Tea Party

Glenn Beck Explains the Tea Party to the MSM

See Video

Stephen Gordon Tea Bags Maddow

See Video

Tea Party Protesters Talk to Neil Cavuto

See Video

Our very own Jason Pye, along with other Tea Party organizers, speaks to Neil Cavuto about the Tea Party movement.  Citing low numbers, Neil questions whether the Tea Party protests will gain the support needed to have the influence needed, and is reminded that the original Boston Tea Party protesters started with a small minority as well.

Washington Post stumped by Rand Paul because he’s shattering media narratives about the Tea Party

Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-KY) outreach efforts to minorities and young people with a heavy focus on criminal justice reform, police militarization, and civil liberties has perplexed the Washington Post’s Aaron Blake.

Over at Washington Post’s The Fix, Blake declared that the “Tea Party” label — which, as he notes, has been overused since the peak of the movement in 2010 — is “far too simple” for Paul. He points to the Kentucky Republican’s piece in Time on the startling scenes from Ferguson, Missouri and police militarization:

Given Paul’s political rise — he defeated an establishment-aligned Republican in a 2010 primary — it was natural to label him a tea partier. We have done it too — repeatedly. It’s the easiest short-hand for a GOP outsider. But more and more, it’s looking like that label doesn’t really fit. While Paul is certainly aligned with the tea party on a lot of stuff, the label doesn’t describe him as well as it does someone like Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah). An op-ed Paul wrote Thursday in Time magazine was just the latest example of that. The things Paul said in it are not the kind of things you would expect from a tea partier.
[…]
The trouble with Paul is that no well-known labels seem to fit him well. While his dad, Ron Paul, is a pretty straight-line libertarian, that’s not really who the younger Paul is. He’s not an establishment Republican, a neo-conservative, an arch-conservative or a moderate Republican.

We still don’t know what label would be better than “tea party,” but it’s becoming clearer and clearer that this label doesn’t really fit. Maybe he’s just a Rand Paul Republican.

Leftists are absolutely shocked that conservatives actually revere the Constitution

In a recent article, the Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne whined that “For too long, progressives have allowed conservatives to monopolize claims of fealty to our unifying national document.” He goes on to talk about how conservatives and TEA Party-types walk around with their pocket Constitutions and cite its passages in defense of their political positions, and declares it is high time that liberals use the Constitution to rebut conservative political arguments.

Reading the article, I was reminded of a recent debate with a liberal friend who was blasting the Supreme Court ruling in the Hobby Lobby case, saying that it was setting a dangerous precedent to allow people to exempt themselves from laws based on religious objections, in this case “denying” women of their birth control. In response, I asked him to cite the passage of the Constitution which guarantees women the “right” to taxpayer-funded birth control. He responded by saying that the Constitution is not the only source we rely on to determine what government can and should do.

Actually, that is the ONLY thing that we can rely on to determine the proper role of government.

And therein lies the massive gulf between the conservative and liberal understandings of the Constitution. Liberals see the Constitution as a “living” document which can be amended by judicial interpretation to bring it more in line with societal and cultural preferences, a document infinitely malleable with endless interpretations.

House Republicans should probably investigate Senate Democrats for the big role they played in the IRS scandal

House Republicans have spent a significant amount of time over the 13-plus months investigating the Internal Revenue Service and disgraced official Lois Lerner over the targeting conservative and Tea Party groups.

But a series of ethics complaints filed by the Center for Competitive Politics earlier this month highlights the involvement of nine Senate Democrats, including Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY), in the IRS scandal, as A. Barton Hinkle explains:

The complaint details several letters Levin wrote to the IRS in which he insisted that “a message needs to be sent” to social-welfare groups “on an urgent basis,” and that the message should make it “crystal clear” they needed to restrict their political activities. Just so the IRS would not misunderstand, he drew attention to two TV advertisements—one by Crossroads GPS and another by Patriot Majority USA.

