TEA PARTY FURY: Activists Angry With GOP Leaders

[lakhota]

As Tea Party politicians prepare to take their seats when the 112th Congress convenes this week, they are already taking issue with Republicans for failing to hold the line against the flurry of legislation enacted in the waning weeks of Democratic control of the House of Representatives and for not giving some candidates backed by Tea Party groups powerful leadership positions.

Just a month ago, Tea Party leaders were celebrating their movement’s victories in the midterm elections. But as Congress wrapped up an unusually productive lame-duck session last month, those same Tea Party leaders were lamenting that Washington behaved as if it barely noticed that American voters had repudiated the political establishment.

In their final days controlling the House, Democrats succeeded in passing legislation that Tea Party leaders opposed, including a bill to cover the cost of medical care for rescue workers at the site of the World Trade Center attacks, an arms-control treaty with Russia, a food safety bill and a repeal of the ban on gay men and lesbians serving openly in the military.

“Do I think that they’ve recognized what happened on Election Day? I would say decisively no,” said Mark Meckler, a co-founder of Tea Party Patriots, which sent its members an alert last month urging them to call their representatives to urge them to “stop now and go home!!”

“We sent them a message that we expect them to go home and come back newly constituted and do something different,” Mr. Meckler said. “For them to legislate when they’ve collectively lost their mandate just shows the arrogance of the ruling elite. I can’t imagine being repudiated in the way they were and then coming back and saying ‘Now that we’ve been repudiated, let’s go pass some legislation.’ ”

“I’m surprised by how blatant it was,” he added.

But Tea Party activists did not reserve their criticism for Democrats. “The Republicans, frankly, have been a disaster,” Mr. Meckler said. “They stood strong on some things, but the only reason they stood strong is because we stood behind them with a big stick.”

Still, the Tea Party could point to some impact already. Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, who will become House speaker when the Republicans assume the majority, has proposed new procedural rules that acknowledge Tea Party demands. House members will not be able to introduce a bill or a joint resolution without “a statement citing as specifically as practicable the power or powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact it.”

This was a leading demand of the Contract From America, a Tea Party manifesto that was issued as a prelude to the midterm elections. Proposed legislation will have to be posted online for three days before any vote, reflecting Tea Party demands for greater transparency.

More ceremonially, the rules call for the Constitution to be read aloud on the House floor when the session opens.

Tea Party pressure prevailed in blocking the Senate from passing a $1.2 trillion spending bill and a measure that would have created a path to citizenship for some illegal immigrants.

But Judson Phillips, the founder of Tea Party Nation, a social-networking Web site, declared after the approval of the arms-control treaty that “the G.O.P. has caved.”

Mr. Phillips, too, had urged his members to inundate their lawmakers with phone calls, e-mails and faxes urging them to stop considering legislation. “Give them no rest until they are out of town,” he wrote.

Tea Party leaders scoffed at the Republicans’ greatest victory from the lame-duck session — the extension of the Bush tax cuts as part of a compromise with the White House. Instead, Tea Party leaders complained that Republicans had abandoned a push for a full repeal of the estate tax.

Mr. Phillips said the tax cuts were more accurately described as “maintaining the status quo” because the lower rates had been in place for several years.

Despite its victories in November — more than 40 candidates supported by the Tea Party were elected to the House and Senate — the Tea Party lost battles for important leadership positions. Tea Party Patriots, for instance, had backed Representative Jack Kingston of Georgia to be chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee. Mr. Meckler and Jenny Beth Martin, also a co-founder of Tea Party Patriots, criticized Republicans for choosing Representative Harold Rogers of Kentucky instead, saying he was likely “to continue the big-spending, pork-barrel ways that lost Republicans the majority four years ago.”

In an opinion article on Politico, the two also criticized Republican leaders for choosing Representative Fred Upton of Michigan to lead the Energy and Commerce Committee, saying the choice “indicated they are not serious about expanding the nation’s energy-producing capability” through expanded oil drilling and a relaxation of regulations on nuclear power and coal.

The collapse of the spending bill, which would have financed government agencies through September, also means that the next Congress will have an almost immediate effect on decisions about government spending. Under a stopgap measure, the current Congress extended financing for government agencies until only March.

Incoming Tea Party lawmakers said they would push for drastic cuts to federal agencies whose functions they believe would be better handled at the state level, like the Department of Education.

Mike Lee, a senator-elect from Utah who had Tea Party support and defeated an incumbent Republican, Robert F. Bennett, said that he, along with other incoming senators, had signed letters to Senate Democrats asking them to delay voting on the arms-control treaty until the new Congress was seated. Mr. Lee was disappointed that the Senate approved the treaty anyway.

