I think many miss the point of the article...both parties support Big Government and it’s unfair, on face value to “target” one over the other.
Show me the candidates that want to reduce the size of government from 28% of GDP to pre-progressive era 5% of GDP and then you’ll understand the passion of many in the Tea Party.
Co-opting a movement to put the republicans in charge in DC seems, at best, a lackluster solution to $106 TRILLION federal debt run up by both parties.
"it’s unfair, on face value to “target” one over the other"
Well, if you are a one issue voter, then I can see how you'd take that position.
"Show me the candidates that want to reduce the size of government from 28% of GDP to pre-progressive era 5% of GDP and then you’ll understand the passion of many in the Tea Party."
I've never seen one. (Ron Paul maybe???) But then since there isn't one in the race, do you advocate stepping away and not supporting anyone?
"Co-opting a movement to put the republicans in charge..."
Hold on there partner! I NEVER suggested that. But I do think we need to be wise in recognizing that someone will be elected to fill each and every seat available, and we need to fight tooth and nail to find, support and elect conservatives to each and every one of them.
But once the primaries are past, we either support the better of the two choices, or we inevitably allow others to choose for us.
And look at how that's been working so far.