Richard Viguerie: Why leaderless Tea Parties are beating the GOP

American Thinker ^ | December 10, 2009 | Richard Viguerie

[neverdem]

Rasmussen reports the Tea Party Movement, which percolated only months ago, is beating the Grand Old Party.

That's amazing -- and good -- news. A nascent grassroots movement is more popular than a long-established political party.

Republican Party leaders should be embarrassed. Instead, the Republican establishment disdains this populist uprising. Rather than embracing this genuine movement, establishment politicians and consultants are calculating how to co-opt, sideline or even defeat the newest phenomenon in politics - tea partiers.

That would be arrogance, not leadership. It could be the downfall of Republican leaders, who have taken the Party of Reagan to the Party of No -- meaning, No Ideas, No Leadership, and No Principles.

What's driving the Tea Party phenomenon? Robert Stacy McCain writes at American Spectator about one tea partier, Rhonda Lee Welsch, who says, "‘It's a systemic problem,' discussing the top-down approach of leaders in both parties who seem indifferent to the concerns of ordinary Americans."

People realize that big-government, career politicians aren't going to save America, if it's not too late for that already. Like a modern-day court of Louis XVI, our leaders are disconnected from the people. An uprising is taking place, yet our political leaders seem more interested in playing a good round of golf.

As I wrote not long ago:

Americans are concluding more and more that many of the current problems we face are caused by unrestrained and corrupt government. It is becoming apparent to millions of voters the solution lies in electing officials who understand, respect and abide by the Constitution as much as we citizens are expected to follow the law.

The Tea Party Movement, however, is about more than electing new politicians, although that will be one of its consequences. What's happening in the tea parties is that people are actually using the Constitution to ground and form policy choices, and as a constructive means to hold the political establishment accountable.

Our constitutional system of checks and balances is currently in shambles. Congress refuses to hold the President accountable constitutionally, and the courts refuse to hold the other two branches accountable. 

This is why the 10^th Amendment is becoming so popular within the Tea Party Movement, and why that Amendment is becoming the bane of statists in the political establishment.  The 10th Amendment, intended as a fundamental, "systemic" protection of our constitutional form of government, says that all powers not given expressly to the federal government by the text of the Constitution are reserved to the States or to the people. It is a failsafe against tyranny.

The 10^th Amendment, which has been in the closet and is dusty, is a natural resource for the "leaderless" Tea Party Movement. The way to restrain the abuses of power, and create a culture of freedom and economic prosperity, is within the Constitution itself.  Tea partiers will use the Constitution, which has been so disregarded by the three branches of government, to tame the beast of tyrannical big government. The 10^th Amendment is one key to overcoming what Ms. Welsch articulates for all of us as a "systemic problem."

One of the best books I've read in recent years is The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations, by Ori Brafman and Rod Beckstrom.

Read it, and you'll better understand why the Tea Party Movement is surging, and the Republican Party isn't. The book describes the success of leaderless organizations using the analogy of a spider, which is killed when its head is cut off, versus the starfish, which, when a tentacle is cut off, grows a new one.

The great Aztec civilization existed for centuries before the Spaniards arrived on the continent. Cortes told the Aztec leader, Montezuma, give me your gold or your life. Montezuma gave Cortes his gold, and Cortes killed him anyway. The Aztec civilization did not survive the loss of its leader. The head of the spider had been cut off.

The Apaches, a leaderless "starfish" society, survived hundreds of years of the Spaniards' trying to do what they did to the Aztecs. As Brafman and Beckstrom write:

You wanted to follow Geronimo? You followed Geronimo. You didn't want to follow him? Then you didn't. The power lay with each individual.

We are seeing the "starfish" Tea Party Movement with candidates running in both Democratic and Republican primaries. When they are shut out by the party establishments, as happened in New York's 23^rd congressional district, they are running as independents, or under third parties.

"Starfish" tea partiers are learning how to organize, raise money, and utilize the alternative media in record numbers. They are voicing their opposition to unaccountable Big Government, and promoting productive policy alternatives, through the guiding principles of the Founders.

From the tea parties, the grassroots, and the alternative media, we are seeing new leaders emerge. Like our Founders, they understand their strength of leadership does not come from a political party, but from consent of the governed. That is why they don't hitch their wagons to one person or one party.

