The Tea Party Strikes Again?

[notyou2]

If god di'nt win fer Brat, the lection is a miss carriage of god's will an the lection shuld be null n void

[Phatscotty]

Is David Brat really a tea partyer?

Is it accurate to call Dave Brat a tea party member? After all, that’s a label that Mr. Brat himself rejects. Asked yesterday by Politico if he’s a tea partyer, Brat replied that he wishes the press would stop describing his victory as a triumph of the insurgent Republican right wing.

That said “tea party” may be as much descriptive of attitude and style as of policy choice. According to political scientist Ron Rapoport of The College of William & Mary, the tea party per se constitutes a majority of the active Republican Party. It’s a big tent itself, with only about a quarter of self-identified tea party activists labeling themselves libertarians. The better term to capture what many people mean by “tea party activist” is “anti-establishment activist,” Professor Rapoport says.

“All the investment banks in ... those guys should have gone to jail. Instead of going to jail, they went on Eric’s Rolodex, and they are sending him big checks,” said Brat on the campaign trail last month, according to a John Judis piece on the subject in The New Republic.

With this language, Brat was drawing on an old tradition in US politics, writes Mr. Judis: economic populism. On the left, it has its roots in figures such as Huey Long of Louisiana. On the right, it echoes in the words of George Wallace and Pat Buchanan.

“The Tea Party is a heterogeneous movement, but many of its members, and many of the local candidates it champions, are rightwing populists. And that was certainly true of Brat,” writes Judis.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder ... tyer-video

How Tea Party groups missed the David Brat boat

So how much did their groups spend to help Brat win?

Zero.

Of the measly $4,805 in political expenditures against Cantor reported to the Federal Election Commission, none came from the big national tea party groups, according to data compiled by the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation.

The fact that Brat took off without the help of those organizations now makes it harder for them to claim his victory as their own.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the ... brat-boat/

The Tea Party comes from the grassroots, as well as the kind of radio shows that would have him on over the past few months. Anyone who is for reduced spending and will vote against raising deficits and is for cutting government and taking the Constitution seriously is okay in my book, regardless their stance on gay marriage or abortion or any of the other social footballs that get kicked around.

Our type can work with Democrats on many issues, including scaling back the NSA and respecting the 4th amendment as well as anti-big bank legislation.

[saxitoxin]

Is David Brat really a tea partyer?

Is it accurate to call Dave Brat a tea party member? After all, that’s a label that Mr. Brat himself rejects. Asked yesterday by Politico if he’s a tea partyer, Brat replied that he wishes the press would stop describing his victory as a triumph of the insurgent Republican right wing.

That said “tea party” may be as much descriptive of attitude and style as of policy choice. According to political scientist Ron Rapoport of The College of William & Mary, the tea party per se constitutes a majority of the active Republican Party. It’s a big tent itself, with only about a quarter of self-identified tea party activists labeling themselves libertarians. The better term to capture what many people mean by “tea party activist” is “anti-establishment activist,” Professor Rapoport says.

“All the investment banks in ... those guys should have gone to jail. Instead of going to jail, they went on Eric’s Rolodex, and they are sending him big checks,” said Brat on the campaign trail last month, according to a John Judis piece on the subject in The New Republic.

With this language, Brat was drawing on an old tradition in US politics, writes Mr. Judis: economic populism. On the left, it has its roots in figures such as Huey Long of Louisiana. On the right, it echoes in the words of George Wallace and Pat Buchanan.

“The Tea Party is a heterogeneous movement, but many of its members, and many of the local candidates it champions, are rightwing populists. And that was certainly true of Brat,” writes Judis.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder ... tyer-video

How Tea Party groups missed the David Brat boat

So how much did their groups spend to help Brat win?

Zero.

Of the measly $4,805 in political expenditures against Cantor reported to the Federal Election Commission, none came from the big national tea party groups, according to data compiled by the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation.

