Rubio: Do we need a Tea Party Caucus?

[oxcoug]

Amen, Brother Future-First-Latino-President.

http://shark-tank.net/2011/01/24/senator-rubio-questions-the-need-for-senate-tea-party-caucus-video/

[dabrockster]

Amen, Brother Future-First-Latino-President.

http://shark-tank.net/2011/01/24/sen...-caucus-video/

I like his comments. I love the fact that the debates take place at the grass-roots level (Where it needs to be).. I agree with him... Very good response to the question..

[RobinFinderson]

Here is one Tea Bagger's response to Brother Future-First-Latino-President:

The Tea Party happens to be very conservative, at the moment, but that is NOT its defining trait. The Tea Party is a REJECTION OF DC POLITICAL CULTURE. It is important for those who identify as members of the Tea Party to hang together in the same way that it is important for the followers of Jesus Christ to form communities -- such groups give the members greater strength to resist temptation and live in harmony with their convictions.

For the Tea Party not to get absorbed into the Republican party it MUST continue to assert its separate identity. This is essential for the movement to maintain its vitality. The Bachmann response to the SOTU is another example of a Tea Party assertion of identity. I wish it was coming from a better representative of the movement, but the nature of the movement doesn't allow for that kind of quality control.

[Jacob]

Though it hurts....I agree with Robin.

[byu71]

Here is one Tea Bagger's response to Brother Future-First-Latino-President:

The Tea Party happens to be very conservative, at the moment, but that is NOT its defining trait. The Tea Party is a REJECTION OF DC POLITICAL CULTURE. It is important for those who identify as members of the Tea Party to hang together in the same way that it is important for the followers of Jesus Christ to form communities -- such groups give the members greater strength to resist temptation and live in harmony with their convictions.

For the Tea Party not to get absorbed into the Republican party it MUST continue to assert its separate identity. This is essential for the movement to maintain its vitality. The Bachmann response to the SOTU is another example of a Tea Party assertion of identity. I wish it was coming from a better representative of the movement, but the nature of the movement doesn't allow for that kind of quality control.

If the tea party were to take on a set of specific beliefs, their number would shrink mightely (sp). While I think many consider they are in the "tea party" tent, many that lay claim to be leaders in the movement are small tent folks.

I don't know if I am a tea partier or not. I want smaller government. I think most politicians need a wake up call. I like folks like Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor.

Folks like Demint, Hannity and Bachman, if they are the tea party leaders, I am not a follower.

[oxcoug]

If the tea party were to take on a set of specific beliefs, their number would shrink mightely (sp). While I think many consider they are in the "tea party" tent, many that lay claim to be leaders in the movement are small tent folks.

I don't know if I am a tea partier or not. I want smaller government. I think most politicians need a wake up call. I like folks like Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor.

Folks like Demint, Hannity and Bachman, it they are the tea party leaders, I am not a follower.

People like Demint and Bachmann have one thing in common and it's the creeping sickness in the Tea Party ranks - they're both Fundamentalist Christians who want their social agenda to infect the basic cause of the Tea Party, which is really about smaller government and controlling public spending. The Demint/Bachmann crew want smaller government, fiscal restraint..... oh and also to make sure that no one is taking it, or giving it, in the butt. If the Tea Party ever tried to become more coherently organized it would crack under the tensions of the total libertarians and the economic libertarians / social cons who make up its ranks.

[Jacob]

People like Demint and Bachmann have one thing in common and it's the creeping sickness in the Tea Party ranks - they're both Fundamentalist Christians who want their social agenda to infect the basic cause of the Tea Party, which is really about smaller government and controlling public spending. The Demint/Bachmann crew want smaller government, fiscal restraint..... oh and also to make sure that no one is taking it, or giving it, in the butt. If the Tea Party ever tried to become more coherently organized it would crack under the tensions of the total libertarians and the economic libertarians / social cons who make up its ranks.

Was it your intent to speak in favor of Demint/Bachman? If so, well done.

