welcome...
Posted on 02/24/2010 3:29:15 PM PST by Former Military Chick
A network of Tea Party activists are circulating what they call the “Tea Party Declaration of Independence,” a document meant to define the movement and establish its independence from Republicans.
“We reject the idea that the electoral goals of the Republican party are identical to the goals of the Tea Party Movement,” the document, released Tuesday, reads.
Activist Bob MacGuffie, involved in the drafting process and also known for authoring a memo last year on how to disrupt health-care town hall meetings, said activists, “got tired of being defined from the outside and decided to do some self-definition” themselves.
MacGuffie said the idea for the document came from a number of leaders who attended a summit hosted by conservative group FreedomWorks, which has been heavily involved in the movement but was not officially involved in the drafting. He wouldn’t say specifically who drafted the document, but said there are at least 60 groups nationally behind it.
“They would just end up being targets,” he said of the drafters. “We’ll remain nameless for now.”
He also said it’s “hard to say” who’s co-signed the document, saying, “It’s just organically moving out there,” mainly on the Internet.
The movement will work against Republicans if they try to force RINO’s on them, according to the document, referencing “Republicans in Name Only” or members of the GOP seen as too moderate or liberal. It also demands that Republicans understand that activists will “reject its attempts to co-opt” the Tea Party movement.
The declaration says activists will “organize, demonstrate and vote” to achieve their goals.
It doesn’t just declare the movement’s independence from the Republicans, but from Democrats and the media as well.
“We reject arrogant left-wing politicians who furtively hide from public scrutiny, as they cut corrupt deals loaded with earmarks and pork in order to produce 2,000-page pieces of legislation so purposely incomprehensible, they do not even bother to read them before foisting them upon us,” the document reads.
The document said the media “has proved itself to be anything but a fair and balanced enterprise and which focuses more on entertainment, fear mongering and shock value than investigation and unbiased fact.”
They also reject that anyone leads the movement, including “self-styled ‘leaders’ who claim to speak for the Tea Party Movement.”
“This movement is not a brand name to be used to sell product; nor is it a logo to be used to justify profiting off its name,” the document reads. “We reject those who seek to personally capitalize on our popularity and momentum by trying to associate with our cause.”
John Loudon, a leader of the Tea Party political action committee Ensuring Liberty PAC, said he was e-mailed a copy of the document, which he said is “generating quite a bit of buzz” among Tea Party activists.
Even though the document speaks for the entire movement — something that would appear to irk activists known for being adverse to any type of leadership — Loudon said he doesn’t “see it that way.” Instead, he said, someone was just “putting out their thoughtful work and hoping that it gets picked up.”
“If they were trying to claim leadership, I think they’d try to put their name on it,” he said.
McGuffie said he has not heard any negative responses yet to the declaration and doesn’t see it making any Tea Partiers angry as the document is voluntary for activists to sign off on.
The declaration comes at a time where several other manifestos have emerged trying to define what the conservative movement stands for. Last week, several Tea Party groups unveiled plans for drafting a list of specific legislative proposals desired by activists called the “Contract from America.” And a group of leaders — representing the economic, social and a foreign policy wings of the conservative movement — signed the Mount Vernon Statement last Wednesday before the start of the Conservative Political Action Conference.
Read the full “Tea Party Declaration of Independence” here.
Jon Ward contributed to this report.
You will too when it splits the conservative vote.
Okay, so, let me get this straight.
Event 1: The GOP strays from its core conservative values.
Event 2: In response to a perceived lack of representation of those values, tea parties erupt to express grassroots opposition to Obama’s socialist agenda.
Event 3: The GOP realizes it’s being left behind and begins moving in response and recognition of the Tea Parties.
Event 4: The Tea Partiers reject the GOP.
In your mind, this is a correct and viable course of action? I bet you voted for Perot.
That would be the very same Klinton whose spending was fiscally conservative compared to Bush!
And who said he “had to abandon Free Market principles in order to save the Free Market system” ???
Clinton, Bush or Osama?
BUSH!
welcome...
Bunny, you can help avoid that possibility by becoming an active participant in your local Tea Party group.
If you're reading the mainstream press reports about the Tea Party movement, then I suppose I can understand where your fear of a third party originates.
They're certainly promoting the idea that the Tea Party is becoming (or might become) a third political party, with everything they have.
If you haven't yet read the Declaration of Tea Party Independence (at post 27), I suggest you do. It clearly spells out that the Tea Party movement is anything BUT a new political party. It re-inforces the common understanding that this is a spontaneous, grass-roots uprising, born of decades of citizen anger over the usurpations and abuses our government.
In fact, this document was written to address the very thing that has you concerned. You'll feel better about the third party thing if you read it.
“That would be the very same Klinton whose spending was fiscally conservative compared to Bush!”...because he had to due to his party’s mid term losses and he was forced to by the newly elected conservative republican congress...Bush in his latter years also followed the congress he was stuck with...liberal minded democrats!
I’m looking forward to reading this new Declaration of Independence. We sorely need one.
If the new Declaration resonates with the majority of people, great and good! It would crystalize the rebellious impulses that so many people are feeling, while serving notice that major changes are coming.
But if too many people reject it because of parochial concerns (”it mentions dogs and I’m a cat person so to hell with this”) then it will only serve to fracture the Tea Party and ensure the continued decline of our nation.
Perhaps we need to organize the Second Continental Congress?
Sounds good to me, but I suppose the GOP Kool-aiders would object, it doesn`t kneel before their party.
“If tea party groups are to maximize their influence on policy, they must now begin the difficult task of disassociating themselves from cranks and conspiracy nuts. This includes 9/11 deniers, “birthers” who insist Barack Obama was not born in the U.S., and militia supporters espousing something vaguely close to armed rebellion.”
I am glad Rove got to review the long form. When is he going to tell us what it said?
The long form says those who drag any of this into the general election might have well spared themselves the effort of running.Unless, of course, they are promoting these discussions in order to assure the other side wins (which is I am certain the goal of some)
Rove wasn't referring to that era. Just because , after years of suffering, death and financial ruin, the revolution, with the help of France, succeeded doesn't mean hinting at armed rebellion is a winning tactic today. Of the two times it worked, one of them is still in contention. There were many other such movements which were counterproductive. Clinton thrived off the 1990s militia movement. He loved it. Made him relevant again after the 1994 defeat.
Voters like you gave NC to Obama.
Thank you, all you Barr voters.
I remember now the Constitution was ruled toilet paper.
The first one is really good already, isn't it?
Kind of reminds me of the crappy "comprehensive immigration reform" proposals. All we really needed to do was to properly enforce the existing laws! Same thing here, just follow the Thomas Jefferson (et.al) version. It has certainly stood the test of time.
But their enemies were honorable gentlemen who would meet them standing up in the battlefield, not Alinskyite backstabbers as at the present time.
My Suspicious Gland swells up when someone suggests new versions of the Founding documents.
(Hey, Orkin man! Can Traulls (WronGpaul trolls) be eliminated from a website completely>?)
Sometimes crazy is comfortable, eh?
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.