The fact that Brat took off without the help of those organizations now makes it harder for them to claim his victory as their own.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the ... brat-boat/

The Tea Party comes from the grassroots, as well as the kind of radio shows that would have him on over the past few months. Anyone who is for reduced spending and will vote against raising deficits and is for cutting government and taking the Constitution seriously is okay in my book, regardless their stance on gay marriage or abortion or any of the other social footballs that get kicked around.

Our type can work with Democrats on many issues, including scaling back the NSA and respecting the 4th amendment as well as anti-big bank legislation.

OK, well argued. I'll buy what you're selling ... for now!

[Phatscotty]

Is David Brat really a tea partyer?

Is it accurate to call Dave Brat a tea party member? After all, that’s a label that Mr. Brat himself rejects. Asked yesterday by Politico if he’s a tea partyer, Brat replied that he wishes the press would stop describing his victory as a triumph of the insurgent Republican right wing.

That said “tea party” may be as much descriptive of attitude and style as of policy choice. According to political scientist Ron Rapoport of The College of William & Mary, the tea party per se constitutes a majority of the active Republican Party. It’s a big tent itself, with only about a quarter of self-identified tea party activists labeling themselves libertarians. The better term to capture what many people mean by “tea party activist” is “anti-establishment activist,” Professor Rapoport says.

“All the investment banks in ... those guys should have gone to jail. Instead of going to jail, they went on Eric’s Rolodex, and they are sending him big checks,” said Brat on the campaign trail last month, according to a John Judis piece on the subject in The New Republic.

With this language, Brat was drawing on an old tradition in US politics, writes Mr. Judis: economic populism. On the left, it has its roots in figures such as Huey Long of Louisiana. On the right, it echoes in the words of George Wallace and Pat Buchanan.

“The Tea Party is a heterogeneous movement, but many of its members, and many of the local candidates it champions, are rightwing populists. And that was certainly true of Brat,” writes Judis.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder ... tyer-video

How Tea Party groups missed the David Brat boat

So how much did their groups spend to help Brat win?

Zero.

Of the measly $4,805 in political expenditures against Cantor reported to the Federal Election Commission, none came from the big national tea party groups, according to data compiled by the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation.

The fact that Brat took off without the help of those organizations now makes it harder for them to claim his victory as their own.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the ... brat-boat/

The Tea Party comes from the grassroots, as well as the kind of radio shows that would have him on over the past few months. Anyone who is for reduced spending and will vote against raising deficits and is for cutting government and taking the Constitution seriously is okay in my book, regardless their stance on gay marriage or abortion or any of the other social footballs that get kicked around.

Our type can work with Democrats on many issues, including scaling back the NSA and respecting the 4th amendment as well as anti-big bank legislation.

OK, well argued. I'll buy what you're selling ... for now!

If he turns out like Eric Cantor does, I'll join you in castrating him. ATM we have a chance.

and btw, I am not particularly fond of 'the Tea Party Express' or 'the Tea Party Patriots' Things that mean one thing in Massachussettes means something totally different in Oklahoma and even different in California. It's the basic small gov't principles and Liberty that unite us all, even as they add other issues in Texas or other issues in Florida.

[saxitoxin]

Is David Brat really a tea partyer?

Is it accurate to call Dave Brat a tea party member? After all, that’s a label that Mr. Brat himself rejects. Asked yesterday by Politico if he’s a tea partyer, Brat replied that he wishes the press would stop describing his victory as a triumph of the insurgent Republican right wing.

That said “tea party” may be as much descriptive of attitude and style as of policy choice. According to political scientist Ron Rapoport of The College of William & Mary, the tea party per se constitutes a majority of the active Republican Party. It’s a big tent itself, with only about a quarter of self-identified tea party activists labeling themselves libertarians. The better term to capture what many people mean by “tea party activist” is “anti-establishment activist,” Professor Rapoport says.

“All the investment banks in ... those guys should have gone to jail. Instead of going to jail, they went on Eric’s Rolodex, and they are sending him big checks,” said Brat on the campaign trail last month, according to a John Judis piece on the subject in The New Republic.

With this language, Brat was drawing on an old tradition in US politics, writes Mr. Judis: economic populism. On the left, it has its roots in figures such as Huey Long of Louisiana. On the right, it echoes in the words of George Wallace and Pat Buchanan.

