Newt Gingrich: Tea Party Turning Into The 'Militant' Wing Of GOP I personally think the Tea Party will end up hurting Republicans more than Democrats unless the GOP can convince the Tea Baggers to join the GOP (they seem to be quite easy to persuade, so you never know).
The Tea Party Movement will definitely push Republican primary candidates further and further to the right. It'll be interesting to see if they can successfully maneuver back to the center in time for the General Election. Most women and minority people I know aren't really prototypical "Tea Party Types." To win them over I think candidates will often need a more centrist message than "government is evil!", "Obama isn't an American!", "banks are too regulated!" and "cut taxes!". Not always, but often.
Gingrich only HOPES the Tea Party will become a small radical segment of the conservative movement . . . If it turns into something much bigger, and swamps the Republican party, his career is probably over.
It seems to me the Tea Partiers are a loosely knit collection of groups and individuals with one uniting philosophy: Government has gotten too big for the good of the country. Are there whackjobs who attach themselves to this movement? Sure, just like any other large movement. It's not violent, nor does it promote violence. It's not racist, although I'm sure there are racists who have attached themselves to the movement. It's a collection of people who just want to live their lives. The vast majority of these people are just average citizens who are just fed up. Most have never been involved in politics before. That's why the signs and the costumes are so hokey; these people are political amateurs. The idea of a small government isn't a "far right" idea; it's a centrist one. Those who buy the characterization by those on the Left of the Tea Party as being "racist" and "violent" are just unthinking sheep. If you want to see violence, check out the following stories: [video=youtube;yBdbTVUeay8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBdbTVUeay8[/video] (Those are SEIU employees beating a black Tea Party memeber) http://indyposted.com/tag/allee-bautsch-beating/
What's the source for the original poster? I rather enjoy how it seems to be twisting "militant" into meaning "violent" rather than "aggressively active," which is the far more likely definition he intended. Ed O.
How do you explain the massive broad-based support for social security and medicare? If the center in our country love small government, it seems to me those would've been killed off long ago. Also, how do you explain that Obama got elected running on a platform of universal health care?
Answer to the first question: "everyone loves a ponzi scheme unless they're the last generation left holding the worthless paper." He got elected because he is not George Bush. All indications are people do not give him the same level of support they did at election time, once they woke up and saw what the agenda was beyond not being George Bush.
I think Newt was one of the original generation of neo-cons, but he's closer to being an actual conservative than modern neo-cons. He's both brilliant and stupid at the same time. The tea party movement has shown no indication of becoming a 3rd party, and I suspect they'd support conservative democrats as much as republicans, FWIW. When Newt calls them potentially the militant wing of the republican party, I think he means both "activist" and "unwilling to be controlled." The latter being a big problem for republican establishment, if you know what I mean.
Ha, ha, ha, ha!! That's a good one: KKK undertones. Why is it that every protest movement by liberals is a noble endeavor, but when conservatives protest it's automatically racist? I suspect that liberals are frightened to death by the Tea Party movement, and are afraid that it's going to continue growing until it threatens to undermine their entire agenda.
He talked for more than a year about providing universal health coverage. Was it really such a shock that he followed through on that promise?
He also talked for more than a year about bringing the troops home. Politicians say a lot of crap that people don't really believe. Ed O.
He talked for a year about the war, being anti-war, and basically appealed to the left's version of the tea party movement (otherwise known as his ATM, moveOn.org et al). EDIT: d'oh, Ed O beat me to it. And people do want small government, they just don't know what to cut (I say cut it all).
People like free stuff. The generation receiving Social Security and Medicare paid pennies on the dollar for the benefit because they're living much longer than the projections indicated and medical care is much more expensive. Enact real PAYGO and see how much people like Big Government. He ran on "Hope" and "Change". He soft-pedaled health care, even running against mandates and taxing medical benefits. Remember him villifying Sens. Clinton and McCain for those positions? I do. He gets elected and assumes their positions. He won based on rainbows and unicorns, with not much based in reality. Also, his name was John W. McBush.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/22/newt-gingrich-tea-party-t_n_548250.html there are plenty of them out there.