Talk radio host Mark ‘The Great One" Levin discussed recently how Reagan spoke not of "his" administration, but of "this" administration. Levin noted how Reagan understood his power came from the people, not from the office he held. Reagan didn't read The Starfish and the Spider, but he understood its principles. The successors to Reagan's GOP do not understand those principles, and seem more beholden to staying in Washington than saving America. They are "spiders."

The Tea Party Movement is determined to save America. Republican Party leaders would be unwise to try to co-opt, sideline or defeat it. Perhaps they should welcome the new leadership into the Party as their single most important survival tactic.

[iceskater]

Thanks for the ping. Good article.

[Nextrush]

I would say 90 percent of the people now holding office under the R label nationwide down to the lowest of offices are phony and political people.

They have zero convictions and no desire to limit government or cut spending.

I’m not here to be angry, but I have to honest to myself and God.

The situation is critical and how it gets resolved could come through primaries or third party candidates.

I often share the Canadian experience where people got fed up with the “Progressive Conservative Party” as it was known in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s.

They started the Reform Party and got their 60 or so seats out of 300 in the House of Commons. The PC Party got wiped out into a handful of seats.

The Liberal Party dominated Canada for a decade until the money people and bigwigs brought the factions together under the new “Conservative Party” label and then the new party won a few elections to form minority governments.

I could support either option in this nation right now.
Conservatives in primaries and third party conservatives as candidates if the first option fails.

We need primary challengers with third party people ready to go if RINO’s win primaries. Two candidates ready to take the RINO’s out.

The presidential race in 2012 should be run the same way.

The GOP either accepts a genuine conservative or faces one as a third party.

Freedom erodes and government enlarges regardless of which party is in power. The spending and taxes keep on coming.

Give us liberty GOP or we will give you political death.

[onyx]

Given the incumbency reelection rate, I’m not going to argue with your guessitmate’s 90%.

What happened in Canada will stay in Canada, just like their health care system should. You’re falling prey to a much smaller province, hardly a valid comparison to the US. Again, third parties have been tried here in every election and to date, without success.

We have two major parties. One loses, one wins the majority and the majority rules. This is true in state houses and in houses of congress, which is why ‘blue dogs’ must be defeated. Each blue dog votes for the majority when it comes to electing the speaker, should the democrats retain control of the House.

The problem I have with your use of the word RINO, is that your RINO might not be my RINO. My RINOS are more than likely, but not limited to INCUMBENTS.

I’ve already addressed my concerns for the nominating process in the presidential election 2012 in an earlier post. The Grand Old Party needs a full slate of conservative candidates from which its voters can choose that is not short circuited after the first of the front-loaded primaries.

[RegulatorCountry]

I'm acquainted with Viguerie and we correspond via e-mail on occasion. Your characterization of him is very skewed. Yes, he didn't believe Reagan was conservative enough in '76, and also toward the end of his second term. You could pretend to be outraged, you could recognize that Reagan attempting to primary Ford was a fairly daring, anti-establishment thing to do in the first place, or you could attempt to wrap it and yourself in RNC indignation, harrummph, as you have.

The fact of the matter, is that the genius of Richard Viguerie was responsible for so much of the conservative gotv and fundraising success of the Reagan era. He pioneered the use of computerized and segmented donor lists for political direct mail. He supported Reagan, despite their early differences, and played no small part in his success, the success of conservatism, and the now apparently parasitic continuation of the modern Republican apparatus, which has no claim whatsoever to the Reagan mantle. This he seeks to rectify.

Viguerie compelled Reagan rightward. Direct mail testing of fundraising appeals compelled this, for him and for many others, who were met with electoral success as a result. The party did not learn, however, and is now in the doldrums, with a very large decline in contributions. Why is that? They've become arrogant and have completely lost touch, that's why. You see it every single day here on FR, and it's devolving rather than improving.

And you attack the messenger, who was a key architect of the modern conservative resurgence.

Talk about eating your own, as far as fellow conservatives. Trouble is, your perception of your own seems to be the party establishment, rather than a set of ideals. What Viguerie advocates is sound. Elect conservatives. Forget political party, if the Republicans refuse to field conservative candidates. Create a conservative candidacy in the absence of one in any given contest, via third parties if necessary. Or, even a conservative Democrat, all other options failing. This moves the discourse steadily rightward, much along the lines of the steady infiltration of the Republican Party by the left, that has steadily moved the discourse leftward. Turn the tables.

