Posted on 03/22/2014 9:24:45 AM PDT by neverdem
Several writers are clattering around with wooden carts and shouting for Tea Partiers to bring out their dead. “I see a Tea Party whose influence is gradually declining, not increasing,” writes Molly Ball. “The Tea Party’s Over,” editorializes Josh Kraushaar. “Talk of a tea party takeover of American politics – or the Republican Party – has faded of late,” observes Chris Cillizza.
Commentary on the Tea Party has revolved between relieved notices of its death and apocalyptic warnings of its Gríma-like power over the catatonic GOP. And while it’s tempting to think we’ve merely swung back to the death notice phase, Ball, Kraushaar, and Cillizza all make fair points. Only one Republican senator—Thad Cochran—and two Republican congressmen—Mike Simpson and Bill Shuster—face serious primary challenges from the right. Tea Party-aligned groups like the Club for Growth are muted compared to 2012. The movement's involvement in the 2014 election seems relatively small.
But to declare the Tea Party in decline for these reasons is to argue that the Tea Party was only ever concerned with candidates. This has been the shallow Beltway analysis for some time: Republicans are conservatives, Tea Partiers are insane conservatives, and therefore Tea Partiers are trying to primary Republicans. Cut to three Morning Joe guests nodding in unison. The truth, of course, is far more complex than this.
The Tea Party came into existence for two reasons. The first was its id—a reaction against the discredited political class that brought us No Child Left Behind, calamity in Iraq, a homeownership society-cum-popped housing bubble, record debt, a failed stimulus, and a destructive overhaul of our health insurance. This was the Tea Party’s fist in the air. It was also, despite its emotion, what attracted so many independents and newcomers, who were furious at Washington and wanted a political outlet...
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Your fellow anti-17thers have already explained where THEY get their talking points from. THEY have told me the following book is infallible gospel truth that I MUST READ, and if I disagree with ANY portion of what it says, I "hate" the founding fathers. Evidently a 21st century radio talk show host now speaks for the founding fathers:
Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan (D-Chicago)
Wow! News to THIS guy, who has been churning tons of fake RAT votes in the city of Chicago for the last 30 years and has absolute control of the state legislature because of it.
U.S. Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL)
Elected 1998
Who the city of Chicago voted overwhelming for in that election: Carol Moseley Braun (D)
Gee, that's funny, when we look at real life, the OPPOSITE occurs from your fantasy world. In the real world:
When the citizens as a whole in a state vote, they are able to elect a DIFFERENT Senator than the one favored by the big cities in their state (if your theory were true, for example, Georgia would elect NOTHING but socialist Democrats to the Senate, since that's who ALWAYS wins in Atlanta and other urban strangleholds)
But when the STATE LEGISLATURE as a whole votes, the big city (Chicago) gets what they want 100% of the time, thanks to them safely controlling most of the seats (including the suburban ones where most of the district is outside city limits) through gerrymandering, and thus getting a veto-proof majority to give the Chicago politicians whatever they want. I have never seen House Speaker Mike Madigan (D-Chicago) ever lose a vote in his rigged body. They rubber stamp WHATEVER he tells them to.
Sorry real life facts don't gel with your fantasy about legislatures representing the "best interests" of the state, and the statewide popular vote only representing the "big cities" As John Adams would say, facts are stubborn things.
That was an extremely relevant point since you implied that daring to change anything in the original constitution was wrong.
Your “city/state” garbage is just that.
Never heard of em...nor the book.
The RATs run virtually every city, and can comandeer real votes, the homeless vote, the felon vote, the college vote, the union thug vote, the illegal alien votes, the dead vote, and of course the ever popular "trunk of the car" vote.
In many cases, depending on the balance between urban and rural counties, especially considering the city election fraud, the Rs haven't got a chance. That's what I mean by a city/state.
The House of Representatives is supposed to direcly represent the people, the Senate is meant to represent the interests of the state. Of course you already knew that.
Illinois?...! You call that an example?
Well, you'd have to have a Republican Legislature. I beleive there are currently 27.
I did?
I think I said there were some bombs and some mistakes.
Why do you HATE the founding fathers? WHY? WHY?
Answer the question!
:)
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.