The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Peter Robinson ·
Nov 24, 2011 at 9:32am
On this Thanksgiving Day, a brief photo essay--and a word of thanks to all the members of the Tea Party for their selflessness, patriotism, and sheer determination to return this Republic to its founding principles.
A tip of the hat to Prof. Todd Zywicki.
- Comment (50)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Dec '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Well then, it's a happy coincidence that I don't give two [redacted] whether my actions are of use to YOU or not.
[Redacted] and I shall go to another Tea Party.
Ed.'s Note: Comment redacted for violations to the CoC
Edited on Nov 25, 2011 at 10:30amMay '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Conor: OWS is, yes, a reaction against "bailouts" for banks, yet it very much embraces a bailout mentality: "bailout me", that is. Not so the Tea Party. Fundamentally there is a right/left divide. Ignoring that divide is "we all share the same goals" feel-good-ism.
Is the Tea Party a blunt instrument that has hampered us at tactical levels here and there, as with Sharron Angle or Christine O'Donnell? Sure. But on balance it has sent a transformative message to D.C., and consequently the entire debate is now centered on how to achieve the scaling down of gov't -- such that even Obama needs to give it lip service.
OWS has no such victory to trumpet, and in fact has done its cause great harm. Long live the Tea Party.
Oct '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
I can only speak for my own Tea Party involvement and that was inspired by the gross fiscal irresponsibility of the entire political class regardless of political party. I think the seeds of the Tea Party were planted during the most recent Bush administration. The seeds were aggressively watered by President Bush at the end of his last term and by Obama at the start of his.
The core issues of the Tea Party from my observations have been fiscal responsibility and a return to a constitutional form of government. We don't have either right now and that's why there is a Tea Party movement.
I'm certainly sympathetic to a OWS movement that rightly seems to understand that something is very wrong with crony capitalism, but the messages that they have been articulating have been pretty straight forward Marxism. The seem to mistake that they have a right to pursue happiness rather than a guarantee of happiness.
May '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Dave,
There's a lot to like about the Tea Party, and I appreciate it anytime regular people take time out of their busy lives to participate in the civic process. But the good intentions of a group can be separated from their effectiveness. To me, it's obvious that a backlash against Obama was coming in 2010 with or without the Tea Party -- and that the Tea Party helped change the character of the Republicans who ran in that general election, sometimes for the better, as with Rand Paul, and sometimes for the worse, as with Christine O'Donnell.
You're right that Republicans can't get elected without the Tea Party, but neither can they get elected without defense hawks, or without voters in the mold of David Frum or David Brooks (you'd perhaps call them RINOs).
It's misleading to compare the Tea Party protests, where organizers tightly controlled, for example, the sorts of signs displayed, to Occupy Wall Street, which is ideologically committed to welcoming everyone, including homeless people and the mentally ill and anarchists. There is, of course, a lot to dislike about Occupy Wall Street, and I've criticized it in print.
May '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Scott, I think you're right that a substantial part of OWS embraces a "bailout us out" mentality. And I am with you in opposing that element. I don't think saying, "you're message is partly right and partly wrong -- let's cooperate on the stuff we agree on" is the same as ignoring the divide.
Left and right wing populists are always going to be at odds with one another on all sorts of issues. They're going to agree on some stuff too. Why not cooperate on the narrow issues where they agree?
Dec '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
FrumForum, the Army of One? I don't think he could deliver his immediate family as voters. Probably not even himself. Brooks enthusiastically supported Obama's pantcreases even though the Republican nominee was John McCain, the prototypical Republican moderate.
Edited on Nov 25, 2011 at 2:01pmDec '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Now you're just making stuff up without evidence. There was no tight controlling of signage. Perhaps some peer pressure was brought to bear, but when I went to a Des Moines tea party, I just...showed up. Nobody was controlling anything.
I don't get your point. Are the pictures now accurate because they show OWS's inclusiveness? There is really a steadfast refusal of the Left to own their own. The communists, rapists and public masterbators didn't bother to show up at the Tea Party, so there was something about OWS that appealed to them and something in the culture of OWS that made them think it was permitted.
