PDA

View Full Version : Rockwell destroys Tea Parties




nandnor
10-05-2010, 12:29 AM
nvm

JohnEngland
10-05-2010, 02:15 AM
Good article. Shame it wasn't in the WSJ or such.

I think Rand Paul represents how the Liberty movement should approach elections and campaigning. You've got to be mainstream. You can't talk about abolishing everything.

That's not to say you don't intend to do that when you're in office, of course. However, one cannot expect to slay the beast in a few short years. It's going to take decades - maybe a century...

And it works well when, in conjunction with electing Liberty folk, the people are being educated, too. Thus, in the future they'll be more likely to vote freedom.

awake
10-05-2010, 05:18 AM
I don't think he destroyed the Tea Party, he simply pointed out how they will destroy themselves.

TheDriver
10-05-2010, 06:13 AM
Why are Lew and other libertarians looking at the Tea Party as a collectivist group (?), as a Tea Party member and donor to Mises.org - I'm offended!

FrankRep
10-05-2010, 06:49 AM
How to Win Friends & Influence People (http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671723650)
- Dale Carnegie


http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/514laI6nP1L._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg (http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671723650)

MRoCkEd
10-05-2010, 07:01 AM
I'm wondering how Lew thinks we should downsize government? He doesn't believe in political action, just education. But how do a bunch of educated people who avoid politics change the system?

I say... educate, infiltrate, incinerate..

angelatc
10-05-2010, 07:10 AM
The education approach simply doesn't work unless it is a part of an effective political strategy.

klamath
10-05-2010, 07:59 AM
Racist lew up to his old tricks

Fredom101
10-05-2010, 08:19 AM
Why are Lew and other libertarians looking at the Tea Party as a collectivist group (?), as a Tea Party member and donor to Mises.org - I'm offended!

Because it is a collectivist group, as is the LP...

Fredom101
10-05-2010, 08:20 AM
I'm wondering how Lew thinks we should downsize government? He doesn't believe in political action, just education. But how do a bunch of educated people who avoid politics change the system?

I say... educate, infiltrate, incinerate..

Civil Disobedience. As long as we keep paying the thugs, they could care less how many libertarians run for office. Politics doesn't work because voters have a statist mindset and will always vote for statists until we can dispell that entire meme.

silverhandorder
10-05-2010, 08:42 AM
Education takes generations. In the meantime I am content with politics as well.

osan
10-05-2010, 08:44 AM
I say... educate, infiltrate, incinerate..

Hey, it has worked like a charm for the reds. Why not us?

Pericles
10-05-2010, 09:56 AM
http://mises.org/daily/4733 (http://mises.org/daily/4733)

Looks like 'Rocky is quite skeptical about this form of liberty movement. Perhaps its time to reorganize, and embrace our more radical anarchist brothers in societal action.

The usual babble of those on the sidelines and have never been players criticizing the people who are actually doing something.

TheDriver
10-05-2010, 10:21 AM
Because it is a collectivist group, as is the LP...

No not really, as anyone could be a Tea Party type, in fact when we did the march on DC (for Ron) we were doing the same thing the Tea Party types are doing now - protesting government.

The only difference (in Lew's eyes) is Lew supported one type of Tea Party but not the one he has sit on his lazy ass and not became a part of.

If Lew was serious about educating people, why wouldn't he attend Tea Parties and spread his propaganda?

The Tea Party needs drivers - take the wheel!

osan
10-05-2010, 10:39 AM
[/URL][URL]http://mises.org/daily/4733 (http://mises.org/daily/4733)

Looks like 'Rocky is quite skeptical about this form of liberty movement. Perhaps its time to reorganize, and embrace our more radical anarchist brothers in societal action.

I agree that doing the same old thing is unlikely to achieve a different result. He fails, however, by offering no alternatives. What has been done over and over has failed over and over. We got that - anyone with a nominally functional brain and an IQ in the double digits gets that. The begged question, then, is what else might we try? Shooting? Last resort of last resorts IMO - at least on the mass-scale.

Civil disobedience? Great, except for one thing: people have as yet to stick with it.

What, then, do we do that will affect the changes we want?

Oh, and Rockwell was dead-on when he pointed out that the TP movement has no coherency beyond "we're for liberty". That is one really good reason why they will fail or betray.

