People were getting fed up about our representatives not listening to us. Rick Santelli had a rant. That rant went viral. Individual people got together and formed local grass-roots groups to try to make their voices heard. They called it having tea parties. Rick Santelli doesn't run it, he didn't start it, he just gave a name that other people used as a rallying point.
There is not a "Tea Party Movement" as such. What there is, is people fed up with government and getting active for the first time in their lives.
Yes, fiscal issues are important to most if not all groups under the Tea Party umbrella. But saying all groups must include social issues, or all groups can not include social issues is like a Homeowners Association in Duluth telling a Homeowners Association in Dallas that they must include snow removal regulations, or the Dallas group telling the Duluth group that they must not include snow removal regulations. Remember: all politics is local.
The only thing that all Tea Party groups must have in common is conservatism. If some groups want to concentrate solely on reducing taxes, great! If some groups want to concentrate solely on reigning in the judiciary, wonderful! If some groups want to cover all the bases, fantastic! If some groups can't come to an agreement on what they want to be about, then they're too big and need to split up!
This is a grass-roots movement of people coming together to try to make their voices heard. Trying to turn it into some official monolithic group will only lead to its downfall, and give our opponents the opportunity group everyone together and attack everyone with a single statement. The recent NAACP bruhaha is a prime example of what they can try to do if the Tea Party is viewed as one vast organization. And one organization can be more easily corrupted than thousands of small groups.
Anyone who claims to be a leader in the Tea Party movement should be shunned, IMHO. There is no leader. Anyone who says he is, is just trying to get more control.
Everybody here arguing about what should or should not be part of the message doesn't get it! Find a group that believes the way you do, and join it. If you want to influence other groups, you are part of the problem. Get out of the way, and let "the people" have free association. A "common message" won't bring about the changes this country needs. Giving "the people" a voice just might. Excluding anyone will reduce the voice of "the people." So stop arguing and get busy making your voices heard.
Very well said. I do not disagree at all. My point was that the TEA party movement is not limited to fiscal conservatism alone and that it has much more in common with social conservatism then it has with social liberalism or social Marxism.
The thread of course made this an issue because of a certain attempt by some in one TEA party movement to purge itself of social conservatives in favor of social Marxists. This is something that we all must be aware of. I am not saying that we need to force this certain group to change its stance but that I would not support any specific part of the TEA party movement that gets cozy with social Marxism or other far left-wing stances. I would call them out on it as well.
You said: “The only thing that all Tea Party groups must have in common is conservatism.”
This I think really hits the nail on the head. If the TEA party movement loses this ideal due to a false perception that it has to be friendly to social liberals and Marxists then it will lose its purpose.