“The Tea Party is a heterogeneous movement, but many of its members, and many of the local candidates it champions, are rightwing populists. And that was certainly true of Brat,” writes Judis.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder ... tyer-video

How Tea Party groups missed the David Brat boat

So how much did their groups spend to help Brat win?

Zero.

Of the measly $4,805 in political expenditures against Cantor reported to the Federal Election Commission, none came from the big national tea party groups, according to data compiled by the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation.

The fact that Brat took off without the help of those organizations now makes it harder for them to claim his victory as their own.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the ... brat-boat/

The Tea Party comes from the grassroots, as well as the kind of radio shows that would have him on over the past few months. Anyone who is for reduced spending and will vote against raising deficits and is for cutting government and taking the Constitution seriously is okay in my book, regardless their stance on gay marriage or abortion or any of the other social footballs that get kicked around.

Our type can work with Democrats on many issues, including scaling back the NSA and respecting the 4th amendment as well as anti-big bank legislation.

OK, well argued. I'll buy what you're selling ... for now!

If he turns out like Eric Cantor does, I'll join you in castrating him. ATM we have a chance.

I'm not castrating him, I think it's great he won; Cantor is utterly despicable - Brat is the lesser of two evils and may even turn out to be a net good on a majority of things. It just seemed to me like his win didn't vindicate the effectiveness Tea Party per se given it looked like they kinda bandwagoned the victory parade and he seems to be keeping his distance from the TP. But, you have convinced me otherwise ... for now!

[Phatscotty]

I guess the next test is if he accepts money from FreedowWorks, or if he turns them down and whores himself out to Boehner and McConnel and Cantors replacement.

[saxitoxin]

I guess the next test is if he accepts money from FreedowWorks, or if he turns them down and whores himself out to Boehner and McConnel and Cantors replacement.

Has FreedomWorks ever given money to any candidate? I was under the impression it was a pyramid scheme to collect donations and funnel them into the bank accounts of several radio hosts and FW's veteran Inside-the-Beltway staff through large salaries and expensive ad buys that, in turn, just ask for more donations.

I would be very interested in Brat if he maintains his current distance from groups like that; that would protect his Mr. Smith vibe. I'll become less interested in him once he starts attaching himself to these groups, or, more likely, once they start attaching themselves to him.

edit - in 2012 it looks like they made $7,500 in donations and raised more than $5 million

[patches70]

The reason why the Tea Party label is trying to be pinned on Brat is to deflect what the primary between Cantor and Brat really was. A vote on Amnesty.

Cantor was pro amnesty, Brat is not.


That's why Cantor lost.

[Metsfanmax]

Anyone who is for ... taking the Constitution seriously is okay in my book, regardless their stance on gay marriage

Does the 14th amendment not count as the part of the Constitution that they need to take seriously?

[Phatscotty]

The reason why the Tea Party label is trying to be pinned on Brat is to deflect what the primary between Cantor and Brat really was. A vote on Amnesty.

Cantor was pro amnesty, Brat is not.


That's why Cantor lost.

Yay! Look! a real conversation!!!!

That is definitely part of it, no doubt. Most likely a big part, possibly the biggest. I think, honestly, a significant part too was because Cantor turned into what we all hate (at least the honest ones) and have the balls to call them out and if need be punk their asses. I think now that the shock is wearing off and the dust is settling, the possibilities start coming into perspective and we can get more of a grip on the situation.

I know I leapt to my feet and the media caused a buzz storm with the Tea Party label, and while it was indeed Tea Party-ish and his grassroots support may have been largely Tea Partiers, we really dont know yet. In fact, nobody does except for David Brat. I will be more than happy to post videos and articles and speeches throughout and follow up on the story in the process of holding him accountable. If he doesn't, I wouldn't be surprised if Republican voters refuse to vote for him in the general. However, that was a really great night and we actually went out dancing and had some drinks and a lot of fun! So, I am going to have to change the thread title for now, with hopes of changing it again in the future and with dreams of making the title even more exciting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Besides the promises David Brat has made so far and the descriptions he has given of how he intends to vote and what philosophies he holds (he is a P.H.D. in Economics ), I guess all we have is hope.