Still, he said he believed that the vote to extend the Bush tax cuts signaled that Congress had heard the demands of the Tea Party in the midterm elections.

“This changes by degrees,” Mr. Lee said. “As long as you have a Democratic president and a Democratic-controlled Senate, I don’t think there are many people who are expecting that the government’s going to be transformed overnight into something in the image of the Tea Party. That would be delusional.”

www.nytimes.com/2011/01/02/us/politics/02teaparty.html?_r=2&src=twt&twt=nytimespolitics

[nicomachus]

I am interested to see if the tea party movement leads to any kind of resurgence of the libertarian party in 2012. Although I am not a libertarian, I do support third parties (anything but the current two), and I think some intelligent libertarians in congress, such as Ron Paul, would be a welcome change.

On the one hand, they would want to deregulate things I like to see regulated. On the other hand, I think that corporate welfare (which they strongly oppose) is part of what led to the recent crisis and recession (companies that should have been collapsing for a long time were instead propped up and able to grow, and as they grew they became too big, too powerful, and now that they are zombies that should be dead they are just big mammoths in the way of any real economic recovery).

A left-right convergence may be upon us on the issue of taking large corporations to task for their avarice and corruption.

At least, I would hope so.

[lakhota]

nicomachus, you sound like a wise man.

[nicomachus]

That's just because my name ends in that cool, antiquated -us sound.

[deziloooooo]

Think this is the beginning of a three party system in the country?

[ugonow]

Many seem to think so----

www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/09/sarah_palins_tea_party_a_third.html

[billisonboard]

Until we get some form of proportional representation, we will have only two major parties.
www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/BeginnningReading/howprwor.htm

[ed1066]

This is an excellent rebuke to the tired Democrat lie that the Tea Party is nothing more than a tool of the Republicans. It is invigorating and refreshing to see a political movement take off like the Tea Party has done. There is no group on the left willing to go off the reservation and defy the DNC lockstep mandate...

I am proud of the Tea Party for this. If they are pissing off the establishment Republicans and continuing to frighten and enrage the Democrats and the liberals, then they are doing the right thing in my book...

[traelin0]

Gotta love the old Gadsden flag.

[Shirina]

Considering the Tea Party members are against helping 9/11 rescue workers, oppose the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, and support bigotry and discrimination against gays in the military, there's no reason why I would even consider voting for their candidates. About the only thing I agree with them on, in regards to this article, is being against corporate welfare. Otherwise, forget it.

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Maybe now we can stop hearing about nonsense from the left about how the Tea Party is only upset because of the President's skin color.

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Jan 2, 2011 14:16:44 GMT -5 Shirina said:

Considering the Tea Party members are against helping 9/11 rescue workers, oppose the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, and support bigotry and discrimination against gays in the military, there's no reason why I would even consider voting for their candidates. About the only thing I agree with them on, in regards to this article, is being against corporate welfare. Otherwise, forget it.

I figured it was because they weren't left leaning....

[dmsm]

Tea Party ? Not a third option I would want. Ron Paul is a republican. He ran as a republican and he votes republican and has decided earmarks are not a bad thing after all. If he was a man who stuck by his beliefs that would be one thing but he knew he could not win with that. And when he got into office he voted R. So how can he possibly be a third party candidate? He does not stand by what he is said top believe.

[dmsm]

And if left leaning mean we care about human being esp those that worked at ground zero so be it.

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Jan 2, 2011 15:36:56 GMT -5 @dmsm said:

And if left leaning mean we care about human being esp those that worked at ground zero so be it.

I think that sounds like a good political gimmick, but it's not really true.

As far as ground zero workers, I'd have to see why people would vote against it. On the surface it doesn't make sense to have an issue with it...however, I have seen people argue that politicians were arguing against the troops, when what they were arguing against was the crap bill attached to a bill about troop funding.

[Shirina]

As far as ground zero workers, I'd have to see why people would vote against it.

Because there was a rider on the bill that the Tea Party didn't like. I can't recall what it is offhand, but it had something to do with gold, if I remember correctly.

[nicomachus]

The Tea Party has ways to go before it can be a serious political movement. As of right now they all have pet issues they like to press but when push comes to shove few of them understand political nuances enough to have a coherent political philosophy. On the one hand, they love freedom and liberty; but, not for Immigrants. So they aren't standard libertarians by any means.

A few issues they should try to resolve:

-Does their opposition to big government extend to opposition to the bloated military budgets? The Pentagon now takes up half of the federal government’s operating budgets. Even the conservative Reagan-era Cato Institute believes that to cut deficits, we have to also cut the defense budget.