And as for the criticisms I read here on Rockwell's emphasis on education, I will agree with those to the extent that education is but a necessary condition and not a sufficient one. We cannot have meaningful liberty in a nation of imbeciles. It is not even remotely possible. But even if we had the properly clued-in critical mass, that is still insufficient. We have to know what to do and then do it. The elites have that part down pat and that is why they are kicking our asses and are likely to be the victors.

torchbearer
10-05-2010, 10:53 AM
No not really, as anyone could be a Tea Party type, in fact when we did the march on DC (for Ron) we were doing the same thing the Tea Party types are doing now - protesting government.

The only difference (in Lew's eyes) is Lew supported one type of Tea Party but not the one he has sit on his lazy ass and not became a part of.

If Lew was serious about educating people, why wouldn't he attend Tea Parties and spread his propaganda?

The Tea Party needs drivers - take the wheel!

+100000000
Our C4L state chair did an awesome job in louisiana taking the wheel of the tea parties here.

Deborah K
10-05-2010, 11:15 AM
Because it is a collectivist group, as is the LP...

You don't understand what collectivism is.

Austrian Econ Disciple
10-05-2010, 11:24 AM
Lew hasn't been on the "sidelines". Perhaps to people who only covet political office, he has, because that is not his goal. He goes on FTL, supports and endorses Free State Project, endorses and supports civil disobedience and other forms of non-violent resistance, and as always, is one of the best educational administrators in the country. I really despise the political office or you are doing nothing folks.

johnrocks
10-05-2010, 11:49 AM
good article. Shame it wasn't in the wsj or such.

I think rand paul represents how the liberty movement should approach elections and campaigning. You've got to be mainstream. You can't talk about abolishing everything.

That's not to say you don't intend to do that when you're in office, of course. However, one cannot expect to slay the beast in a few short years. It's going to take decades - maybe a century...

And it works well when, in conjunction with electing liberty folk, the people are being educated, too. Thus, in the future they'll be more likely to vote freedom.

qft.

Pat Buchanan Conservative
10-05-2010, 11:52 AM
qft.qft?

Dreamofunity
10-05-2010, 11:55 AM
qft?

"Quoted for truth"

Pat Buchanan Conservative
10-05-2010, 11:56 AM
"Quoted for truth"Thank you.:)

Nate
10-05-2010, 01:04 PM
Lew hasn't been on the "sidelines". Perhaps to people who only covet political office, he has, because that is not his goal. He goes on FTL, supports and endorses Free State Project, endorses and supports civil disobedience and other forms of non-violent resistance, and as always, is one of the best educational administrators in the country. I really despise the political office or you are doing nothing folks.

^This

Political action is not the only action one can take in order to bring about change. There is also direct action. Lew Rockwell has done more for the cause of liberty than 99.9% of the people on these boards. "Sidelines" my ass. If Lew is on the "sidelines" then I wish we had more people on the "sidelines" like Lew. This movement would be much further along.

heavenlyboy34
10-05-2010, 01:06 PM
Why are Lew and other libertarians looking at the Tea Party as a collectivist group (?), as a Tea Party member and donor to Mises.org - I'm offended!

Because they present themselves as such.

heavenlyboy34
10-05-2010, 01:06 PM
^This

Political action is not the only action one can take in order to bring about change. There is also direct action. Lew Rockwell has done more for the cause of liberty than 99.9% of the people on these boards. "Sidelines" my ass. If Lew is on the "sidelines" then I wish we had more people on the "sidelines" like Lew. This movement would be much further along.

+a quadzillion :cool:

AuH20
10-05-2010, 01:10 PM
The Tea Party is in an embryonic stage and Rockwell foolishly is chastising them for not being full-blooded Rothbardians overnight. This guy is a tough critic for a sideline watcher. :D

Deborah K
10-05-2010, 02:11 PM
Because they present themselves as such.

How so? Collectivism is rooted in individual sacrifice for the greater good - as in - the collective.

TheDriver
10-05-2010, 02:20 PM
The Tea Party is in an embryonic stage and Rockwell foolishly is chastising them for not being full-blooded Rothbardians overnight. This guy is a tough critic for a sideline watcher. :D


I find it hypocritical for Lew to be critical of the Tea Party when Mises and Rothbard were polar opposites on a need for limited federal government. Rothbard did not support it, Mises did.

