Posted on 04/11/2014 10:01:47 AM PDT by lowbridge
The Tea Party zealots who haven’t learned from their mistakes in 2010 and 2012 are trying their best to screw up the GOP’s chances to win the Senate this fall.
Where does the Tea Party find these people to run in primaries? Most important, why do they offer them up as legitimate Republican candidates?
The Tea Party bosses have been listening to too much talk radio. They seem to think that what makes a good Republican candidate is someone who sounds like a talk radio host.
But talk radio is all about bombast and attracting callers, not about winning elections.
If Republicans are going to win general elections in 2014 and beyond, we’ve got to put up principled conservative candidates who sound like senators, congressmen, and governors — not kooks.
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournalism.com ...
Libertopians claim Ron Paul created and leads the TEA Party and will assault those who say it’s anything but libertarian in nature. They deny facts like Leftists when it contradicts their orthodoxy
I don’t think I was trying to spin any kind of false impression of who Tea Partiers are. I put my cred on this particular issue up against most anyone. I happend to see the Santelli rant live - and as it turns out, I know exactly how the Santelli rant video got to the top talk show and the top web site in the world, and even tho neither had ever covered Santelli before, they both went wall to wall with it. This exploded as a direct result of all of that.
Then I saw it explode onto the scene, including the phrase Tea Party, over the next 3 days, including from Robert Gibbs at the WH Press podium, threatening Santelli, to all the NBC networks, not just CNBC where Santelli reports.
Moreover, I have chronicled it in dozens of articles and two books as it unfolded over the past five years. I speak to TP groups and consult with them. They are more Christian, but not all of them, and their emphasis is not those issues for the most part. Some execptions of course.
FR is a social conservative site / I detect NO support for the Huckster
It is true that paulbots want to claim the TP as a Paul phenomenon, when it is not. However, they are part of the picture. Just like them, some social ONLY conservatives want to claim the TP as a social issue movement, and that is also wrong.
And by wrong, I mean they are both wrong with regards to what/how/why the movement exploded. You can start a TP group and make it whatever you want, but in my last post to ansel I recount the history of who/why/what it is.
That’s because Freepers are normally way more informed than most social ONLY conservatives, and only some Freepers are social ONLY types. The Huck nation are full of what I call pro life liberals. A lot of the social only folks are like that.
As opposed to true conservatives, believing in all the major foundations of conservatism.
If you had told me ten years ago that a man espousing communist healthcare and nuclear disarmament was gonna become president of the United States, I would have thought you were a kook and so was the person espousing those things. Alas, we have a communist kook as president. We have compassionate conservatives advocating for homosexual marriage. We have compassionate conservatives who want to legalize tens of millions of people who broke our laws to come to our country. We have compassionate conservatives who want to nationalize school curriculum. The list goes on. Who are the kooks? When did they become acceptable?
I am not saying that there aren’t some kooky tea partiers. But define kook.
True
Bump
I will vote for Hillary before I vote for a Rino again.
If your self description is correct, then you know that I was merely posting accurate information.
The tea party is more Christian than republicans, is mostly Evangelical, and to the right of republicans on social issues.
I don’t know what has set off all this chest beating and self-aggrandizement from you, I don’t even know where the disagreement is.
I think Mike is seeking steady work and is trying to find a niche that he will appeal to.
“MR jumped the shark a while back”
I would like to see a list of former conservative stalwarts who have jumped the shark.
Let’s see. Ann Coulter, Tom Cobern, Michael Reagan, Michael Medved, George Will, Condolezza Rice, GW Bush, Jeb Bush, Rick Perry,
Feel free to continue.
But when you think everyone has “jumped the shark” maybe there is something wrong with you eyes and ears.
There is some more massaging of facts, I don't think any of us have seen such a thing.
Can you point out some articles or movements, or leaders, doing that?
I’m sure there are a lot of “Tea Party Kooks” sponsored by the dims and dressed to tug at conservative heartstrings and sabotage the election.
Anyone who thinks that list is of “conservative stalwarts”, is completely out of it.
Huckabee isn’t any big deal in national politics, but the anti-social conservatives keep trying to hold him up as representing Evangelical Christians, while they take everything else as their own.
He made a primary run in 2008 that didn’t go anywhere, and like Santorum he won a niche of anti-Romney Christians during an anti-Romney primary, he is not a significant or enduring political figure.
I totally agree with your take on Huck and Santorum’s campaigns…they both techinically got second place, but the only real challenger to McCain in 08 was Romney and the only real challenger to Romney in 12 was Newt - and the others just hung around til they “got second.”
But hey, try and tell that to the sweater vest crowd, and they go ballistic.
Article V and if that doesn't work each state needs to form their own infantry divisions.
You’re both right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.