That is the way out of this mess. He sees it, has seen it for a very long time, and your attempting to smear him does a disservice to us all.

[el_texicano]

Truly it is written:

Proverbs 30:27
The locusts have no king, yet go they forth all of them by bands;

May God of Heaven help us...

[ImpBill]

"What Viguerie advocates is sound. Elect conservatives. Forget political party, if the Republicans refuse to field conservative candidates."

I most wholeheartedly agree. Unfortunately, the death grip both major "political party's" have on the electorate is beyond stunning. One can witness the result daily even here on FreeRepublic.com. Regardless of how often the site owner declares this is not a GOP forum the "party" faithful continue their march towards the cliff!

[onyx]

First off, I'll thank you not to mischaracterize me or my comments: “wrapping myself in RNC indignation” you're aching arse. Reagan mounted his challenge to Ford within his beloved party, but that wasn't good enough for poor Richard who lost out to the likes of Lester Maddox of all noble people. THAT alone speaks volumes about poor Richard's brand of ‘third party desperation.’

But I digress. The past is the past and I am all about moving forward. Trouble is, Viguerie is a third party guy, who fails to recognize that a lot of the Tea Partyers are both current and former conservative Republicans, who think of themselves as “Tea Party Republicans.”

Incumbency is the primary problem. Not one incumbent is irreplaceable. If nothing else, the Tea Parties have shined the spot light on the incumbents, complete with their mega-million campaign funds, so this time around in 2010, their conservative challengers should have an energetic base of volunteers ready work in their campaigns to get out the vote.

Primaries should be robust, with challengers for every incumbent.

Should the decades long incumbent win the GOP primary, then s/he will still be open to a third party challenger but this time that challenger might make more of a dent.

[loveliberty2]

If the Republicans quickly make a right turn, find a new leader who, in his bones and being, understands and appreciates the simple principles and ideas of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, and can articulate those ideas, they can win big in 2012. Because the ideas of America's founding are just as revolutionary (perhaps more) today as they were then.

America's big bloated government is King George, oppressive taxation and regulation are being felt by ordinary people, and they will respond to a real leader (not any of the current crop).

Popularity and issues-oriented chatter won't do it. Solid, sound principles and ideas will. Couple that with a credentialed and knowledgeable patriot who understands the nature and history of our enemies, as well as the counterfeit ideas of the Left in America, and in 2012, the current President will be limited to one term.

Lt. Col. Allen West deserves close examination by those who recognize the military threats, as well as the ideological threats America faces. His bio is on his web site, and a recent blog posting can be found here.

There are videos contain his challenging speeches, as well as a recent interview in Israel, where he was a keynote speaker on terrorism.

[onyx]

“Forget political party, if the Republicans refuse to field conservative candidates.”

---

What is this “if the Republicans refuse to field conservative candidates”?

Refuse?

Heretofore, I thought decisions to seek public office were made by individuals interested in holding a particular office.

[GVnana]

Richard Viguerie’s intent is to co-opt the Tea Party movement into a Third party to defeat the Republican party.

I got that, too.

[Deb]

Wow, I didn't think there would be a single post on this thread that exposed what Viguerie was really up to. Just the usual, "Throw the bums out!" nonsense.

It's obvious he's hiding his true intentions when he says the Republican leaders "distain the Tea Parties". I haven't seen or heard a single negative statement about the TP attributed to any Republican.

[SoCalPol]

Viguerie, a long time friend of the Democrats with his
Third Party, all or nothing mentality.

So many on FR who think the Third Party candidate who will always receive 2% to 8% of the vote at most will beat
the Republican or Democrat who will receive at least 48% of the vote.
Lets see, 6% 3rd P vs. 48% R or D
Do these people on FR know 3rd grade math.

There has been in recent years Republican Congressmen and Senators lose by small amounts due to 3rd Party loons.

So many on FR are too lazy to work within the Republican party to work for Conservative Republicans.

Instead, these third party yahoos stand around waving their pom poms with their pre packaged comments looking at the world through a straw.

