Posts
There’s something seriously wrong with the ideology of Tea Party Movement. The ‘official website’ mission statement professes ‘The impetus for the Tea Party movement is excessive government spending and taxation. Our mission is to attract, educate, organize, and mobilize our fellow citizens to secure public policy consistent with our three core values of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets.’ Sounds like mighty good stuff, doesn’t it? But it’s not necessarily so.
Massachusetts voters got it right when they handily elected Republican Scott Brown over what was supposed to be a shoe-in victory for Democrat Martha Coakley. Although Brown claimed during an interview with the Boston Globe that he was “not quite sure what you are talking about”, when questioned about what he thought about the Tea Party movement, he had nonetheless attended a fundraiser sponsored by the Greater Boston Tea Party eleven days prior to making the statement.
As it turned out, Brown went to Washington as an “independent voice” and proved to be true to form when the first piece of legislation he voted in favor of was the Democratic Jobs Bill. Aghast at such audacity, Tea Party enthusiasts chastised Brown for having “voted for it because it contains measures that will help put people back to work.” Although the Congressional Budget Office estimated the $15 billion will create between 100,000 to 200,000 jobs, it lacked the premise of fiscal responsibility, a heinous crime by any measure to the Tea Party.
The Tea Party was formed in response to the growing number of moderate Republicans. If the intentions of the Tea party are to attract voter support in the upcoming mid-term elections, their defeat may be preordained by making statements that could very likely alienate a vast majority of the electorate.
To begin with, during a January town hall meeting on Medicare, Republican South Carolina Lt. Governor Andre Bauer said federal government entitlement programs for the poor are like “feeding stray animals” and that by giving “an animal or a person ample food supply” they will “reproduce, especially the ones that don’t think too much further than that.”
The comment may have been made in correlating a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion with food stamp benefits totaling $706 billion and that with 34% of the children in the state being black as compared to 14% nationwide, and the poverty rate among blacks is 33.5% the solution may be to drug test parents as a condition for people to continue public assistance when 58% of South Carolina school children receive free or subsidized lunch programs.
I can‘t imagine Bauer will be able to fulfill his 2012 goal of becoming the next Governor of South Carolina in 2012 when Mark Sanford vacates the post due to term limits. A third of the registered voters are non-white and only 3% of the population is Hispanic. Bauer isn’t the only politician to make statements that are blatantly racist.
In February, Tom Tancredo, former Republican Congressman from Colorado and a 2008 presidential candidate, told an audience at a Tea Party Convention in Nashville that "people who could not even spell the word 'vote', or say it in English, put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House." The statement suggested literacy tests would have prevented Obama from becoming President.
I don’t know where Tancredo’s future political aspirations may lie but they’re seriously in doubt when he makes statements that too easily group together illiterate blacks and Hispanics that don’t speak English. They are racist in nature and hopefully at odds with the majority of the electorate.
Such are my concerns about the Tea Party movement. What I thought would be a group of patriots destined to become political game changers have, instead, become what I refer to as ‘political punks’ for their unrelenting intentions on disrupting the status quo with no structured solutions to combat what is socially unacceptable to their simplistic ideals.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Is the Tea Party Over Already?
There’s something seriously wrong with the ideology of Tea Party Movement. The ‘official website’ mission statement professes, ‘The impetus for the Tea Party movement is excessive government spending and taxation. Our mission is to attract, educate, organize, and mobilize our fellow citizens to secure public policy consistent with our three core values of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets.’ Sounds like mighty good stuff, doesn’t it? But not necessarily so.
Massachusetts voters got it right when they handily elected Republican Scott Brown over what was supposed to be a shoe-in victory for Democrat Martha Coakley. Although Brown claimed during an interview with the Boston Globe that he was “not quite sure what you are talking about”, when questioned about what he thought about the Tea Party movement, he had nonetheless attended a fundraiser sponsored by the Greater Boston Tea Party eleven days prior to making the statement.
As it turned out, Brown went to Washington as an “independent voice” and proved to be true to form when the first piece of legislation he voted in favor of was the Democratic Jobs Bill. Aghast at such audacity, Tea Party enthusiasts chastised Brown for having “voted for it because it contains measures that will help put people back to work.” Although the Congressional Budget Office estimated the $15 billion will create between 100,000 to 200,000 jobs, it lacked the premise of fiscal responsibility, a heinous crime by any measure to the Tea Party.
The Tea Party was formed in response to the growing number of moderate Republicans. If the intentions of the Tea party are to attract voter support in the upcoming mid-term elections, their defeat may be preordained by making statements that could very likely alienate a vast majority of the electorate.
