I also do not like the idea of Tea Party caucuses on the Hill
*********************************************************
I’m divided on it.
On one hand it makes sense, there are no Congressperson (TP) only (D), (I) and (R’s) and as Bachmann put it...”We are the receptacle” and they don’t claim to be the leaders, run it or any such thing.
Many Congresscritters will not take email etc from people who aren’t in their district. The caucus is a central ‘inbox’ of sorts— where Tea Party members can express their concerns, ideas and all that.
I think the TPC can possibly offer a fuller representation of the Tea Party ideals on legislation, than we could do alone in our districts.
The down side I see is that when money and donors get too involved— it opens the door wider to corruption and skews interests.
I also worry some will see it as strictly a republican group because mostly it is the republicans in congress that are interested in Tea Party ideas and values, some of them are Tea Party members themselves.
If Palin was elected— would she have to stay away from the Tea Party because she’s a republican and holds office? What about Walsh, Paul or Rubio, must they now drop their affiliation or claims of being a Tea partier—they are elected Republicans.
I think there is a point to where the Tea Party can be too jealously guarded as to make it unattractive and exclusive to others—when that was what was trying to be avoided in the first place.
“...the Tea Party can be too jealously guarded as to make it unattractive and exclusive...”
Freedom is definitely NOT well-served by even well-intentioned Pharisees.
When its acolytes speak of eligibility and access and they engage in great debates about timing and exclusions, then the question is answered regarding whether the entity’s prime motivation is of party or of principle.
People who think Truth and Freedom and the advocacy of both should be subject to party endorsed ‘timing’ don’t know What The Future they are talking about.