With that much of a disagreement between the two, when it comes to government, isn't it a little early to be throwing citizens protesting government under the bus because they don't fit in your little box?

Fredom101
10-05-2010, 02:38 PM
You don't understand what collectivism is.

The tea party, like the LP, simply wants to wrestle the control of the golden gun from the current crop of thugs so THEY can take power. This is collectivism. Individualism would mean that we didn't have overlords, that we are free. The tea party is a political movement that has gone from somewhat principled small-l libertarianism to GOP lite. Grouping people in terms of political parties and so-called moral majorities is collectivist at the bone.

Deborah K
10-05-2010, 02:39 PM
The tea party, like the LP, simply wants to wrestle the control of the golden gun from the current crop of thugs so THEY can take power. This is collectivism. Individualism would mean that we didn't have overlords, that we are free. The tea party is a political movement that has gone from somewhat principled small-l libertarianism to GOP lite. Grouping people in terms of political parties and so-called moral majorities is collectivist at the bone.


This is inaccurate if you've read Ayn Rand and G.Edward Griffin on the subject.

georgiaboy
10-05-2010, 02:48 PM
First published in 1937...


How to Win Friends & Influence People (http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671723650)
- Dale Carnegie


http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/514laI6nP1L._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg (http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671723650)

torchbearer
10-05-2010, 04:10 PM
^This

Political action is not the only action one can take in order to bring about change. There is also direct action. Lew Rockwell has done more for the cause of liberty than 99.9% of the people on these boards. "Sidelines" my ass. If Lew is on the "sidelines" then I wish we had more people on the "sidelines" like Lew. This movement would be much further along.

Maybe only by virtue of age.
I've problem done more in the last 15 years than lew.
while he was hiding in a classroom, i was in the trenches.

anaconda
10-05-2010, 04:18 PM
Good article. Shame it wasn't in the WSJ or such.

I think Rand Paul represents how the Liberty movement should approach elections and campaigning. You've got to be mainstream. You can't talk about abolishing everything.

That's not to say you don't intend to do that when you're in office, of course. However, one cannot expect to slay the beast in a few short years. It's going to take decades - maybe a century...

And it works well when, in conjunction with electing Liberty folk, the people are being educated, too. Thus, in the future they'll be more likely to vote freedom.

Given potential economic conditions and the right messengers, this reform might happen much more quickly. In less than a decade.

Matt Collins
10-06-2010, 02:35 PM
Lew Rockwell discusses this with Judge Napolitano:




YouTube - Freedom Watch Part 3 - Invasion At Home (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu807LfKDwA)

LibertyEagle
10-06-2010, 02:55 PM
The education approach simply doesn't work unless it is a part of an effective political strategy.

+1

LibertyEagle
10-06-2010, 02:57 PM
I find it hypocritical for Lew to be critical of the Tea Party when Mises and Rothbard were polar opposites on a need for limited federal government. Rothbard did not support it, Mises did.

Thank you for pointing that out.


With that much of a disagreement between the two, when it comes to government, isn't it a little early to be throwing citizens protesting government under the bus because they don't fit in your little box?

Yeah, I think so.

heavenlyboy34
10-06-2010, 03:18 PM
How so? Collectivism is rooted in individual sacrifice for the greater good - as in - the collective.

No, Voluntaryism is and volunteerism is. Collectivism is the exact opposite, and has no intent to be good.

heavenlyboy34
10-06-2010, 03:19 PM
First published in 1937...
That is an excellent book.

heavenlyboy34
10-06-2010, 03:24 PM
Maybe only by virtue of age.
I've problem done more in the last 15 years than lew.
while he was hiding in a classroom, i was in the trenches.

This rests on the assumption that partisan activism is "doing something", but that is not objectively true. I have my own disagreements with Lew, but his achievements are more important in the long run than the petty, short term goals of political action. It seems that his investment of time in "the classroom" (not to mention publishing, speaking, etc) had a better return than yours, unless you can prove otherwise.

