What say ye now?
I can give you more if you need it.
Posted on 03/07/2013 11:16:37 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The modern day tea party movement took shape in 2007. Yet, it is hardly a reflection of the anti-war, anti-deficit, pro-civil liberty message that propelled its early popularity.
During a time of impending recession, a government that had taken us to endless wars on false pretenses, and an unprecedented expansion of government under eight years of “conservative” leadership, the tea party began as a fundraising rally cry for a then relatively unknown dark horse candidate, Representative Ron Paul.
The first “modern day tea party” was held on the anniversary of the original Boston Tea Party, December 16, 2007. In a 24 hour period, in concert with symbolic and peaceful tea party re-enactments across the country, Paul supporters dumped 5.2 million dollars into the long-shot presidential campaign along with fake tea boxes spray painted with slogans like “End the Patriot Act,” “End the War in Iraq,” “End the War on Drugs,” and “End the Fed.”
There were no anti-gay boxes. No one had a picture of a fetus on their boat. And no one, and I mean no one, had a Sarah Palin sticker on their car.
Not until mid-February of 2009, when Rick Santelli gave a now infamous rant on CNBC, did the more religiously radical and racially declined start waving the “Don’t Tread on Me” flags poached with all the irony that individual liberty and theocracy can muster on the dance floor....
(Excerpt) Read more at ivn.us ...
It’s a shame we are so effectively divided.
It would be nice if Religious Conservatives, Social Conservatives, Fiscal Conservatives, Constitutional Conservatives, Libertarian Conservatives, and Ron Paul Conservatives could all tolerate each other enough to get firmly together behind limited government, tightly bound by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
I kinda though that was what the TEA Party was supposed to be about.
Have you done any research on former Congressman Ron Paul and his foreign policy ideas?
I'm not a Ron-basher, but I strongly suspect that 2007 Paul "tea party" was just a one-time event with tea props rather than anything in any meaningful way related to the Tea Party.
What say ye now?
I can give you more if you need it.
People really don’t know, do they.
Yes, I have.
I can, however, agree with his supporters on limited government, bound tightly by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Too many don’t care enough about that core Cause of Causes to make that leap, I suppose.
Others want to make sure we don’t.
So... We continue to do battle, in our separately conservative cliques, with consequent lack of effectiveness.
No doubt there was some cross over between the Ron Paul movement and the “Tea Party” movement/mindset as it came to be known, but the Paul use of the term had nothing to do with the rapid launch of the name back into the mainstream in spring of 09. That was Santelli, made famous by Rush, Drudge, and Robert Gibbs, along with the rest of the NBC networks - acting like a match to kindling that had been buidling under Bush and then reached critical mass under Obama and threats of Obama Care.
It has become a lot of things now, being organic and leaderless by design, but it is mainly a conservative small government pro liberty approach. It is about liberty, but not strict libertarianism by any means. Some particular tea party groups have been taken over by social only conservatives, but that is not what it started out as either.
I would say that is what the Tea Party is generally about, though some Paulista’s want to claim it all and some social issue conservatives want to claim it all. Neither are correct.
Faced with the current Socialist Democrat regime, I couldn't agree more. Paraphrasing this sentiment in another way ....
Why can't we support each other's virtues, the way the libs support each other's vices?!
In Iowa, these kooks have all but destroyed RPI. They have been a disaster and they think RPI stood for Ron Paul Iowa instead of Republican Party of Iowa. The Ron Paul supporters are worse than Ron Paul. Rand Paul had better distance himself from those kooks.
Saying the Tea Party is somehow Ron Paul’s creation is patently absurd. Still, there is no question that both Pauls are really, actually, for real, no kidding, serious about limited/Constitutional government. They actually believe in it, and that’s why they have devoted followers. I don’t want Ron as President, but I do want him around.
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.