[Goatnapper'96]

Here is one Tea Bagger's response to Brother Future-First-Latino-President:

The Tea Party happens to be very conservative, at the moment, but that is NOT its defining trait. The Tea Party is a REJECTION OF DC POLITICAL CULTURE. It is important for those who identify as members of the Tea Party to hang together in the same way that it is important for the followers of Jesus Christ to form communities -- such groups give the members greater strength to resist temptation and live in harmony with their convictions.

For the Tea Party not to get absorbed into the Republican party it MUST continue to assert its separate identity. This is essential for the movement to maintain its vitality. The Bachmann response to the SOTU is another example of a Tea Party assertion of identity. I wish it was coming from a better representative of the movement, but the nature of the movement doesn't allow for that kind of quality control.

Robin, did you ever explain how you went from loving Rachel Maddow because she would not let the Tea Party die and that would end up being an albatross around the neck of Republicans in the 2010 Election to deciding you belonged to the clique? I think Miss Pelosi beat you to that punch when she announced the big tentness of the Tea Party, after decrying it as astroturf.

Personally, I will never belong to any group that would have me but while you might include yourself because you define fiscal conservativism to mean not running a deficit....I am prone to remember the quote from "The Princess Bride" wrt you and fiscal conservativism as defined by the Tea Baggers: "I don't not think those words mean what you think they mean."

Regardless, welcome aboard!

[byu71]

Was it your intent to speak in favor of Demint/Bachman? If so, well done.

My guess is he would be happy to have them as passengers on the train, just not in the "conductors" seat. I may be projecting my thoughts onto him though.

[Goatnapper'96]

My guess is he would be happy to have them as passengers on the train, just not in the "conductors" seat. I may be projecting my thoughts onto him though.

I agree. The Tea Party is a voice for fiscal conservativism. It ends there. It might have to make alliances within the greater framework of the Republican Party with the Religious Right, but the key to Tea Party potency is to stay laser focussed on fiscal conservativism. FC is something that speaks to most independents and every Republican. It is such a sexy title that Robin has decided he are won as well. While the Republican party will be unable to avoid becoming bogged down into the bog of eternal stench over social conservative issues I am hoping that the people driving the Republican Party train are the same ones driving the Tea Party train. In other words, I hope and pray that FC is the primary rallying cry of Republican leadership while giving lip service to socially conservative issues. If the days of the religious right having too much persuasive clout are gone, God will bless us mightily!

[RobinFinderson]

Robin, did you ever explain how you went from loving Rachel Maddow because she would not let the Tea Party die and that would end up being an albatross around the neck of Republicans in the 2010 Election to deciding you belonged to the clique? I think Miss Pelosi beat you to that punch when she announced the big tentness of the Tea Party, after decrying it as astroturf.

Personally, I will never belong to any group that would have me but while you might include yourself because you define fiscal conservativism to mean not running a deficit....I am prone to remember the quote from "The Princess Bride" wrt you and fiscal conservativism as defined by the Tea Baggers: "I don't not think those words mean what you think they mean."

Regardless, welcome aboard!

Welcome aboard? I was here first, bub.

There is no contradiction. I'm a liberal libertarian who appreciates grassroots activism. The difference between liberal and conservative libertarians is in what we consider to be 'essential government services.' I am all for having small government, conservative spending and minimal government intrusion into our lives, but I differ from many of my fellow libertarians in what I consider to be 'essential.'

For example, I think that it is 'essential' that the government address the problems Americans face with regard to health care. The prognosis for doing nothing in this realm is grim, and Capitalism (in any of the forms supported by pro-capitalists) doesn't adequately remedy the problem as quickly as it needs to be addressed. I would be happy if there were a solution that could work in the current political climate, but so far the best solution (ie. one that will eventually actually work) is a slow crawl toward socialized medicine. I'd be thrilled if Republicans or anyone else could convince me that there was some other solution to the problem, but until that convincing happens, I support progress toward 'socialized medicine' for the same reason I support our 'socialized military.' Both would actually work in addressing essential problems faced by our country.

I like the Tea Party's activist bent. A lot of us liberals thought that we were being effective activists in our support for Obama, who unseated the party darling (Hillary) to win the party's nomination. There is a certain circus-like quality about the Tea Party that is not entirely unlike Burning Man, and I like that too.