And let us not forget the moment of silence at OccupySD "in solidarity" with the nut who was hanging out at OccupyDC and shot at the White House. That's some official conduct there.
May '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Sisyphus
When will someone at the Atlantic take an interest in solvency and liberty, and understand the Tea Party as well as they do the cocktail party? · Nov 25 at 1:27am
This is absurd. And evidence that you read neither The Atlantic generally nor my work there.
Dec '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Conor Friedersdorf
Sisyphus
When will someone at the Atlantic take an interest in solvency and liberty, and understand the Tea Party as well as they do the cocktail party? · Nov 25 at 1:27am
This is absurd. And evidence that you read neither The Atlantic generally nor my work there. · Nov 25 at 2:01pm
Isn't The Atlantic that magazine that has a website that has the blogger who's an amateur gynecologist?
May '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
AmishDude
Now you're just making stuff up without evidence. There was no tight controlling of signage. Perhaps some peer pressure was brought to bear, but when I went to a Des Moines tea party, I just...showed up. Nobody was controlling anything.
I don't get your point. Are the pictures now accurate because they show OWS's inclusiveness? There is really a steadfast refusal of the Left to own their own. The communists, rapists and public masterbators didn't bother to show up at the Tea Party, so there was something about OWS that appealed to them and something in the culture of OWS that made them think it was permitted.
And let us not forget the moment of silence at OccupySD "in solidarity" with the nut who was hanging out at OccupyDC and shot at the White House. That's some official conduct there.
The Tea Party started controlling its signage because when they didn't, there were lots of offensive signs. That isn't a feature of the Tea Party. It's a feature of all populist protests that are open to the public. There's always a fringe.
Dec '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Conor Friedersdorf
The Tea Party started controlling its signage because when they didn't, there were lots of offensive signs. That isn't a feature of the Tea Party. It's a feature of all populist protests that are open to the public. There's always a fringe. · Nov 25 at 2:09pm
Your last sentence is true, but I see no evidence of the control. I know the LaRouchies tried to get on the edge of the rallies and make sure their signs were seen by the media.
The video is amusing. Some awful stuff, but some of it's funny because, you know, it's supposed to be about Tea Party racism and includes things like "God Bless Glenn Beck" which is just...well, racist, of course.
But who would watch a 90 second video anyway?
Let's address something that can be tied to the leadership, though. What about that moment of silence?
May '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
AmishDude
Let's address something that can be tied to the leadership, though. What about that moment of silence? · Nov 25 at 2:22pm
Amish Dude,
If there's one thing we can say about Occupy Wall Street, it's that there is nothing that can be called "leadership." I think there are ways to grok what the movement is about, but attributing a moment of silence in one city for a guy most of the people there probably hadn't heard of to a nationwide movement? It makes no sense. Do you honestly think a majority or even a substantial number of Occupy Wall Street folks are cool with assassination attempts on Obama? Come on.
Aug '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Conor Friedersdorf:
It's misleading to compare the Tea Party protests, where organizers tightly controlled, for example, the sorts of signs displayed...
Like AmishDude, when I went to a Tea Party protest, I just showed up. With extra signs to share with people, in fact. And nobody vetted them.
Of course, my signs were inoffensive -- I'm not a big believer in using unkindness to spread a message.
As far as I can tell, if someone had shown up with an offensive sign, the rest of us would have tried to shame the offender into taking the sign down. But not because we were under orders from anyone, but because it was the right thing to do.
Isn't it possible that one difference between Tea Partiers and OWSers is that the former are more likely to spontaneously self-police themselves than the latter? Why must greater self-control be an indicator of stronger central organization?
Aug '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Conor Friedersdorf
Why not cooperate on the narrow issues where they agree?
Nothing wrong with attempting it. And nothing wrong with expecting that, despite some agreement, cooperation and even communication will be difficult.
It's one thing to agree that something is a problem, another thing to agree on how to fix it... That doesn't mean communication isn't worth attempting. But I think it's a mistake to expect it to meet with a ton of success.
