[besson3c]

The base sentiment behind the tea party is perfectly valid, and certainly many tea party people are rational and sane human beings.

But why is it that this message of out-of-control spending, large government, fiscal responsibility, being against bail-outs, etc. being overshadowed by bat shit insanity such as that of that Democrat nazi guy, Sharon Angle, Rand Paul, Christine O'Donnell, Joe Miller, Carl Paladino, Jan Brewer, etc.? This message seems to have lost all of its focus by these side show circus acts, which is a real shame. At some point this message seems to have become about God, guns, the reputation and careers of these individuals, and all sorts of other political issues other than the original economic core issues. Not only that, but many of these same individuals seem to have fared poorly in presenting actionable solutions to these economic issues, perhaps morphing the basic branding of the tea party from "taxed enough already" to some odd grab bag of weird. Maybe several of them do have perfectly valid solutions, but it seems like what has hogged the media spotlight is them just saying bizarre things, being caught up in severe image problems and/or hypocritical behavior and/or jaw dropping gaffes.

Do you know whether people that embraced this message are put off by the devolution of the tea party? Maybe it's time for tea party version 2? How, in the future, can we have a sane conversation about these sorts of issues without it devolving into witchcraft, the separation of church and state, the 17th amendment, guns and overtaking the government with violence, terror and anchor babies, abortion, race, and all of this other nonsense/stuff?

Even if you sympathize with some/all of these positions, hopefully we can agree that the message needs some focus if it is to build some political traction - it needs to be coherent and in bite-sized chunks so that the branding of the party is clear to the voting public?

Like I said, the basic premise behind the tea party is perfectly valid, and I'd *love* for there to be a strong third party, but honestly some of these tea party characters scare the shit out of me. Some of them because of their political positions, but the others mostly because of their ideological fervor and extreme points of view that often don't seem to be coupled with actionable solutions and an image not mired in weird distractions. I have to wonder who is backing them financially and whether they have a hidden agenda. Some of them seem like they could be trojan horse candidates counting on voters being asleep at the wheel so that some power can be exerted that is not in the best interests of the general public once they are elected? This sounds pretty conspiracy theoryish I guess, but I just don't remember there being this sort of assortment of misfit candidates in the past?

Or, is it normal that during an election this is roughly this percentage of really seemingly off-the-wall candidates in both parties?

[Big Mac]

besson, you're describing the byproducts of yellow journalism. The country is dying but most of the media cares more about the interaction between Barack Obama and court jester Jon Stewart and whether the office of the presidency was diminished by Obama being called "dude." Yes, there's a bit more fuel for media stupikdity because of the unconventional effect of the Tea Party candidates, but general mass stupidity happens to varying degrees every cycle.

Meanwhile, Rome is burning. The Tea Party hopes to put out the fire before it's too late, and it's a monumental task.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The country is dying... Rome is burning...

Hmm... Your journal seems a bit yellow.

[ghporter]

Funny thing; most polarizing, "attractive to ideological nut-job" movements start out with a seed of "perfectly valid" ideas. I'd mention one rather extreme example, where "putting people back to work" was used, quite Machiavellianly, to subvert a rather large country and send it on a very destructive journey toward a failed attempt at world domination, but I think the 4th post in a thread is a little too soon to invoke/violate/test Godwin's Law.

I am NOT comparing the Tea Party to the above alluded to group. But ideologically extreme movements are very commonly based on "perfectly valid" ideas-and usually they begin quite innocently.

[OreoCookie]

I agree. In Germany, this produced the Green Party: causes such as environmentalism and opposition to militarism was a common denominator among people from traditional left groups to very conservative Christian groups. The Green Party was a few times at a cross road during the journey at which it matured to become the party it is today. One important thing is to agree on a program on topics which lie beyond the `common cause.'

Now, environmental policies are on the political agenda of every mainstream German party.

Another instance where -- in all likelihood -- this has failed is the `Piracy Party' which, contrary to the name, is in favor of modern and well-informed politics when it comes to new technologies and individual liberties. After an initial success (they got 2 % in the last federal election which is very respectable for a first election), they have failed to develop and traditional parties have paid more attention to their basic causes.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Jan Brewer

Do not lump Jan Brewer in with The Tea Party. The only thing she has done since Janet Napalitano bailed for Homeland Security is sign SB-1070, only because it would help her get elected.

[Doofy]

Here's a tale from the previous general election here in the UK.

Conservatives didn't mention immigration at all in their campaign. Not once.
Media (fed by the left) constantly asked said Conservatives about immigration.
Just before the actual vote, the media turned around and started with "why are you always going on about immigration?". This gave the impression, to anyone who hadn't been keeping score, that the Conservatives were always mentioning immigration, yet they didn't mention it even once.

This is how the left fights. And this is probably what's going on to a certain extent with the TP. It's diversionary tactics from the left, hoping that the bright shiny objects distract enough people. Same old game, same old story.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Do not lump Jan Brewer in with The Tea Party. The only thing she has done since Janet Napalitano bailed for Homeland Security is sign SB-1070, only because it would help her get elected.

I thought she lumped herself in? If not, fine, take her out of the list...

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

besson, you're describing the byproducts of yellow journalism. The country is dying but most of the media cares more about the interaction between Barack Obama and court jester Jon Stewart and whether the office of the presidency was diminished by Obama being called "dude." Yes, there's a bit more fuel for media stupikdity because of the unconventional effect of the Tea Party candidates, but general mass stupidity happens to varying degrees every cycle.

Meanwhile, Rome is burning. The Tea Party hopes to put out the fire before it's too late, and it's a monumental task.

If their efforts were really genuine, maybe they ought to concentrate on being effective? I'm starting to wonder they are genuine, since it seems like a no brainer to not overshadow the cause of the burning with ridiculous attention getting distractions and/or unrelated ideology wrapped in a transparent layer of "freedom" and patriotism.

[BadKosh]

Lets wait til they take over to see the job they do. Then we can vote them out if they don't cut the spending and restrictive regs.
The left had those high words and ideals but we got a barge of crap instead.