Why has Ron Paul NOT joined the Tea Party Caucus?

[Matt Collins]

Why has Ron Paul not joined Michele Bachmann's House Tea Party Caucus???


Jack Hunter floats an idea here:
http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/charleston/are-grassroots-conservatives-simply-being-co-opted-by-the-republican-party/Content?oid=2175688

[Depressed Liberator]

Because they're neocons.

[AuH20]

Because they're neocons.

I disagree there. Voting for foreign intervention does not make one a neocon. You have to commit many more sins to earn that infamous tag. Even the highly regarded Walter Jones is in this caucus. Secondly, the house members are leaps and bounds better than the republican senators, many of whom are near irredeemable. Now regarding Ron's non-participation, the old codger is in wait-and-see mode given that he is a politician after all.

[Imaginos]

Why bother?
Ron Paul IS the Tea Party itself.
The man has been 'one man army of Tea Party' for more than 3 decades.
Those pretenders in the Tea Party Caucus can go fuck themselves.

[Imaginos]

One more thing.
Michele Bachmann is NOT one of us.
Just because she's saying some nice things about Ron Paul and attending his meeting time to time does not mean she's genuine.
When it comes to foreign policy, she's a de facto neocon!
Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing!

[TXcarlosTX]

why bother?
ron paul is the tea party itself.
the man has been 'one man army of tea party' for more than 3 decades.
Those pretenders in the tea party caucus can go fuck themselves.


gooaaaaaalll!!!!!!

[FrankRep]

Because they're neocons.

What is a Neoconservative? Read this:

Conservatives, Neoconservatives and Constitutionalists
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=254923

[silus]

What is a House Tea Party Caucus?

[Xchange]

Because they're neocons.

co-signed

[james1906]

I disagree there. Voting for foreign intervention does not make one a neocon. You have to commit many more sins to earn that infamous tag. Even the highly regarded Walter Jones is in this caucus. Secondly, the house members are leaps and bounds better than the republican senators, many of whom are near irredeemable. Now regarding Ron's non-participation, the old codger is in wait-and-see mode given that he is a politician after all.

I'm sure Jones will end his participation in this caucus sooner rather than later once he sees it's all about bombing shit.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I never understood the point of a caucus. It is counter-intuitive to me. These peoples ideas diverge on so many important issues, they hardly have too much in common. Bachmann, is a rabid foreign interventionist Israeli firster who agrees with corporate welfare (subsidies). Mike Pence is a total Neo-con douchenozzle. Walter Jones is out of place in this wacky outfit. Vote with them on the issues you do have in common (Like you would with a Feingold, or Kucinich), but why would you ever want to associate and form a caucus with these people? It's like the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks getting together to form a Communist Caucus. It's destined for failure, and the "smaller" Government people will get devoured, or lumped together with the more rabid Statists.

Bachmann and Pence are also huge Drug Warriors. I'm glad Ron has the sense to not join a group with these people.

I mean...if you guys are taking this route, why not form a caucus with Kucinich? Kucinich has more in common with Ron Paul than does Bachmann or Pence.

[Imaginos]

I never understood the point of a caucus. It is counter-intuitive to me. These peoples ideas diverge on so many important issues, they hardly have too much in common. Bachmann, is a rabid foreign interventionist Israeli firster who agrees with corporate welfare (subsidies). Mike Pence is a total Neo-con douchenozzle. Walter Jones is out of place in this wacky outfit. Vote with them on the issues you do have in common (Like you would with a Feingold, or Kucinich), but why would you ever want to associate and form a caucus with these people? It's like the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks getting together to form a Communist Caucus. It's destined for failure, and the "smaller" Government people will get devoured, or lumped together with the more rabid Statists.

Bachmann and Pence are also huge Drug Warriors. I'm glad Ron has the sense to not join a group with these people.

I mean...if you guys are taking this route, why not form a caucus with Kucinich? Kucinich has more in common with Ron Paul than does Bachmann or Pence.
Good point.
I do not agree with Kucinich on many things, but comparing to Bachmann or Pence, Kucinich is the epitome of integrity.
People like Bachmann or Pence are one of the reasons why we are in this fucking mess to begin with.
They are opportunists trying to use whatever political movement/momentum for their greed yet general public still buy that crap.
So many people don't bother to study or try to figure out 'integrity factor' of politician and always fall for their scam/shenanigan/marketing gimmick and that's why we are in this fucking mess!
They don't want to read or study and all they want is some sleek sound bite!

[sailingaway]

Why on earth should he? The tea party supports HIM. At least the part we care about does. And what if it took positions he couldn't join? Better not join then quit later in terms of maintaining relationships, don't you think?

