Chuck Baldwin: Have The Tea Parties Been Neoconned?

[FrankRep]

Back in February of 2010, I appeared on Neil Cavuto’s FOXBusiness TV show to talk about the emergence and effectiveness of America’s Tea Party movement. I warned FOX biz host Charles Payne that I was very concerned about the Tea Parties being infiltrated and taken over by big-government neocons.


Have The Tea Parties Been Neoconned? (http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=3425)


Chuck Baldwin Live (http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/)
Apr 21, 2011



=====


http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/stories2011/09aApril/teapartyrally-t.001.jpg



The McClatchy-Marist Poll (http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/misc/usapolls/US110410/McClatchy/McClatchy-Marist%20Poll%20Complete%20April%2018th,%202011%20 USA%20Poll%20Tables.pdf), which was released last Monday, revealed that those calling themselves Tea Partiers have little interest in doing anything substantial about cutting government spending, hindering any attempt by conservatives in Washington to rein in that spending and it giving President Obama a huge edge going into the 2012 elections.

The Tea Partiers are about to discover that they can't have it both ways.



Tea Party About to Give Obama a Second Term (http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/7248-tea-party-about-to-give-obama-a-second-term-)


Bob Adelmann | The New American (http://www.thenewamerican.com/)
26 April 2011

----

Related article:

Poll Finds Tea Partiers Won’t Cut Spending, Will Hike Taxes (http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/7237-poll-finds-tea-partiers-wont-cut-spending-will-hike-taxes)

[MN Patriot]

Those conservatives who call themselves Tea Partiers probably support the War on Drugs, too. This is yet more proof that I am right, "conservatives" are just that, they want to conserve the status quo. They really don't want to end big government, income taxes, the Federal Reserve. "Conservatives" just want to battle it out with "liberals" over who gets to run big government. No matter who is in control, government gets bigger.

When do we start the serious discussion about creating an independent libertarian third party with the goal of replacing the Republican Party? Turn the Republicans into the third party who wants big government, war, income taxes, a central bank.

[AuH20]

Those conservatives who call themselves Tea Partiers probably support the War on Drugs, too. This is yet more proof that I am right, "conservatives" are just that, they want to conserve the status quo. They really don't want to end big government, income taxes, the Federal Reserve. "Conservatives" just want to battle it out with "liberals" over who gets to run big government. No matter who is in control, government gets bigger.

When do we start the serious discussion about creating an independent libertarian third party with the goal of replacing the Republican Party? Turn the Republicans into the third party who wants big government, war, income taxes, a central bank.

That's not entirely true. There are republicans who follow the tenets of the old canon found in the works of Russell Kirk. It should be also noted that Kirk was a non-interventionist.
http://www.kirkcenter.org/index.php/detail/ten-conservative-principles/

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_sKDaf3rT5to/S20mhmLB7zI/AAAAAAAAA18/ukpbyvfBKoE/s1600/Russell%20Kirk.jpg


There is an older segment of the Tea Party (primarily the baby boomers) that has been brainwashed into thinking that the ill-begotten fruits of the New Deal aren't so bad. Republicans integrated this progressive plank into the platform in the 1960s. Hell, Reagan went as far to amplify the benefits of Social Security. Think of the current republican party as a once majestic sand castle that has been beaten down by the waves of prosperity and misplaced sense of entitlement over the decades.

[HOLLYWOOD]

TEA PARTY has been co-opted by establishment Washington DC money from FASCIST and NEOCON groups and their covert Tea-O-con fronted subgroups.

I was wondering where Chuck Baldwin has been, of course the TEA PARTY has been hijack Chuck... sometime down the road, Chuck needs to get Ralph Nader, Cindy McKinney, and the other 3rd parties heads and come to some agreement to back Ron. When you have many different political affiliations supporting Ron Paul, then you have America supporting you and not this constant 50% Mob Rule by the Duopoly and their Establishment Empires.