Austrian Econ Disciple
10-06-2010, 03:27 PM
The difference between Ron and all the other guys running on "The Tea Party" is that he doesn't want to be there. He wants to be back home. I have not heard once out of any of the Tea Party candidates that they don't want to be there and that they would rather be back home. Anyone who wants to be in DC will always vote against our interests eventually. Look at Rohrabacher. Ron views it as we do as self-defense, none of the other Tea Partyists view it this way, and they will be the new establishment if they stay more than one term. We will be fighting against them in a few years. Knowing this, that should tell you something about politics!


Just look at Rand...'we have come to take our country back'. I don't want anything. I want to be left alone. Leave me to my devices.

This is why the Government always grows, because freedom lovers do not want to be in DC, and if you do want to be in DC you will get corrupted.

torchbearer
10-06-2010, 04:14 PM
This rests on the assumption that partisan activism is "doing something", but that is not objectively true. I have my own disagreements with Lew, but his achievements are more important in the long run than the petty, short term goals of political action. It seems that his investment of time in "the classroom" (not to mention publishing, speaking, etc) had a better return than yours, unless you can prove otherwise.

would you call the progressive socialism we are suffering from to be short-term?
political action results in the changing of the real world actors who are changing things.
education is a pipeline activity, meaning you are educated the youth so that in the future you will have better voters.
a combination is required, but one task requires being in the line of fire. the other is buried away in a sanctuary.

Deborah K
10-07-2010, 10:05 AM
No, Voluntaryism is and volunteerism is. Collectivism is the exact opposite, and has no intent to be good.

Are you making up new definitions for collectivism? I'm going off Griffin's definition.

YouTube - -DVD Version: INTRO - Individualism vs Collectivism (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMYicq_SN1E&feature=channel_page)

YouTube - P1. The Nature and Origin of Human Rights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXOrJtn1h2M&feature=channel)

YouTube - P2. Group Supremacy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOUS6OalV2I&feature=channel)

YouTube - P3. Coercion vs Freedom (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AgcVNzObWE&feature=channel)

YouTube - P4. Equality and Inequality under Law (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKPPe78pX5w&playnext=1&videos=KgByfK5hjZs&feature=mfu_in_order)

LibertyEagle
10-07-2010, 10:33 AM
This rests on the assumption that partisan activism is "doing something", but that is not objectively true. I have my own disagreements with Lew, but his achievements are more important in the long run than the petty, short term goals of political action. It seems that his investment of time in "the classroom" (not to mention publishing, speaking, etc) had a better return than yours, unless you can prove otherwise.

Hard to say for sure, but I'd bet that more people were introduced to libertarian principles during Ron Paul's campaign, than were during the previous 25 years of solely educating and publishing on Lew Rockwell. That's not to say that one can exist without the other, or should. We need both.


“I have many friends in the libertarian movement who look down on those of us who get involved in political activity,” he acknowledged, but "eventually, if you want to bring about changes … what you have to do is participate in political action.” -- Ron Paul
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2008/sep/22/00019/

LibertyVox
10-07-2010, 10:39 AM
Hard to say for sure, but I'd bet that more people were introduced to libertarian principles during Ron Paul's campaign, than were during the previous 25 years of solely educating and publishing on Lew Rockwell. That's not to say that one can exist without the other, or should. We need both.


http://www.amconmag.com/article/2008/sep/22/00019/

Okay, bu then why restrict oneself to Tea O'con Parties parties?
Why not attend any rally, if the purpose is outreach and introducing liberal ideas?

LibertyEagle
10-07-2010, 10:55 AM
Okay, bu then why restrict oneself to Tea O'con Parties parties?

Why not attend any rally, if the purpose is outreach and introducing liberal ideas?

I didn't say we should limit ourselves to Tea Parties.

However, it's just my opinion, but I would steer clear of extreme leftist (ie. socialist/marxist/communist) groups primarily because one, the likelihood of converting someone from those groups is slim-to-none and also because most of our candidates are running for Republican nominations. For example, seeing people wave big RP for President signs while standing next to CP-USA waving their death to America signs, wouldn't exactly go over well with any Republican I have ever met and it would take way too long to get them to look past it. To me, it's like shooting ourselves in the foot. Sure, it's our prerogative to do it, but is it a wise move? In most cases, probably not.

virgil47
10-07-2010, 10:57 AM
The tea party, like the LP, simply wants to wrestle the control of the golden gun from the current crop of thugs so THEY can take power. This is collectivism. Individualism would mean that we didn't have overlords, that we are free. The tea party is a political movement that has gone from somewhat principled small-l libertarianism to GOP lite. Grouping people in terms of political parties and so-called moral majorities is collectivist at the bone.