-Doing nearly any kind of business in this country requires one to sign industry-wide fine print one-sided contracts with banks, insurance companies, and credit card companies, many of which block Constitutional access to the courts. Is such a society compatible with the notion of "liberty?"

-The article that kicked off this thread suggests the Tea Party could turn on the Republicans. Clearly, we do not expect them to side with the Democrats. Will they turn to a third party? If so, when can we expect them to pick up the issue of civil liberties in the electoral arena: Currently, Federal and State laws keep the two parties in power and prevent competition from independents or third parties by blocking ballot access and monopolizing public debate forums.

-How can the call for less taxation and lower deficits be accomplished unless the large corporations begin paying their fair share of taxes? At current, some of these companies are able to operate without paying any Federal Taxes.

These are just a few issues that I think the right-leaning tea party should consider in their liberty panic. I also think they are some of the issues that left and right can converge on and begin taking government back from big business.

[ed1066]

On the one hand, they love freedom and liberty; but, not for Immigrants.

Surely you meant to say "not for illegal immigrants". I see nothing in the Tea Party platform that is anti-LEGAL immigration...do you?

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Jan 2, 2011 17:33:59 GMT -5 @nicomachus said:

The Tea Party has ways to go before it can be a serious political movement. As of right now they all have pet issues they like to press but when push comes to shove few of them understand political nuances enough to have a coherent political philosophy. On the one hand, they love freedom and liberty; but, not for Immigrants. So they aren't standard libertarians by any means.

I haven't heard them say anything about not wanting freedom and liberty for immigrants. Oh, wait a minute, are you another one of those people who combines immigrants and illegal immigrants into one category?

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Jan 2, 2011 17:33:59 GMT -5 @nicomachus said:

-How can the call for less taxation and lower deficits be accomplished unless the large corporations begin paying their fair share of taxes? At current, some of these companies are able to operate without paying any Federal Taxes.

My guess is that they start with spending cuts. What makes you think that companies aren't "paying their fair share?" My guess is that the people they employ are paying taxes, at least some of the, and they also aren't using government programs which saves money. So I would say they are doing their fair share.

[nicomachus]

Jan 2, 2011 20:08:23 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

Jan 2, 2011 17:33:59 GMT -5 @nicomachus said:

-How can the call for less taxation and lower deficits be accomplished unless the large corporations begin paying their fair share of taxes? At current, some of these companies are able to operate without paying any Federal Taxes.

My guess is that they start with spending cuts. What makes you think that companies aren't "paying their fair share?" My guess is that the people they employ are paying taxes, at least some of the, and they also aren't using government programs which saves money. So I would say they are doing their fair share.

Right, TARP never happened.

Anyway, most corporations pay no taxes:
www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1249465620080812


As for the claim that they don't use Government programs, you are just wrong.

Many drugs (including most anticancer drugs) were developed with taxpayer money and then had the patent rights given to private businesses by the National Institute of Health and the Defense Department. Bristol-Meyers Squibb, for example, controls the rights to Taxol, an anticancer drug paid for by taxpayers.

McDonalds used taxpayer money for years to promote its brand name overseas as part of a foreign market access program.

Under the 1872 Mining Act mining companies purchase rights to public land for only $5 an acre; this is theft from tax payers.

Tax payers subsidize stadiums against their own referenda for the enrichment of team owners (meanwhile, libraries are cutting hours).

In 1997 congress gave away the airwaves to the television broadcast corporations, about a $70 bill loss from license revenue.

The recent health care law forces person's to give money to private insurance companies; this is no different in effect from a tax subsidy.

George W. Bush gave IBM 2.5 billion dollars in welfare as part of the "Job Creation Act."

Many of America's largest corporations are on Welfare. This is the sort of thing the Libertarians have been chronicling for many years; it would be nice if the Tea Party would join their movement.

Corporate tax income is now about 1/5 of what it was during the 1950s under Eisenhower. It is time for large businesses to start paying their fair share.

[nicomachus]

Jan 2, 2011 20:05:50 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

Jan 2, 2011 17:33:59 GMT -5 @nicomachus said:

The Tea Party has ways to go before it can be a serious political movement. As of right now they all have pet issues they like to press but when push comes to shove few of them understand political nuances enough to have a coherent political philosophy. On the one hand, they love freedom and liberty; but, not for Immigrants. So they aren't standard libertarians by any means.

I haven't heard them say anything about not wanting freedom and liberty for immigrants. Oh, wait a minute, are you another one of those people who combines immigrants and illegal immigrants into one category?

They are in one category. Violence against immigrants and automatic deportation are not sane solutions.