Unsatisfied by the IRS response, Levin continued to press the agency to give such groups—which are organized under Section 501(c)4) of the tax code—”a choice: either lose their exempt status (and pay taxes) or eliminate the partisan political activity.” He followed that up with a demand to see confidential information about Crossroads GOP, Priorities USA, Americans for Prosperity, and Patriot Majority USA. Informed that “the IRS cannot legally disclose” what he wanted, he tried again—and again. As the ethics complaint notes, “IRS Acting Commissioner Steven Miller acknowledged in an interview that Senator Levin’s effort did, in fact, have an effect on the IRS’ internal proceedings.”

Today in Liberty: Labrador says coronating McCarthy sends the “wrong response,” Army begins Bowe Bergdahl investigation

“The kind of man who wants the government to adopt and enforce his ideas is always the kind of man whose ideas are idiotic.” — H. L. Mencken

Big Business is freaking out about the building wave against cronyism

Big Business and the Wall Street class are still trying to figure out what to make of outgoing Rep. Eric Cantor’s (R-VA) stunning loss to Dave Brat and what it means for the national political landscape now that it appears the Tea Party movement is experiencing a resurgence, as The New York Times explains:

His loss at the hands of David Brat, a Tea Party-inspired economics professor who campaigned on throwing corrupt Wall Street bankers in jail, railed against crony capitalism and insisted that immigration reform would only reward lawbreakers, spurred business leaders to mobilize to preserve their clout in Congress. Already uneasy over what they see as an especially hostile strain of anticorporate populism growing within the conservative movement, and threatening the traditional corporate-friendly centers of power inside the Republican Party, many businesses fear the loss of some of their strongest champions on Capitol Hill.
[…]
What has concerned many businesses with a stake in federal policy is a growing anger on the right from people who can sound more Occupy Wall Street than Tea Party.

“You could even make a case that there’s a lot in common between the Tea Party types and the Elizabeth Warren liberals,” said Gregory R. Valliere, the chief political strategist for the Potomac Research Group. “The impact of what’s happened is going to make Republicans in the House apprehensive about appearing to be too cozy to business.”

Denial: Cantor’s political establishment friends can’t grasp that his loss was about cronyism

Tom Donohue, President and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, is trying to dismiss the notion that soon-to-be former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) lost on Tuesday night because of his connections to big business:

Tom Donohue, president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, noted his group wasn’t involved in the Cantor primary, and said the Chamber has yet to lose in any of the races where it has spent money this year.

“We have lots of allies,” he told Bloomberg Television. “Look, you can try to make this the story of the year, but it’s not going to last very long.”
[…]
But Donohue pushed back against the notion that the Tea Party defeated Cantor.

“The Tea Party had nothing to do with this,” he said.

“They weren’t in, they didn’t put any money in, they didn’t have any people there. It was sort of an attractive professor in a very, very conservative district in Virginia. And everybody was surprised.”

There’s a groundswell building against cronyism, and the Tea Party movement can lead the way

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) has been pushing conservatives to take a new angle in the pursuit of limited government by targeting Washington’s cronyist culture, and it’s a message that the Tea Party movement could carry, as Jennifer Rubin explains:

Alternatively, the tea party might transform itself into a single-issue group. Whatever you think of one-issue politics, the right has a number of successful groups. On the right, the National Right to Life Committee and the National Rifle Association have been influential for years. Likewise, Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform has reinforced the right’s no-tax-hike policy in election after election and in key budget standoffs. What issue could the tea party adopt?

The ideal movement, missing on the right, would be one devoted entirely to anti-cronyism. It is a popular position on the right and among all voters. The removal of special goodies in the tax code and budget that distort the market and reward entities that can manipulate big government is sorely needed. And although Republicans talk a good game, there has been comparatively little progress on issues such as too-big-to-fail bank subsidies, energy tax breaks and ag subsidies. Moreover, the original issue that lifted the tea party to prominence was the mortgage bailouts, a prime example of favoritism (not only for irresponsible borrowers but also for the lenders). Devising a pledge as stringent as the no-tax-hike pledge to stop new crony capitalism endeavors and to begin rooting out existing ones would be one way to approach the issue.


The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.