That is the new theme for the thread!
HOPE!

[Phatscotty]

<looks around for Death Squads>

TPDS got him!



that isn't to say we aren't keeping a close eye on the next person on the list! At least he is more handsome

[Phatscotty]

[Metsfanmax]

Besides the promises David Brat has made so far and the descriptions he has given of how he intends to vote and what philosophies he holds (he is a P.H.D. in Economics ), I guess all we have is hope.

That is the new theme for the thread!
HOPE!

So "hope and change" is acceptable as long as you agree with the political views of the candidate?

[Phatscotty]

Besides the promises David Brat has made so far and the descriptions he has given of how he intends to vote and what philosophies he holds (he is a P.H.D. in Economics ), I guess all we have is hope.

That is the new theme for the thread!
HOPE!

So "hope and change" is acceptable as long as you agree with the political views of the candidate?

No, Mets...c'mon man. Hope that David Brat makes good choices and tries his best to do what he said he's gonna do and keep the promises he makes.

[Phatscotty]

I guess the next test is if he accepts money from FreedowWorks, or if he turns them down and whores himself out to Boehner and McConnel and Cantors replacement.

Has FreedomWorks ever given money to any candidate? I was under the impression it was a pyramid scheme to collect donations and funnel them into the bank accounts of several radio hosts and FW's veteran Inside-the-Beltway staff through large salaries and expensive ad buys that, in turn, just ask for more donations.

I would be very interested in Brat if he maintains his current distance from groups like that; that would protect his Mr. Smith vibe. I'll become less interested in him once he starts attaching himself to these groups, or, more likely, once they start attaching themselves to him.

edit - in 2012 it looks like they made $7,500 in donations and raised more than $5 million

That's a good point, in fact I almost edited it into my previous post. It's not like he's challenging Barbara Boxer or Diane Feinstein. But for anyone who is a fiscal conservative that might challenge someone like that in the future, I think they should have some money from someone, hopefully of a like mind. I have no problem giving money to a group whose purpose is to help Tea Party candidates make an impact on Republicans and in government in general, so long as they don't go Cantor. But I also don't expect people to ride their bike to work at Congress or eat mayonnaise sandwiches and pack lunches in the Senate cloak room either.

[Phatscotty]

Anyone who is for ... taking the Constitution seriously is okay in my book, regardless their stance on gay marriage

Does the 14th amendment not count as the part of the Constitution that they need to take seriously?

that's kinda of like asking if pro-choice people take murdering babies seriously. I know what you keep on trying to do, it just so happens you actually asked a legitimate question this time.

The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. The amendment addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws, and was proposed in response to issues related to former slaves following the American Civil War.

I'm guessing that you want to get into the litigated parts over a century later and how it's relative to plant life thus plants have rights?

Go ahead, blow your wad.

[bradleybadly]

So I saw the headline of Cantor's loss at the gym, and it was pretty epic. There were more TVs tuned to that story than any sports. Suddenly remembered this place, and was sure that all the old comrades would be whining & perhaps some new ones - not much changed.

Nice to see you again, Sultan. Not sure why you went through the trouble of creating a new profile as kuthoer, but it's your life.

Can we get a 15 paragraph sermon from Player on this, or did Saxi scare her away?

[Phatscotty]

So I saw the headline of Cantor's loss at the gym, and it was pretty epic. There were more TVs tuned to that story than any sports. Suddenly remembered this place, and was sure that all the old comrades would be whining & perhaps some new ones - not much changed.

Nice to see you again, Sultan. Not sure why you went through the trouble of creating a new profile as kuthoer, but it's your life.

Can we get a 15 paragraph sermon from Player on this, or did Saxi scare her away?

Good to see ya still out there and doing well! Player pops back a couple times a year to make a post here n there, but I think it's because of the bottle just as much as it is saxi.

