrogance, and neither party has a monopoly on either of those faults. I, along with thousands of others I am in contact with frequently, are of the firm belief that, should the Tea Party officially sanction, participate in, and facilitate this attempted GOP takeover, they will undermine (and possibly even permanently destroy) their credibility as watchdog groups.
Individuals within the Tea Party are free, welcome, and encouraged to do what they believe is right, and I will support them to the hilt, and even offer aid, such as I have to give.
Finally, to address your point about the “swinging pendulum” in American politics: This is the essential problem- that we see it as a left or right issue. This is not the case. To continue the clock analogy, whether the pendulum has swung to the left or right, and whether the arc is traversed quickly or at a snail’s pace, these peripheral issues are irrelevant. The pendulum still swings, and with it, the power remains in the hands of government.
I think the Tea Party can be more effective as a watchdog pointing out corruption and abuse of the power WE have given to the government, and encouraging the voting public to withdraw the “consent of the governed” in such cases as it becomes necessary (letters behind the names being utterly irrelevant).
To further the clock analogy, the Tea Party Movement can become digitized, providing an alternative to the grandfather clock (with all its chimes and that proverbial pendulum) by being like an atomic clock and showing not only the time, but also fractions of a second, the month, the day, the year, and even the phases of the moon. They cannot do that by becoming an integral part of the grandfather clock or the pendulum.
Ed, thank you. I’m glad to see we’re on the same page. As far as what to do, I’m advocating more and more just simply rallying around the cause of Federalism. Taking the damn pendulum off of the clock and wielding OUR power ourselves, rather than letting our Federal government continue their 100+ year practice of acting as our NATIONAL government. ONLY individuals are both sovereign AND possess rights. States and individuals are sovereign. Our nation is sovereign. Our 3 branches of Federal government have convinced themselves (and a sizable chunk of the population) that THEY are sovereign as well. They are not. It’s about damn time we reminded them of that.
All of the other issues will follow, but our broken tax code will not be fixed, spending will not be reduced, morality will not be recognized and lived by, arrogance will not be constrained, until we the people resolve to bring power back to the local level, where we can better control it and temper it to keep it from being usurped again.
“The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.” We were distracted from our vigil by a variety of concerns, whether valid or not. We MUST resume our vigil. Shoring up the 10th Amendment is the logical next step.