[onyx]

Deb & GVnana

The three of us see through him and I'm certain we have a lot of company. "Disdain" is precisely what Viguerie has for the GOP.

Richard Viguerie is the owner/publisher of THIRD PARTY WATCH, and it wasn't too long ago that Bob Barr and Viguerie were trying to takeover the Libertarian Party so that Barr could run under its banner. I don't recall if Viguerie succeeded, but Barr did mount a run.

Oh wait, I found an article. Here's the money paragraph:

Clearly, Barr and Viguerie are attempting to gain control of the LP so that Barr can campaign on a conservative/libertarian hybrid platform and Viguerie can extend his fundraising empire into the libertarian quadrant of the political universe. If they succeed, the Libertarian Party will become just one more mouthpiece for malcontent Republicans.

"If they succeed, the Libertarian Party will become just one more mouthpiece for malcontent Republicans." LOL.

THIRD PARTY WATCH

[Deb]

Yes, I remember the Barr presidential effort and his strange alliance with the ACLU. It was very discouraging to learn that Barr and Viguerie weren’t really on the side of true conservatism.

[onyx]

Well, you know where I stand on third parties. Right alongside you, Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh. Third parties are fine and dandy for the Left side, and the Right already has several. We hardly need added others.

[RegulatorCountry]

you're aching arse

Your concern is both touching and disturbing, simultaneously.

But I digress.

Yes, you've demonstrated a penchant for digression.

The past is the past and I am all about moving forward.

That's funny, I get the impression you've got old scores to settle, with those who dare to buck the (R) establishment.

a lot of the Tea Partyers are both current and former conservative Republicans, who think of themselves as “Tea Party Republicans.”

That's funny, I get the impression that they're by and large conservatives, of every political affiliation or none at all. Republicans seeking to co-opt the movement, who don't have conservative, Constitutionalist bonafides are wasting their time.

Incumbency is the primary problem. Not one incumbent is irreplaceable. If nothing else, the Tea Parties have shined the spot light on the incumbents, complete with their mega-million campaign funds, so this time around in 2010, their conservative challengers should have an energetic base of volunteers ready work in their campaigns to get out the vote. Primaries should be robust, with challengers for every incumbent. Should the decades long incumbent win the GOP primary, then s/he will still be open to a third party challenger but this time that challenger might make more of a dent.

Well my goodness, all that barking at conservative icon Richard Viguerie, just to turn right around and agree with him.

Now, just what was it, that you were going on about, lol?

[Kells]

Let’s be honest here. The leadership of our current "two party system" has, over the years, been fully co-opted by two groups of predominantly inherited millionaires

Well then let us be honest about the history of third party movements. Any third party that won more than 1% of the vote required the backing of millionaires, not just for campaign cash but for obtaining media access and to counteract vote rigging.

Sometimes millionaires use a third party just to prevent election of a less-favored major party candidate. Teddy Roosevelt's Bull-Moose party caused the defeat of Republican Taft and the election of Wilson. Under Wilson we got the income tax, Federal Reserve, and entry into WWI. Kooky Ross Perot was essential for the election of Bill Clinton.

Sara Palin must combine her people power with backing from a few "good" millionaires to overrun the Republican party. If she can win the Republican primaries, she will be ready for the general elections.

[votemout]

The issue isn't what's the history of third-parties, it's that the top two don't have any special entitlement to maintain their place and power.

With more and more conservatiuves realizing the GOP has failed them and willing to join a different party, the GOP will BE the third party and eventually become insignificant. You have to start sometime and place with somebody, and this is the time and place. The somebodies are already in place.

[onyx]

Vig’s history is not digression, even though it offers some uncomfortable truths for you. Even his recent history, does not bode well for Richard’s claim that he wants to ELECT conservatives; i.e. backing the “presidential” candidacy of Ron Paul, who is not a conservative I would support, unless he were running for a state house office.

It is interesting, is it not, that Ron Paul the Libertarian, chooses to run under the Republican banner?

Please do not confuse “making a dent” with WINNING. Nothing beats winning.

[Brett66]

We are seeing the "starfish" Tea Party Movement with candidates running in both Democratic and Republican primaries.

Which democrats ran under the philosophy of the Tea Party?

An interesting scenario that could play out is if Sarah Palin ran as a Tea Party candidate, but I think she'll stay with the GOP.