[Knightskye]

Same reason he didn't vote for Bush in 2000.

[Humanae Libertas]

Well because the current Tea Party, which Necons are attending, is controlled opposition. And I'm sure Ron Paul knows it too.

[libertybrewcity]

I disagree there. Voting for foreign intervention does not make one a neocon. You have to commit many more sins to earn that infamous tag. Even the highly regarded Walter Jones is in this caucus. Secondly, the house members are leaps and bounds better than the republican senators, many of whom are near irredeemable. Now regarding Ron's non-participation, the old codger is in wait-and-see mode given that he is a politician after all.

then what does? foreign intervention (big gov foreign policy) is a central tenant of the neoconservative philosophy and practice.

[Knightskye]

Maybe we should stop using "neoconservative" and just call them "progressive". That's what foreign policy they espouse. :D

[Slutter McGee]

One more thing.
Michele Bachmann is NOT one of us.
Just because she's saying some nice things about Ron Paul and attending his meeting time to time does not mean she's genuine.
When it comes to foreign policy, she's a de facto neocon!
Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing!

Jesus. You do realize that the tea-party is about domestic spending. It isn't about foreign spending. It isn't about the war. It isn't about the patriot act.

Do you realize that being pro-war does not make one a neocon? It makes one pro-war. A neo-con is prowar for a specific reason.

No Bachmann is not one of us. But she is representative of the tea-party. And so are we. Because we agree on domestic spending and domestic fiscal policy.

The tea-party is a fucking coalition. And sometimes you have allign yourself with people you disagree with to reach a common goal, because the near term ramifications if you don't outweigh the headache you might have in the future.

Example: Allying with the Commies in WW2 because the Nazis were a more serious and immediate threat.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[John Taylor]

jesus. You do realize that the tea-party is about domestic spending. It isn't about foreign spending. It isn't about the war. It isn't about the patriot act.

Do you realize that being pro-war does not make one a neocon? It makes one pro-war. A neo-con is prowar for a specific reason.

No bachmann is not one of us. But she is representative of the tea-party. And so are we. Because we agree on domestic spending and domestic fiscal policy.

The tea-party is a fucking coalition. And sometimes you have allign yourself with people you disagree with to reach a common goal, because the near term ramifications if you don't outweigh the headache you might have in the future.

Example: Allying with the commies in ww2 because the nazis were a more serious and immediate threat.

Sincerely,

slutter mcgee

+1689.

[nobody's_hero]

Is this 'Tea Party Caucus' the equivalent of King George and the English Parliament going out to the Thames River and dumping tea off the docks, in response to the Boston Tea Party?

[Todd]

One more thing.
Michele Bachmann is NOT one of us.
Just because she's saying some nice things about Ron Paul and attending his meeting time to time does not mean she's genuine.
When it comes to foreign policy, she's a de facto neocon!
Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing!

yes...Just look at her vote on funding Afghanistan yesterday.

[Slutter McGee]

I mean...if you guys are taking this route, why not form a caucus with Kucinich? Kucinich has more in common with Ron Paul than does Bachmann or Pence.

Except on the issues that the tea-party promotes. Which is why it is the tea-party caucus. Not the tea-party, pro-war, and anti civil liberties caucus. Because then you might have a point.

Sincerley,

Slutter McGee

[ctiger2]

One more thing.
Michele Bachmann is NOT one of us.
Just because she's saying some nice things about Ron Paul and attending his meeting time to time does not mean she's genuine.
When it comes to foreign policy, she's a de facto neocon!
Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing!

Double Plus 1

This caucus needs Ron WAY WAY more than Ron needs it. Ron is the Real Tea Party.

[ravedown]

on a side note-
beck apparently is having a tea party summit on his program tomorrow? all the different tea party affiliations are meeting to discuss the in-fighting and differences in ideologies etc. this could be interesting, it could be a huge mistake...but will def be good watching.

[TheDriver]

Why has Ron Paul not joined Michele Bachmann's House Tea Party Caucus???


Jack Hunter floats an idea here:
http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/charleston/are-grassroots-conservatives-simply-being-co-opted-by-the-republican-party/Content?oid=2175688

Anyone running for President in 2012, who could have joined this and didn't, will pay for it in the GOP primary.

Of course, assuming someone ran outside the GOP, not joining the Caucus would have been a brilliant political move. The Tea Party creates too much division outside the conservative spectrum. Which is not good for winning elections in most parts of America.