To begin with, during a January town hall meeting on Medicare, Republican South Carolina Lt. Governor Andre Bauer said federal government entitlement programs for the poor are like “feeding stray animals” and that by giving “an animal or a person ample food supply” they will “reproduce, especially the ones that don’t think too much further than that.”
The comment may have been made in correlating a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion with food stamp benefits totaling $706 billion and that with 34% of the children in the state being black as compared to 14% nationwide, and the poverty rate among blacks is 33.5% the solution may be to drug test parents as a condition for people to continue public assistance when 58% of South Carolina school children receive free or subsidized lunch programs.
I can‘t imagine Bauer will be able to fulfill his 2012 goal of becoming the next Governor of South Carolina in 2012 when Mark Sanford vacates the post due to term limits. A third of the registered voters are non-white and only 3% of the population is Hispanic. Bauer isn’t the only politician to make statements that are blatantly racist.
In February, Tom Tancredo, former Republican Congressman from Colorado and a 2008 presidential candidate, told an audience at a Tea Party Convention in Nashville that "people who could not even spell the word 'vote', or say it in English, put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House." The statement suggested literacy tests would have prevented Obama from becoming President.
I don’t know where Tancredo’s future political aspirations may lie but they’re seriously in doubt when he makes statements that easily group together illiterate blacks and Hispanics that don’t speak English. They are racist in nature and hopefully at odds with the majority of the electorate.
Such are my concerns about the Tea Party movement. What I thought would be a group of patriots destined to become political game changers have instead become what I refer to as ‘political punks’ for their unrelenting intentions on disrupting the status quo with no structured solutions to combat what is socially unacceptable to their ideals.
Massachusetts voters got it right when they handily elected Republican Scott Brown over what was supposed to be a shoe-in victory for Democrat Martha Coakley. Although Brown claimed during an interview with the Boston Globe that he was “not quite sure what you are talking about”, when questioned about what he thought about the Tea Party movement, he had nonetheless attended a fundraiser sponsored by the Greater Boston Tea Party eleven days prior to making the statement.
As it turned out, Brown went to Washington as an “independent voice” and proved to be true to form when the first piece of legislation he voted in favor of was the Democratic Jobs Bill. Aghast at such audacity, Tea Party enthusiasts chastised Brown for having “voted for it because it contains measures that will help put people back to work.” Although the Congressional Budget Office estimated the $15 billion will create between 100,000 to 200,000 jobs, it lacked the premise of fiscal responsibility, a heinous crime by any measure to the Tea Party.
The Tea Party was formed in response to the growing number of moderate Republicans. If the intentions of the Tea party are to attract voter support in the upcoming mid-term elections, their defeat may be preordained by making statements that could very likely alienate a vast majority of the electorate.
To begin with, during a January town hall meeting on Medicare, Republican South Carolina Lt. Governor Andre Bauer said federal government entitlement programs for the poor are like “feeding stray animals” and that by giving “an animal or a person ample food supply” they will “reproduce, especially the ones that don’t think too much further than that.”
The comment may have been made in correlating a budget shortfall of $1.1 billion with food stamp benefits totaling $706 billion and that with 34% of the children in the state being black as compared to 14% nationwide, and the poverty rate among blacks is 33.5% the solution may be to drug test parents as a condition for people to continue public assistance when 58% of South Carolina school children receive free or subsidized lunch programs.
I can‘t imagine Bauer will be able to fulfill his 2012 goal of becoming the next Governor of South Carolina in 2012 when Mark Sanford vacates the post due to term limits. A third of the registered voters are non-white and only 3% of the population is Hispanic. Bauer isn’t the only politician to make statements that are blatantly racist.
In February, Tom Tancredo, former Republican Congressman from Colorado and a 2008 presidential candidate, told an audience at a Tea Party Convention in Nashville that "people who could not even spell the word 'vote', or say it in English, put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House." The statement suggested literacy tests would have prevented Obama from becoming President.
I don’t know where Tancredo’s future political aspirations may lie but they’re seriously in doubt when he makes statements that easily group together illiterate blacks and Hispanics that don’t speak English. They are racist in nature and hopefully at odds with the majority of the electorate.
Such are my concerns about the Tea Party movement. What I thought would be a group of patriots destined to become political game changers have instead become what I refer to as ‘political punks’ for their unrelenting intentions on disrupting the status quo with no structured solutions to combat what is socially unacceptable to their ideals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)