[Lord Arioch]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlO8OTK_Nb0

[Metsfanmax]

Anyone who is for ... taking the Constitution seriously is okay in my book, regardless their stance on gay marriage

Does the 14th amendment not count as the part of the Constitution that they need to take seriously?

that's kinda of like asking if pro-choice people take murdering babies seriously.

Hardly. In the case of abortion, there are arguably competing rights at stake. In the case of gay marriage, there's not. The 14th amendment clearly calls for equal protection under the law, so taking the Constitution seriously requires you to be in support of marriage equality.

[Phatscotty]

Anyone who is for ... taking the Constitution seriously is okay in my book, regardless their stance on gay marriage

Does the 14th amendment not count as the part of the Constitution that they need to take seriously?

that's kinda of like asking if pro-choice people take murdering babies seriously.

Hardly. In the case of abortion, there are arguably competing rights at stake. In the case of gay marriage, there's not. The 14th amendment clearly calls for equal protection under the law, so taking the Constitution seriously requires you to be in support of marriage equality.

But are you saying a line can never be drawn at what is marriage and what isn't? Why can't 8 people get married? I ask, do you draw a line somewhere? brother n sister? do you draw a line?

Where?

[Metsfanmax]

Anyone who is for ... taking the Constitution seriously is okay in my book, regardless their stance on gay marriage

Does the 14th amendment not count as the part of the Constitution that they need to take seriously?

that's kinda of like asking if pro-choice people take murdering babies seriously.

Hardly. In the case of abortion, there are arguably competing rights at stake. In the case of gay marriage, there's not. The 14th amendment clearly calls for equal protection under the law, so taking the Constitution seriously requires you to be in support of marriage equality.

But are you saying a line can never be drawn at what is marriage and what isn't? Why can't 8 people get married? I ask, do you draw a line somewhere? brother n sister? do you draw a line?

Where?

My personal opinion on that is irrelevant. As long as no one is allowed to marry 8 people, then there's still equal protection under the law. It's when one group gets the benefit and another doesn't, that the 14th amendment is being violated.

[mrswdk]

If there are people who still insist on participating in Olde Worlde voodoo rituals such as marriage in the year 2014 then they might as well participate properly, rather than attempting to 'update' the Olde Worlde traditions to suit themselves. If two so-called 'atheists' wish to go to a Christian church and play dress up for the day, the least they could do is observe the beliefs and traditions of the Christian faith.

I mean, you guys still do archaic, throwback shit like making the woman change her family name to the man's, and then giving all the kids the man's family name too. Why happily perpetuate a custom which gives women 'second class' status within their families, but then get all agitated that two dudes aren't allowed to put magic rings on each others fingers in church because 'equality'?

And why do those gays (or anyone else, for that matter) want to get married in the first place? Are they going to get their kids a Bar Mitzvah too, or would that be judged to trivialize and demean Judaic rituals?

[Metsfanmax]

And why do those gays (or anyone else, for that matter) want to get married in the first place? Are they going to get their kids a Bar Mitzvah too, or would that be judged to trivialize and demean Judaic rituals?

Well, it's not just a ritual anymore; there are specific legal rights and benefits associated with getting married. I'm not a fan of religion at all, and the thought of pretending I am for a day is pretty contemptible, but having my partnership externally validated and recognized with things such as hospital visitation rights and medical decision-making rights is reason enough to want to be married. And even aside from that, there are of course many gay people who are also religious, and if they want to participate in a legal/religious ceremony that other people can, why should any of us want to say no? The fight for marriage equality is not a stance on marriage; it is a stance on equality, and it either means legal marriages for everyone, or legal marriages for no one.

[mrswdk]

Real equality would be to allow everyone to have access to that medical care, regardless of marital status. Even if you give gay guys the same opportunity as everyone else to receive legal perks via cynical exploitation of the Christian faith, you are still arbitrarily excluding all un-married people from those services.

As for the gay people who genuinely belong to a branch of Christianity/Islam whatever: I have always wondered what would make a gay person participate in a religion that refuses to legitimize their lifestyle and instead declares it an abomination. Do such people even exist?