Your definition of freedom will have us living in caves and hoping we are the strongest in the area. That is not freedom that is anarchy and anarchy is a non starter as far as civilization goes.

LibertyVox
10-07-2010, 11:16 AM
Liberty Eagle : I didn't say we should limit ourselves. Did I? Not at all.


Exactly. People here are contemptuous of tea parties in the same they are of many other political pressure groups. Now contempt does not mean, they don't recognize potential for good. I guess why tea parties get the most flak is precisely because they sometimes operate in the name of RP with their pro status quo and other disgusting ideas and because they represent a voting bloc from an analogous political quadrant.


It's just my opinion, but I would steer clear of extreme leftist (ie. socialist/marxist/communist) groups primarily because one, the likelihood of converting someone from those groups is slim-to-none and also because most of our candidates are running for Republican nominations. For example, seeing people wave big RP for President signs while standing next to CP-USA waving their death to America signs, wouldn't exactly go over well with any Republican I have ever met and it would take way too long to get them to look past it. To me, it's like shooting ourselves in the foot. Sure, it's our prerogative to do it, but is it a wise move? In most cases, probably not.


I don't know how many democratic or other typically " leftist" groups hold rallies with death to America signs. My guess only as much as the cons groups.
As to the question of looking bad and image etc, ..the main thing for RP and other lovers of liberty is winning people's hearts and minds even as many RPFers feel contempt for them or as RP put it, "...look down upon the." And unfortunately, tea parties do very little in that realm. They attract the same old so-con neocon chaps largely (arguably the most repulsive demographic in the country and the veritable wolf in sheep's clothing), and this in itself is quite a liability to Ron Paul and C4L and RP et al. have struggled with that in the past and present. This does not mean we should stop reaching out. And I know you agree with me. Thus my contention that to me at least out reach to TP is not much different than to any other group. And I am not sympathetic to them, only as much as I would be to any other political group or movement which can be won over with ideas. And these groups lie on all sides of the political ideas my friend.

That's why when people here thrash TP, I quite understand that. I don't need the feel to defend it, just reiterate from time to time not to be overtly antagonistic to it (or any other group).

Live_Free_Or_Die
10-07-2010, 11:37 AM
I see some people may have reflected on the Education Genie...
Then again... maybe not...


The education approach simply doesn't work unless it is a part of an effective political strategy.

I think I recently heard the single payer system won't work unless everyone is forced to pay but maybe I was hearing things at the time.

Your post really cracks me up. It won't work unless it is paired with something else that has never worked like in 1894 when Republicans took 100 seats, 1934 when Republicans took 80 seats, 1994 when Republicans took 54 seats.

I like conservative math:
Won't Work + Has Never Worked = Will Work


The philosophy that destroys us is not even defined. We have broken from reality a psychotic nation. Ignorance with a pretence of knowledge replacing wisdom. -Ron Paul


As long as the American people think that we have to police the world and have this world empire and that we have to take care of people from cradle to grave, no tax system will work. You have to change the philosophy of government. -Ron Paul


I don’t think ultimately term limits will solve the problem. I think the only thing that solves the problem is the philosophy of government and what the attitude is of the people and what they think the world government ought to be. -Ron Paul

If education will not work would someone please update the Campaign for Liberty web site?


Our mission is to promote and defend the great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity.


Education takes generations. In the meantime I am content with politics as well.

Seems like tyranny has taken generations but currently public education occurs in less than 18 years and college often in less than 4. Maybe my math is off though and tyranny has occurred quicker than memory serves.


I agree that doing the same old thing is unlikely to achieve a different result. He fails, however, by offering no alternatives. What has been done over and over has failed over and over. We got that - anyone with a nominally functional brain and an IQ in the double digits gets that. The begged question, then, is what else might we try?

How many times have I posted this?

