errantgeek
Posts: 156
Joined: 6/20/2011 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY No, their association with the Republican party is really an "overturning" of the establishment part of the Party. The party's stated ideals better matched the beliefs of many of the TEA party movement members, and gave a path to make a real political impact. That's why it is more closely identified with the Republicans now, and why even establishment Republicans hate, and are against it. Firm Yes and no. Remember, the guys who would become the tea party complained -- loud and constantly -- about the appointment of Eric Holder, Tim Geithner, and the retention of Ben Bernanke in the Obama administration. And those criticism were very well-founded. Then, FreedomWorks, FNC and AFP hit the scene, huge amounts of money and media exposure entered the tea party coffers, and suddenly all that complaint of corporate patronage and regulatory capture disappeared and was scrubbed from the tea party's platform and the memberships' minds, replaced by screaming about socialism, Obamacare, Stalinism, and all that other nonsense. It wasn't that the tea party was a populist movement that overturned the Republican establishment, quite the opposite in fact. The tea party was a populist movement that was captured by a handful of conservative fringe elements with very deep pockets, who in turn overturned the Republican establishment. In a way, while the tea party nominally represents ideals that should align very closely with the occupy movement and make them natural allies, they don't and in fact are opposed to the occupy movement, because the tea party has become a microcosm of exactly what the occupy movement protests: the capture of organizations by corporate money and influence-bartering to further corporate, rather than popular, interest.
< Message edited by errantgeek -- 10/28/2011 8:40:21 AM >
|