[MN Patriot]

That's not entirely true. There are republicans who follow the tenets of the old canon found in the works of Russell Kirk. It should be also noted that Kirk was a non-interventionist.
http://www.kirkcenter.org/index.php/detail/ten-conservative-principles/


There is an older segment of the Tea Party that has been brainwashed into thinking that the ill-begotten fruits of the New Deal aren't so bad. Republicans integrated this progressive plank into the platform in the 1960s. Hell, Reagan went as far to amplify the benefits of Social Security. Think of the current republican party as a once majestic sand castle that has been beaten down by the waves of prosperity and entitlement over the decades.

From your link:

The attitude we call conservatism is sustained by a body of sentiments, rather than by a system of ideological dogmata. It is almost true that a conservative may be defined as a person who thinks himself such.
.
.
In fine, the diversity of ways in which conservative views may find expression is itself proof that conservatism is no fixed ideology

That page is full of contradictions. It certainly is on the right track regarding the essential ideas, but no wonder conservatives have been fooled into being Democrats.

Conservatism is not a fixed ideology, so then it adopts the liberal ideology.

We really DO need a libertarian revolution to fix things. Thanks for confirming this.

[Sola_Fide]

Chuck's a patriot. Love that guy...

[cindy25]

I think we should use fascist instead of conservative; and socialist instead of liberal. John McCain is a fascist, as is Lindsey Graham, Obama is a socialist, not a liberal

[FrankRep]

I think we should use fascist instead of conservative; and socialist instead of liberal. John McCain is a fascist, as is Lindsey Graham, Obama is a socialist, not a liberal

Learn the game....


The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.

- Professor Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/094500110X/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=libert0f-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=094500110X) (1966), p. 1247-1248

[AuH20]

From your link:


That page is full of contradictions. It certainly is on the right track regarding the essential ideas, but no wonder conservatives have been fooled into being Democrats.

Conservatism is not a fixed ideology, so then it adopts the liberal ideology.

We really DO need a libertarian revolution to fix things. Thanks for confirming this.

Libertarians have similar holes in their line of thinking as well. I do find the concept of "abstract" liberty amusing though. The concept of liberty in many cases is conveniently detached from the very community which provides the exercise of such freedoms. I guess liberty just sprouted forth from a vacuum completely on it's own? It can be characterized as a "cart before the horse" fallacy.

Another qualm I have with libertarians is their insistence that man is naturally a good creature if left alone. That always gives me a chuckle. All in all, there are elements of libertarianism that I cherish and utilize in my daily life, but I'm far from a devout worshiper. Ultimately, I think if anyone marries themselves exclusively to one philosophy, they're doing themselves a great disservice.

[MN Patriot]

Libertarians have similar holes in their line of thinking as well. I do find the concept of "abstract" liberty amusing though. The concept of liberty in many cases is conveniently detached from the very community which provides the exercise of such freedoms. I guess liberty just sprouted forth from a vacuum completely on it's own? It's often a cart before the horse fallacy. Another qualm I have with libertarians is their insistence that man is naturally a good creature if left alone. That always gives me a chuckle. All in all, there are elements of libertarianism that I cherish and utilize in my daily life, but I'm far from a devout worshiper. Ultimately, I think if anyone marries themselves exclusively to one ideology, they're doing themselves a disservice.

You are demonstrating the uneasy alliance between libertarians and conservatives. Plus some inaccurate arguments. I haven't heard very many libertarians say man is essentially good if left alone. The ideal purpose of government in a libertarian society is to prevent people from harming one another. This certainly doesn't imply that libertarians think man is fundamentally good.
If people respected one another we would have liberty. People don't respect each other. Common criminals steal and rape. Political criminals rob and kill. The founders created a brilliant form of government that sought to restrain the political criminals, and allow us to defend against common criminals. It comes down to respect for one another, and it seems to me "conservatives" don't have as much respect for others as libertarians do.