May '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Isn't it possible that one difference between Tea Partiers and OWSers is that the former are more likely to spontaneously self-police themselves than the latter? Why must greater self-control be an indicator of stronger central organization? · Nov 25 at 2:43pm
Actually, I think that Tea Partiers are more likely to police themselves -- they don't have the same ideological commitment to being inclusive, reaching decisions by consensus, and letting everyone speak. But I also think it is more centrally organized. There are a handful of Tea Party groups that claim leadership of the movement. And particular groups tend to sponsor the rallies, get permits, etc.
That just isn't the case with OWS.
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
So is that what they're saying now? That there was sign control at Tea Parties?
Really, people. These events were open for anyone to attend. I myself covered dozens of Tea Parties throughout the country.
There was no sign control.
It's worth noting that at one large Tea Party event I covered the day before healthcare passed (the infamous "racist" one), I literally saw not a single other journalist there.
Oct '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Conor Friedersdorf
The Tea Party started controlling its signage because when they didn't, there were lots of offensive signs. That isn't a feature of the Tea Party. It's a feature of all populist protests that are open to the public. There's always a fringe.
There was a bit of fringe element at the 9/12 March, but I didn't see anything racist or hateful. The wingnuttery at that point was more of a traditional conspiratorial nature. I remember some lady who was earnestly trying to tell anyone who would listen about the Bilderberg Group and their role in....something. One world order, I assume.
There also was a pretty busy fellow from Jews for Jesus who was doing pretty well handing out his literature. The math might have been that the Tea Party will have lots of Evangelical Christians and that they tend to be pro-Israel therefore raising awareness of Jews for Jesus would earn them some financial support.
It was the first time I ever did anything that was a mass crowed based political expression and I was very surprised at how normal and reasonable everyone was.
Edited on Nov 25, 2011 at 4:58pmOct '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.: So is that what they're saying now? That there was sign control at Tea Parties?
Really, people. These events were open for anyone to attend. I myself covered dozens of Tea Parties throughout the country.
There was no sign control.
It's worth noting that at one large Tea Party event I covered the day before healthcare passed (the infamous "racist" one), I literally saw not a single other journalist there.
There certainly wasn't any sign control or control of much else other than the parade route at the 9/12 March. It was organized well enough so that everyone obviously knew where to go and when, but not much beyond that. For example, the sound system for the speeches was so weak that I suspect almost no one at the march could tell you want was said by the various unknown speakers.
The only real control that I saw at the event was the United States Capitol Police and other law enforcement agencies marking off the parade route and making sure no one got hurt in any traffic type of incident.
It was an oddly pleasant event with lots of very nice people.
Edited on Nov 25, 2011 at 4:52pmDec '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Conor Friedersdorf Amish Dude,
If there's one thing we can say about Occupy Wall Street, it's that there is nothing that can be called "leadership." I think there are ways to grok what the movement is about, but attributing a moment of silence in one city for a guy most of the people there probably hadn't heard of to a nationwide movement? It makes no sense. Do you honestly think a majority or even a substantial number of Occupy Wall Street folks are cool with assassination attempts on Obama? Come on. · Nov 25 at 2:29pm
The spin! The spin! You want OWS leadership? OK: Van Jones.
You are simply projecting on them what you want them to be about. Kinda like a certain presidenty type guy. It's time to join the reality-based community. The movement is what it shows.
Watch this video. That's a guy who is in charge. With a microphone.
Dec '10
Re: The Tea Party versus the Occupiers
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.: So is that what they're saying now? That there was sign control at Tea Parties?
Really, people. These events were open for anyone to attend. I myself covered dozens of Tea Parties throughout the country.
There was no sign control.
It's worth noting that at one large Tea Party event I covered the day before healthcare passed (the infamous "racist" one), I literally saw not a single other journalist there. · Nov 25 at 4:27pm
I've noticed that, on this thread, Conor has a tendency to make assertions based on facts that are not in evidence.
Maybe there were journalists, and they just managed to blend in really really well.
Well, OK, it was worth a shot.