The Tea Party and the GOP Crack-up

[Hutch]

I think the TEA party started to die the day Palin and Bachman (and others like them) got involved. If the TEA just focused just on financials (like in the beginning) and not social ideals I believe it would be going strong for a long time. Also seems like once Democrats start blaming problems on something, that something is either dead, dying or very dysfunctional.

So, how does one maintain idealogical purity?  Example.  10 folks are rock-ribbed Libertarian/Constitutionalists, and form a "movement".  100 people hear the message of limited government and financial responsibility and "join".  30 of those 100 are deeply religious fundamentalists, but are attracted to the fact that SOMEBODY is calling for reining in government.  200 of the fundies friends join because they know that fundies are are "against teh Gheyzors".  Has the group been hijacked?  Can ANY group that wants to form a voting majority be ideologically pure?

I think Reagan (maybe Bush) said it best when a group of gay Republicans endorsed him.  He welcomed their support, saying "That doesn't mean I agree with them, it means they agree with me".

I fully support the original TEA party ideal.  If a vegan joins, it doesn't make me swear off meat.  If a Klansman joins, it doesn't make ME a racist, or the group a racist group.

[charby]

So, how does one maintain idealogical purity?  Example.  10 folks are rock-ribbed Libertarian/Constitutionalists, and form a "movement".  100 people hear the message of limited government and financial responsibility and "join".  30 of those 100 are deeply religious fundamentalists, but are attracted to the fact that SOMEBODY is calling for reining in government.  200 of the fundies friends join because they know that fundies are are "against teh Gheyzors".  Has the group been hijacked?  Can ANY group that wants to form a voting majority be ideologically pure?

I think Reagan (maybe Bush) said it best when a group of gay Republicans endorsed him.  He welcomed their support, saying "That doesn't mean I agree with them, it means they agree with me".

I fully support the original TEA party ideal.  If a vegan joins, it doesn't make me swear off meat.  If a Klansman joins, it doesn't make ME a racist, or the group a racist group.

When a movement or party is created, the founders create a visioning statement and goals, that way the message is clear. Also the leaders of the group if infiltrated by another group trying to ride the coat tails of the movement starts to interject their ideals in the group, will need to step up and curtail the activities of the 2nd group. Been there, done that with activist groups and being on their board of directors. Some groups/people are terrorists of organizations without realizing it.

[Sergeant Bob]

I think the TEA party started to die the day Palin and Bachman (and others like them) got involved. If the TEA just focused just on financials (like in the beginning) and not social ideals I believe it would be going strong for a long time. 

It's almost impossible to regulate a movement which goes national (like the TEA Party) when anyone can use the platform for their own gains.

Also seems like once Democrats start blaming problems on something, that something is either dead, dying or very dysfunctional.

That's also one reason (among many) the Repubs can't seem to get ahead much of the time. They are somewhat insulated from the Demo's demonizing as they are already large so they can win if they can energize their base.

The TEA Party (extremists, racists, etc not my words) didn't have a chance once the Demo's attacked and got the lapdog media behind them.