No, it's common sense.
Posted on 11/04/2009 5:04:37 PM PST by Sub-Driver
The Permanent Tea Party Independent voters have become like a herd of cattle looking for political leadership. By DANIEL HENNINGER
Welcome to the permanent American tea party.
You will recall how when the tea-party movement erupted during the congressional recess in August, it was spun on the left that these events were the creation of conservative ideologues. At the start, yes. By the end, though, it was about anxieties deeper than that.
The GOP is now spinning the results in Virginia and New Jersey as proof that voters are fed up with the liberal ideologues in the White House and Congress. Yes, but it's deeper than that.
What was learned Tuesday is that the American voter is absolutely, totally, unremittingly disgusted with both political parties. More than anything, the American voter is desperate for political leadership.
That electorates in two politically significant states, led by the widening independent movement, could swing within one year from enthusiasm for electing Barack Obama to support for Virginia's OK Republican Bob McDonnell and New Jersey's lackluster Chris Christie is simply astonishing.
Add another American metaphor to the political landscape: the cattle stampede. Independent voters across the U.S. have become like the massive cattle herd John Wayne drove from Texas to Kansas in "Red River." These voters are spooked and on the run, a political stampede that veered left in November 2008 and now right a mere year later. They will keep running—crushing incumbents, candidates and political models of the left and right—through November 2010 and onto 2012 until they find a person or party capable of leadership appropriate to our unsettled times.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Last year we had to save ourselves from Bush. Today we need to save ourselves from Obama.
Really bad analogy, because it seems he’s equating the Tea Party movement with independents who voted for Obama.
WSJ gets it wrong again.
We’re fed up with liberals and socialists and people like Barney Frank who F@CK things up, force businesses to do certain things, and then blame them for it when the SHTF finally. And then bitch they can’t grow government bigger because the other party gave government a ‘bad reputation.’
We’re fed up with RINOs in the Republican party, and the leadership, who back candidates that are liberal like Scozzafava. And then actively run ads against the conservative opposing the liberal RINO and give the liberal RINO hundreds of thousands of dollars. And then after the conservative beyond all measures almost wins, they trot someone out like Boehner to say they never were really against the conservative.
THAT’s what we’re tired of. WSJ can’t see past their own colons their heads are so far up their asses.
I’m watching Steffi Stefanopolis on The Factor right now - he’s no dunce - but like so many he refuses to recognize and/or admit the 4 ton gorilla in the room that is blatantly obvious to anyone who’s actually been to a tea party or town hall in the last 6 months.
The anger and/or passion that’s driving this tea party movement doesn’t really have that much to do with the current economic situation, rising taxes or fear of rising taxes, or the specifics of any particular pieces of legislation. This movement is about saving what’s left of liberty, capitalism, and the Constitution; which the liberals/progressives have been waging war against for a century and Obama seems intent on finishing off once and for all with his “Great Leap Forward.”
He’s just parroting the MSM template. Think they’d ever let him tell the truth, or that he’d even want to, an ex-Clinton aide who now is ‘objective’ ‘fair’ and ‘unbiased’?
Jeez it’s not that hard.
People want lower taxes, less government, more domestic energy production, a strong military, and a freakin’ job!
Is that “right wing purity”? I don’t really give a damn what you call it but whatever you call it, the folks who talk that game will be elected by and large.
Maybe I’m missing it, but isn’t Henninger saying exactly what you said? That things are in deep crap right now, and we don’t give a hoot about party, we care about principles?
Are you perceiving that his principles differ from yours?
I’m pretty fed up with anybody who’s been in office as a Republican, and of course it isn’t worth talking about any Democrats.
“Unless leadership emerges equal to the new world voters see they have fallen into, volatility in America’s election returns is going to be the norm for a long time.”
Just like a Banana Republic
I agree with Mason.
This is a darn good article with many insights you won’t hear in the DBM. This goes way beyond party ID.
There are people of all political stripes in the tea party movement and Henninger is right in that they are looking for leadership. Maybe not leadership in the form of a person, but leadership in terms of a set of core principles that will not be compromised away.
Tuesday showed that beyond a doubt, the rose is off the Obama bloom. There is a huge vacuum there and if the GOP is astute, it will find a way to fill the vacuum. They shouldn’t make it about Obama, but make it about core principles - smaller government, lower taxes, personal responsibility, energy independence, private sector job creation.
Lasting majorities are made when people vote FOR something, not when people vote AGAINST something.
Not exactly a comentary on the Tea Party, more like one man’s wrong interpretation of the independents!~
Remember, the ideas themselves were and are "self-evident" truths, and they were stated simply and understood by farmers and professors alike, because they dealt with human nature as it is, and the tendency of human beings to abuse power if it is granted to them: therefore, the Founders framed a constitution for self-government that absolutely limited the powers they would give to their elected officials.
They even made that Constitution contain the only prescription for its own amendment, not to be accomplished by judges and legislators, but by "We, the People."
Today, we have allowed those who call themselves "progressive" (what a cruel joke) to turn the Founders' ideas upside down and backward. Instead of "We, the People" being the sovereigns, the "living constitution" crowd and the power-hungry politicians behave like rulers or masters, amassing more and more of the earnings of the people to themselves, and making the sovereign "people" into slaves for several months a year.
These are "regressives," spouting ideas which are as old as the history of civilization--ideas which have failed in every place and time they have been tried. They are counterfeit ideas and lead to tyranny by the few over the many.
It's time to rediscover the ideas of liberty, using the Founders' own simple principles, and appeal to the common sense of ordinary Americans. It would be a winning combination. If the Federalist Papers were written to convince upstate New York farmers of the merits of the Constitution's limits on power, then surely they're not too complicated for citizens of today. It's worth a try. Read Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny." Read "Our Ageless Constitution." See
Memorize the Founders' words, and go forth to expose and conquer the "regressives"! Restore liberty and get rid of the approaching tyranny.
My guy is conservative and fights this crap. Sensenbrenner. Apart from the notable exceptions, fresh conservative blood in the seats every few terms is a good idea.
I was talking about Stephanopolous.
I was talking about Stephanopolous.
Henninger accidentally scraped his fingernail across a CRUCIAL concept.
Yes, we are a cattle stampede. We’re generally headed in the right direction — the restoration of liberty — but we really REALLY need a locus, a central figure, a “man on horseback” or something like it, to rally around. Nobody is the spokesperson of the Tea Party movement.
Given a solid spokesperson (Sarah, are you reading this?) with strong principles that resonate with the Tea Party tsunami, we could steamroll Washington in a few days. Such a leader could declare “lock and load” and an army of five million would be ready to rumble the following day. Such a leader could say, “I want the following traitors HANGED!” and the criminals would be dancing on the breeze within the hour.
But who speaks for the conservatives making up the Tea Party movement? Rush? Michael Steele? Newt?
See the problem? We are a cattle stampede, though we’re headed in the right direction. But just imagine what kind of an unstoppable force we could become with aim!
I disagree with that last sentence. What Americans are looking for is representation. It has been evident in at least the last 20 years that Americans in general are *not* being represented by those they elect to office.
IMHO, the last 'Leader' was Reagan. And the reason for this was because he had principles and vision, and was able to persuade the electorate (not shove down their throat) that his vision was correct.
I don't even like the term 'leader'. IMHO, that term is reserved for those who step up in a time of true crisis: Washington, Jefferson, Madison, (I'll be flamed for these two) Lincoln and FDR, and (incindentally) JFK.
If I might add: Louis XVI and Ceasescu were 'leaders', but it was obvious that the population at the time and place were not interested in a 'leader'.
No, it's common sense.
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.