[Knightskye]

Is this 'Tea Party Caucus' the equivalent of King George and the English Parliament going out to the Thames River and dumping tea off the docks, in response to the Boston Tea Party?

Hahahahaha. Brilliant. :)

[buffalokid777]

Original Tea Party

Taxed
Enough
Already

Hijacked Tea Party

Terminate
Every
Arab

[Slutter McGee]

Original Tea Party

Taxed
Enough
Already

Hijacked Tea Party

Terminate
Every
Arab

Really? In what way? I read all the time about the tea-party. I have watched videos. I have attended them. I have met plenty of people who support the wars, but I have met none that have made it an issue at a tea-party event or who have tried to incorporate it into the movement.

Or are you just saying this because many in the tea-party are prowar?

I say that we don't make an issue of the war if they won't turn this into a vehicle of the religious right.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[ChaosControl]

Because they're hypocritical twits. The very people who are turning the movement into nothing but a GOTV for the GOP.
I'm glad he doesn't join, he never should. We should have nothing to do with the "tea party".

[heavenlyboy34]

Jesus. You do realize that the tea-party is about domestic spending. It isn't about foreign spending. It isn't about the war. It isn't about the patriot act.

Do you realize that being pro-war does not make one a neocon? It makes one pro-war. A neo-con is prowar for a specific reason.

No Bachmann is not one of us. But she is representative of the tea-party. And so are we. Because we agree on domestic spending and domestic fiscal policy.

The tea-party is a fucking coalition. And sometimes you have allign yourself with people you disagree with to reach a common goal, because the near term ramifications if you don't outweigh the headache you might have in the future.

Example: Allying with the Commies in WW2 because the Nazis were a more serious and immediate threat.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Don't even get me started with THAT warfare State propaganda! :p:rolleyes:

Did World War II Have To Happen? (http://www.lewrockwell.com/buchanan/buchanan115.html)

[ctiger2]

Here's the fax I sent to Michelle Bachmann last week:



Tea Party Caucus?

Michele Bachmann…

Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)
Voted YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare. (Jul 2008)
Voted NO on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq. (Jun 2008)
Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)
Voted YES to EXTEND THE PATRIOT ACT "Spy-On-Citizens" Provisions
Voted YES on HR 5140 Economic Stimulus Plan (Feb 2008)
Voted YES on HR 6331 override a veto on a bill that expands Medicare (July 2007)
Voted YES on HR 3548 Providing Homebuyer Tax Credits (Nov 2009)



You really don’t have a clue if you think you represent the Tea Party people

You’re a partisan hack…


If people in MN-6 have half a brain you should be voted out this fall. Sorry…

[buffalokid777]

Really? In what way? I read all the time about the tea-party. I have watched videos. I have attended them. I have met plenty of people who support the wars, but I have met none that have made it an issue at a tea-party event or who have tried to incorporate it into the movement.

Or are you just saying this because many in the tea-party are prowar?

I say that we don't make an issue of the war if they won't turn this into a vehicle of the religious right.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

If you want to cut the deficit, the war and military spending has to be looked at, it is impossible to balance the budget otherwise.

2009 Budget

$515.4 billion US Department of Defense (Roughly 40% of all discretionary spending.
$145.2 billion Global War On Terror
$37.6 billion Homeland Security

[Matt Collins]

Michele Bachmann…

Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)
Voted YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare. (Jul 2008)
Voted NO on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq. (Jun 2008)
Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)
Voted YES to EXTEND THE PATRIOT ACT "Spy-On-Citizens" Provisions
Voted YES on HR 5140 Economic Stimulus Plan (Feb 2008)
Voted YES on HR 6331 override a veto on a bill that expands Medicare (July 2007)
Voted YES on HR 3548 Providing Homebuyer Tax Credits (Nov 2009)






Can you provide either a source or bill number for these?

[Humanae Libertas]

Can you provide either a source or bill number for these?

http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Michele_Bachmann.htm

Tons of info on candidates, politicians, and more.

[Slutter McGee]

If you want to cut the deficit, the war and military spending has to be looked at, it is impossible to balance the budget otherwise.

2009 Budget

$515.4 billion US Department of Defense (Roughly 40% of all discretionary spending.
$145.2 billion Global War On Terror
$37.6 billion Homeland Security

I am not arguing that military spending is not a problem. Just that in its current incarnation, the tea-party is not about military spending. We can't try to force our views on foreign policy into the tea-party. Just like they can't force their desire to legislate religious morals into the teaparty.

If either of these things is done, then the tea-party is useless for what it is designed for. A vehicle for curbing domestic spending.