1. Convince a majority
2. Create a majority (ie. geographical organization)
3. Breed a majority
4. Kill a majority

People keep posing your same question but no one has ever challenged or offered an alternative to the above. So lets update my list based on what previous posts in this thread indicate will not work.

1. Convince a majority
2. Create a majority (ie. geographical organization)
3. Breed a majority
4. Kill a majority

Start packing or start fucking.

Unless of course you have a plan to address the education genie to put this one back into play:
1. Convince a majority

The only other way I see that one strategically being played successfully is civil disobedience, but very few express any interest in that. Heaven forbid we give up the convenience of showing up at a ballot box once every couple years and exercise Constitutional civic duties reclaiming We The People's seat of government and organize to protect our fellow citizens from federal tyranny.


The tea party is a political movement that has gone from somewhat principled small-l libertarianism to GOP lite.

That was just outright comical. +1 :)


would you call the progressive socialism we are suffering from to be short-term?
political action results in the changing of the real world actors who are changing things.
education is a pipeline activity, meaning you are educated the youth so that in the future you will have better voters.
a combination is required, but one task requires being in the line of fire. the other is buried away in a sanctuary.

Please explain how politicking is in the line of fire? Feel free to compare it to someone like... Irwin Schiff or other people who individually secede on principal? Feel free to compare it to people in Keene smoking pot? Feel free to compare it to people producing and selling raw milk? Seriously, in the line of fire? I can't believe you articulated it like that...

Ron Paul must have had a statist lapse when he dropped this one:

All initiation of force is a violation of someone else's rights, whether initiated by an individual or the state, for the benefit of an individual or group of individuals, even if it's supposed to be for the benefit of another individual or group of individuals. -Ron Paul

LibertyEagle
10-07-2010, 11:38 AM
LFoD, it takes BOTH.

Live_Free_Or_Die
10-07-2010, 11:48 AM
LFoD, it takes BOTH.

I got the memo:

Won't Work + Has Never Worked = Will Work

I'm on board, let's get the GOP into office so I can experience real change not the fake hopey kind of change.

I want the real thing baby, Rah Rah GOP...
http://dianhasan.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/coca-cola_the-real-thing-vintage-poster.jpg

I can't wait. It's gonna be great.

Dianne
10-07-2010, 06:49 PM
There are two tea parties... There is the true Ron Paul for liberty tea party which was created in 2007, in support of Ron Paul for President. Hard working group, inclusive of everyone who wishes freedom from tyranny and an opressive government.

There is the fake tea party, sparked by Sarah Falin and Karl Rove, Dick Army and Fox News. I remember the days when FOX News called us in the tea party as martians in the tin foil hats. Well now they have stolen the movement in order to marginalize it and truly make us look like tin foil hatters.

Just stay true to message.... we can win this, if we don't jump to the lessor of the evils... The lessor of the evils, is still evil.

The tea party movement of 2007, the REAL ONE sees no color or race barrier; sees no political barrier, and wishes an end to these military complex occupations.
The tea party is all about freedom for every American (regardless of sex, religion, sexual orientation), and an end to a governmental dictatorship directed toward the end of freedom and liberty as we once knew it.

klamath
10-07-2010, 07:23 PM
Dianne;2920928]
There are two tea parties... There is the true Ron Paul for liberty tea party which was created in 2007, in support of Ron Paul for President. Hard working group, inclusive of everyone who wishes freedom from tyranny and an opressive government.

There is the fake tea party, sparked by Sarah Falin and Karl Rove, Dick Army and Fox News. I remember the days when FOX News called us in the tea party as martians in the tin foil hats. Well now they have stolen the movement in order to marginalize it and truly make us look like tin foil hatters.

Just stay true to message.... we can win this, if we don't jump to the lessor of the evils... The lessor of the evils, is still evil.

The tea party movement of 2007, the REAL ONE sees no color or race barrier; sees no political barrier, and wishes an end to these military complex occupations.
The tea party is all about freedom for every American (regardless of sex, religion, sexual orientation), and an end to a governmental dictatorship directed toward the end of freedom and liberty as we once knew it.[/

Hate to blow your theory but that doesn't completely match the original tea party I was in. That matches just about as many issues as Palin and Army's does. So I guess it wasn't all that you thought it was either.