Another thing I like about the Tea Party is that it really demands that the government serve the interests of all of us little people BEFORE corporate interests. I'm equally pissed, along with my more conservative Tea Bagger brethren, over TARP, even though TARP may have saved the US economy as we know it. That is part of the circus quality of the movement... we would rather suffer and do what we think is right than continue to prop up what we see as the rigged system that is the alliance between monied special interests and our government. I would do just fine in the Wild West.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Good points Robin.

Many people claim to be 'fiscal conservatives' or claim to channel the Founders' ideals. However very few of them will ACTUALLY take the logical step and demand that was phase away Social Security, the Dept of Education, and other steps to starve the federal government of money and power (returning the power to the states, where it should be).

There should never again be a company who is 'too big to fail'. They only get that way by coercing government to regulate away their competition. To me, it is tragically apparent that both the D's and the R's are walking hand in hand to the promised land, leaving the wreckage of actual rights and lives of their constituents in their wake. Both are trying to outdo one another in bankrupting great-great grandchildren and thus putting America's strengths behind bars for centuries to come.

I haven't the time to respond to some of the other salient points here. Suffice to say that I sincerely hope the rulers of the Repubs don't co-opt the tea party. As you said, there is a strong liberal (Classical liberal anyway) and libertarian streak within the Tea Party. I hope it stays that way.

[Jacob]

Suffice to say that I sincerely hope the rulers of the Repubs don't co-opt the tea party. As you said, there is a strong liberal (Classical liberal anyway) and libertarian streak within the Tea Party. I hope it stays that way.

I think that's right. Which is why a Tea Party Caucus in the US Senate might not make much sense. There will be too much co-opting. It appears that Oxcoug either doesn't think the Tea Party was much use to republicans in the last election, or he thinks they served their purpose and should now just shut up.

I'm of the opinion that nothing has changed yet. So keep speaking up and making the ruling classes nervous. When republicans or democrats actually effect some positive change re: the Tea Party issues, the Tea Party can go away quietly, but we are not there yet. We haven't even taken a step in that direction.

[byu71]

I think that's right. Which is why a Tea Party Caucus in the US Senate might not make much sense. There will be too much co-opting. It appears that Oxcoug either doesn't think the Tea Party was much use to republicans in the last election, or he thinks they served their purpose and should now just shut up.

I'm of the opinion that nothing has changed yet. So keep speaking up and making the ruling classes nervous. When republicans or democrats actually effect some positive change re: the Tea Party issues, the Tea Party can go away quietly, but we are not there yet. We haven't even taken a step in that direction.

I am all for the "tea party" speaking up. I am OK with Michelle, Senator what is his name, Sarah, Hannity, et. al. speaking up. It does bother me when they think they speak for conservatives. If they do, I am no longer a conservative. I think their RINO mantra is a bunch of crap. It is like the evangelicals saying mormons aren't Christian. Screw their litmus tests.

[RobinFinderson]

Good points Robin.

Many people claim to be 'fiscal conservatives' or claim to channel the Founders' ideals. However very few of them will ACTUALLY take the logical step and demand that was phase away Social Security, the Dept of Education, and other steps to starve the federal government of money and power (returning the power to the states, where it should be).

This is where my 'liberalness' shows. Before Social Security, a lot of people would work and save their whole lives, then dwindle away eating dog food without the ability to wipe their own butt. Social Security definitely faces some challenges ahead, due to the glut of Boomers all retiring close together, but that is a problem that can be solved (for less than the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) and we can keep this essential program that makes life less of a gamble, and therefore increases the ability of people to take the very risks with their professional lives that are essential for private innovation.

The Department of Education and public education in general are other 'essential' programs for this country to work well. Education is what makes 'freedom' and 'liberty' mean anything.

Anyhow, we can cut down the military, and stop pretending like we are the world's police man. We aren't policing. We are forcing other countries to give us favored trade status at the point of a gun. I'm not sure how the world would be different if we were to be a less militaristic society, but I think we have got to head in that direction and significantly cut our military spending down to an 'essential' level.