Then why are they taking Republican seats?
Guav:
Claiming the Tea Party is taking over the Republican party is like claiming KFC took over Kentucky Fried Chicken—they are the same thing.
Tell that to Miller and O’Donnell.
15 Responses to “Then why are they taking Republican seats?”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
September 30th, 2010 at 10:09 am
To paraphrase Dilbert, their paradigm is about to shift without a clutch.
September 30th, 2010 at 10:14 am
They’re not the same thing at all. The Tea Party is a movement. To the parties I’ve been to, I’ve seen as much anger at the Republicans as I’ve seen against Democrats. The anger is about the out of control attitude in Washington.
All the speeches were clear to indicate that the GOP was just as guilty, sometimes more so since they tend to claim to be the fiscally responsible party.
A pox on both parties. I want ’em all out. And I’d like to be able to replace them with complete drooling idiots that can do very little harm because we simply don’t grant them the power to do so. THAT is the crux of the problem, not the party.
September 30th, 2010 at 10:33 am
I have always thought that the Tea Party was more a Libritarian movement than a Republican one. At least that is were I saw it coming from in my area. I don’t get the impression that the Tea Party movement goes all the way to “get rid of all governemnt programs” like the die-hard Libritarians do, but there is definately some “small government” types in the movement.
s
September 30th, 2010 at 10:52 am
They’re not the same thing at all. The Tea Party is a movement. To the parties I’ve been to, I’ve seen as much anger at the Republicans as I’ve seen against Democrats.
Yet not running in Democratic primaries… curious.
But to be fair, for the most part, what the Tea Party is is more akin to pragmatic Libertarians, who have finally grasped how useless the Libertarian Party brand is, and are now appropriating the Republican Party apparatus to actually get elected. It’s great that they’ve finally recognized some level of political reality, but bad news for Republicans because there’s a reason the Libertarian Party was a perennial loser.
September 30th, 2010 at 10:57 am
71% of Republicans now tea-party supporters
http://gunmart.blogspot.com/2010/09/71-of-republicans-now-tea-party.html
September 30th, 2010 at 11:22 am
The Tea Party originated outside of the Republican party and was just as disgusted with Republicans as with Democrats. From very early on though, the various Tea Parties, had decided to infiltrate the Republican party at the precinct level because of the two parties it was the closer to their ideal. It’s taken them two years, but they are starting to see their hard work come to fruition.
Are they now one and the same with the Republican party? I would say not yet, considering the PSH from the establishment Republicans. They are close though. If the Tea Party supported candidates win most of their races this year I expect a lot of establishment Republicans to either retire or switch parties, much like what happens to the minority party who just lost their majority status. That is a good thing. The sore losers who leave the Republican party will be replaced with more conservative people and those that join the Democrats can only make that party more moderate.
September 30th, 2010 at 11:23 am
Republican candidates grab a Bible and wrap themselves in the American flag when they campaign. Tea Party candidates wrap themselves in the Gadsden flag. Big difference.
September 30th, 2010 at 11:53 am
Miller is just a hard-right religious republican who happens to be backed by TPE. He’s not a Libertarian, though he’s closer than Murkowski.
September 30th, 2010 at 12:24 pm
Yet not running in Democratic primaries… curious.
Not really. Let’s say I want a rifle chambered in my own personal wildcat cartridge, the 6.9 PSH, and because my wife might want to shoot it, I need to be able to adjust the length so that she can handle it it better.
Now, why would I go and purchase a shotgun when the AR platform, although doesn’t support the 6.9 PSH, would fit my needs better? Sure, I’m going to have to go through the work of getting a custom built barrel, but that’s a LOT easier than having to completely reconfigure a shotgun to meet my needs.
The Democratic party generally stands in opposition to the vast majority of common themes in the Tea Party (of which there are very few to begin with since it’s a movement more than an organized party). The amount of effort of getting a Dem on board with Tea Party ideas is a LOT harder than finding a Republican who will.
However, now you have Democrats who are running ads without stating their political association and even others who brag about voting WITH BUSH. Call this a secondary effect.
September 30th, 2010 at 1:29 pm
Conservative Democrats just need to get active at the local level, become precint bosses, and take over
September 30th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
The Democratic party generally stands in opposition to the vast majority of common themes in the Tea Party (of which there are very few to begin with since it’s a movement more than an organized party). The amount of effort of getting a Dem on board with Tea Party ideas is a LOT harder than finding a Republican who will.
And this belies the whole notion that Tea Partiers are just as angry with Reps as they are with Dems, and are some political third way. The rifle in your example isn’t transformed from being an AR by virtue of the re-barreling; it’s tweaked, it’s slightly different in certain aspects, but at the end of the day, pretty much the same thing. And Tea Partiers aren’t transformed from being Republicans (as all quasi-sensible libertarians are) by virtue of calling it a movement.
September 30th, 2010 at 3:30 pm
Junyo: The Tea Partiers are Conservatives. Some libertarian, some religious.
They are not working with the Democrats simply because the Dems have gone full-retard into socialism.
The Tea Partiers may have been able to work with folks like Bob Heinlein and Ronald Reagan in the 1960’s Democratic Party ( Heinlein’s political book on taking over precincts was born from his efforts to save the CA Democratic Party from the socialists … he failed, BTW, and moved out of the state ), but it is more than a bit late for that.
September 30th, 2010 at 3:31 pm
The Tea Party movement is funded by and mostly led by Republicans, the people who make up the rank and file are predominantly conservative Republicans, and 71% of Republicans support the Tea Party.
Asking why they are taking Republican seats just proves my point—Joe Miller and Christine O’Donnell ARE Republicans, and Republican voters nominated them.
September 30th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
that they are ‘republicans’ does not mean they are the ‘republican party’. the party, after all, had different ideas about those seats. there is a distinction.
September 30th, 2010 at 11:26 pm
As milton Friedman said, you don’t have to kick them all out and replace them with good people, you just have to change the situation so that they have to behave good in order to win their seats.