But my point is that most Tea Party people complain incessantly when they hear someone speak in Spanish. "Speak English," they moan, in spite of their own difficulties with the language.

[ed1066]

Violence against immigrants and automatic deportation are not sane solutions.

Again, where in any Tea Party material did you see a call for violence against immigrants or a call for the deportation of LEGAL immigrants? Please provide a link, otherwise everyone here will know you are talking through your hat...

Or, as stated earlier, are you one of those who does not distinguish between legal immigrants and illegal (criminal) aliens? If so, you are insulting, degrading and disrespecting the entire community of legal immigrants, and I take personal offense, as my ancestors and my wife were legal immigrants to this country...

[floridayankee]

Jan 2, 2011 15:36:56 GMT -5 @dmsm said:

And if left leaning mean we care about human being esp those that worked at ground zero so be it.

No, that's not what he means. Us rightiies care about others...we'd rather quietly help them using our own time and money rather fussing and whining for an over-bearing government to force everyone else to help.

If I rememebr the report correctly from 2002, I believe a dozen or so of the biggest charities had reported receiving in the range of $2.5 billion in private donations by the 1 year anniversary of 9/11....all without the heavy hand of government forcing the country to donate.

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Jan 2, 2011 21:10:49 GMT -5 @nicomachus said:

Jan 2, 2011 20:05:50 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

I haven't heard them say anything about not wanting freedom and liberty for immigrants. Oh, wait a minute, are you another one of those people who combines immigrants and illegal immigrants into one category?

They are in one category. Violence against immigrants and automatic deportation are not sane solutions.

But my point is that most Tea Party people complain incessantly when they hear someone speak in Spanish. "Speak English," they moan, in spite of their own difficulties with the language.

No, legal and illegal immigrants don't fall "in one category." My guess is that you are pretty liberal, of course that is my own experience in that liberals are the only group of people I know who can't seem to differentiate between legal and illegal immigrants.

[floridayankee]

Jan 2, 2011 21:08:58 GMT -5 @nicomachus said:

Anyway, most corporations pay no taxes:
www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1249465620080812

To take this article serious, they need to break out what type of corps pay no taxes. For instance, S-Corps do not pay fed income taxes since profits are distributed to the owner(s) who then pay an income tax.

As for the claim that they don't use Government programs, you are just wrong.

Government subsidies still happen today. The biggest is likely the "green technology" field. There are pros and cons to corporate welfare such as this.

It is time for large businesses to start paying their fair share.

Our state liquor tax alone for the 4th quarter 2010 is in the range of $4-4.5 million dollar range. Add in payroll taxes, vehicle taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, road taxes, consumption taxes, personal property taxes and a butt-load of various other fees, just how much more would you like us to pay?

So, the towns, counties, states and feds tax and fee the crap out of a corporation and they're surprised if/when there's nothing left over to slap an corporate income tax on?

[rockon]

LONG LIVE THE TEA PARTY!!!!!! They are the only breath of fresh air this countries politics have seen in decades. I'm kind of surprised that some of our liberal friends haven't suggested a special tax assessment to make sure they have enough funding to have a convention and so they can compete with the other two parties or maybe that they should have their own special caucus in the congress.

[ed1066]

I'm kind of surprised that some of our liberal friends haven't suggested a special tax assessment to make sure they have enough funding to have a convention and so they can compete with the other two parties or maybe that they should have their own special caucus in the congress.

LOL! When it comes to conservatives, the only words the liberals are interested in are "censorship" and "extermination"... our "tolerant" friends on the left get very violent very quickly when they see Americans expressing free speech that desn't toe the liberal line...

[billisonboard]

Jan 5, 2011 12:34:18 GMT -5 rockon said:

LONG LIVE THE TEA PARTY!!!!!! They are the only breath of fresh air this countries politics have seen in decades. I'm kind of surprised that some of our liberal friends haven't suggested a special tax assessment to make sure they have enough funding to have a convention and so they can compete with the other two parties or maybe that they should have their own special caucus in the congress.

This liberal is happy about the Tea Party movement. I hope it does crystallize into a third party (although I think it is more likely that it would just phase out the current Republican Party). I do not believe that a majority of American voters will back their agenda but the Tea Party is certainly a valid attempt to use the democratic process to create the America that some wish to have.

[burnsattornincan]

I do not believe that a majority of American voters will back their agenda but the Tea Party is certainly a valid attempt to use the democratic process to create the America that some wish to have.

So you do not believe the majority of Americans are patriotic and hold true to the Constitution written by men far greater than any one group of men ever seen since? We shall see if you are correct probably within a few short years.