That doesn't mean that we don't fight and advocate for decreases in military spending. It means that we don't use the tea-party to make those arguments. Military spending is constitutional, even if the war is not just.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Wesker1982]

Because they're neocons.

This.

Unless someone can explain to me the difference between a tea partier and a neocon, thanks.

[someperson]

Is this 'Tea Party Caucus' the equivalent of King George and the English Parliament going out to the Thames River and dumping tea off the docks, in response to the Boston Tea Party?
+∞ lol

[georgiaboy]

I am not arguing that military spending is not a problem. Just that in its current incarnation, the tea-party is not about military spending. We can't try to force our views on foreign policy into the tea-party. Just like they can't force their desire to legislate religious morals into the teaparty.

If either of these things is done, then the tea-party is useless for what it is designed for. A vehicle for curbing domestic spending.

That doesn't mean that we don't fight and advocate for decreases in military spending. It means that we don't use the tea-party to make those arguments. Military spending is constitutional, even if the war is not just.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Where do you get this idea that the tea party's intent to reduce spending is limited to domestic? I thought all spending was on the table for being cut. It should be.

Regarding Ron Paul's joining the caucus, something about the danger of entangling alliances seems applicable here. Also, seems like these caucuses are merely window dressing, distracting from what we should really be looking at -- the legislation sponsored & co-sponsored, the votes, etc.

[yokna7]

I always shunned the black caucus because it is a collectivist mindset. He is doing the same.

[AuH20]

This.

Unless someone can explain to me the difference between a tea partier and a neocon, thanks.

NAFTA, CAFTA, bailouts of financial institutions, the validity of the Federal Reserve, increased entitlements, open borders. A Neo loves all mentioned and then some. They'll sell their own mother down the river for an uptick in GDP.

[heavenlyboy34]

I am not arguing that military spending is not a problem. Just that in its current incarnation, the tea-party is not about military spending. We can't try to force our views on foreign policy into the tea-party. Just like they can't force their desire to legislate religious morals into the teaparty.

If either of these things is done, then the tea-party is useless for what it is designed for. A vehicle for curbing domestic spending.

That doesn't mean that we don't fight and advocate for decreases in military spending. It means that we don't use the tea-party to make those arguments. Military spending is constitutional, even if the war is not just.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

I disagree. As wrong as they were, the authors of the constitution did not envision a massive standing army used to police the world. It makes more sense to have small state militias paid for by States than to have a national army. The Anti-Federalists were right on this, too.

[Slutter McGee]

I disagree. As wrong as they were, the authors of the constitution did not envision a massive standing army used to police the world. It makes more sense to have small state militias paid for by States than to have a national army. The Anti-Federalists were right on this, too.

I don't think they intended that either. But according to the a literal interpretation of the language it is hard to call military spending un-constitutional.

I don't intend to say that we don't take on military waste or the wars. Just that we use another avenue than the tea-party, and that we don't turn our backs on the tea-party unless supporting the wars becomes and active platform of them.

Sincerley,

Slutter McGee

[Deborah K]

I never understood the point of a caucus. It is counter-intuitive to me. These peoples ideas diverge on so many important issues, they hardly have too much in common. Bachmann, is a rabid foreign interventionist Israeli firster who agrees with corporate welfare (subsidies). Mike Pence is a total Neo-con douchenozzle. Walter Jones is out of place in this wacky outfit. Vote with them on the issues you do have in common (Like you would with a Feingold, or Kucinich), but why would you ever want to associate and form a caucus with these people? It's like the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks getting together to form a Communist Caucus. It's destined for failure, and the "smaller" Government people will get devoured, or lumped together with the more rabid Statists.

Bachmann and Pence are also huge Drug Warriors. I'm glad Ron has the sense to not join a group with these people.

I mean...if you guys are taking this route, why not form a caucus with Kucinich? Kucinich has more in common with Ron Paul than does Bachmann or Pence.


On this we can agree. A caucus is a group of people who meet privately and belong to the same political party or have the same goal that decide policy, choose candidates or promote certain causes. Among those in Congress are:

the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, Congressional China Caucus; Congressional Climate Caucus, Congressional Croatian Caucus, Congressional Czech Caucus, and many, many more.


They're nothing but factions.

[Deborah K]

Because they're hypocritical twits. The very people who are turning the movement into nothing but a GOTV for the GOP.
I'm glad he doesn't join, he never should. We should have nothing to do with the "tea party".

I'm a member of two tea parties in my area. So obviously I disagree with you. I am against the Tea party caucus but then, I'm also against political parties. Having stated the above, I see nothing wrong with affiliating with groups who, for the most part, I agree with, and who I can infiltrate and influence.