God Party vs Tea Party

The TEA Parties have fired a shot across the bow of the old guard of the Republican Party. You will know the old guard better by their philosophy. Simply put: "if you are right on abortion hardly anything else matters." Not fiscal conservatism. Not small government. And especially not winning national elections.

Representatives of the loosely organized tea party movement urged GOP leaders in a letter released Monday to abandon their fronts in the culture wars - issues such as gay marriage, school prayer, and abortion - and instead focus their new electoral power on individual liberties and "economic freedoms."

The letter, signed by 16 tea party groups and a conservative gay organization, points to an emerging rift between the tea party movement and the GOP, which still counts social conservatives seeking "moral government" as a key constituency.

The signatories, ranging from conservative commentator Tammy Bruce to local tea party group leaders, say the key lesson the GOP should draw from the election is that Americans are concerned chiefly about taxes and the size of government, not their neighbors' lifestyle choices or personal decisions.

But the push to quit the culture wars is already meeting resistance from mainstream Republicans, who worry about a rebellion from social conservatives if the party refrains from taking stands on moral issues

The Republican Party as constituted is an unnatural coalition. The interests of the two main factions are not congruent. You have what is essentially a "leave us alone coalition" at odds with the "if we don't have government guns to enforce our moral vision what is the point?" types. Of course it is a rather weak moral vision that requires guns to keep people in line. A contradiction my "moral government" friends don't get. And on top of that government by its nature must engage in immoral acts as a practical matter. Murder, theft, spying, torture, slavery, coercion, etc. Of course we want to keep that sort of thing to a minimum. But until the arrival of the moshiach we are stuck with it.

Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

And even when it gets some eloquence it wears thin after a while. Torture elevated by eloquence is still torture.

Now about that TEA Party letter [pdf]. (bolding mine)

Dear Senator McConnell and Representative Boehner

On behalf of limited government conservatives everywhere we write to urge you and your colleagues in Washington to put forward a legislative agenda in the next Congress that reflects the principles of the Tea Party movement.

Poll after poll confirms that the Tea Party's laser focus on issues of economic freedom and limited government resonated with the American people on Election Day.

The Tea Party movement galvanized around a desire to return to constitutional government and against excessive spending, taxation and government intrusion into the lives of the American people.

The Tea Party movement is a non-partisan movement, focused on issues of economic freedom and limited government, and a movement that will be as vigilant with a Republican-controlled Congress as we were with a Democratic-controlled Congress.

This election was not a mandate for the Republican Party, nor was it a mandate to act on any social issue, nor should it be interpreted as a political blank check.

Already, there are Washington insiders and special interest groups that hope to co-opt the Tea Party's message and use it to push their own agenda - particularly as it relates to social issues. We are disappointed but not surprised by this development. We recognize the importance of values but believe strongly that those values should be taught by families and our houses of worship and not legislated from Washington, D.C.

We urge you to stay focused on the issues that got you and your colleagues elected and to resist the urge to run down any social issue rabbit holes in order to appease the special interests.

The Tea Party movement is not going away and we intend to continue to hold Washington accountable.

Now about the Drug War. I think it is too soon for that issue. But we will get to it. It seems rather stupid to have the Feds spend $25 billion a year to make illegal drugs easier for kids to get than legal beer.

Here is the heart of the matter.

"When they were out in the Boston Harbor, they weren't arguing about who was gay or who was having an abortion," said Ralph King, a letter signatory who is a Tea Party Patriots national leadership council member, as well as an Ohio co-coordinator.

King said he signed onto the letter because GOProud seemed to be genuine in pushing for fiscal conservatism and limited government.

"Am I going to be the best man at a same sex-marriage wedding? That's not something I necessarily believe in," said King. "I look at myself as pretty socially conservative. But that's not what we push through the Tea Party Patriots."

That indifference is essentially the point of the gay conservative group.

"For almost two years now, the tea party has been laser-focused on the size of government," said Barron, who said his group and the tea partiers are part of the "leave-me-alone coalition."

Yeah. Leave us the fuck alone. And we are as serious as death about it.

H/T Instapundit and Instapundit and a phone call today from a friend.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

posted by Simon on 11.15.10 at 10:04 PM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/10314






Comments

I think you may be psychic.

Eric Scheie   ·  November 15, 2010 11:59 PM

The thing that would make them congruent is federalism. All these social issues are more properly and traditionally matters of State's interest (if that), not the Feds, which has a much more restricted writ. It's a hot item here on RedState:
http://www.redstate.com/aarongardner/2010/11/15/a-note-to-goproud-and-other-libertarian-tea-partiers/
Which, despite the hard-line tone taken by the diarist (very off-putting), gets into precisely this sort discussion of a workable compromise in the comments.

Eric E. Coe   ·  November 16, 2010 01:51 AM

Eric,

A socon Republican Party can not and will not win National elections.

Given a choice between a socon and a communist I will vote for a communist:

Obama/Keyes vs Kerry/Bush

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber barons cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. Clive Staples "CS" Lewis

But maybe I haven't got far enough into the comments.

M. Simon   ·  November 16, 2010 05:24 AM

The above was for E. E. Coe.

M. Simon   ·  November 16, 2010 06:25 AM

I am definitely in favor of "Leave us Alone", but I am not sure that is what many are asking for. I am fine with legalizing adult drug use but not granting protected rights for the users.
There are consequences to our actions; some physical, some social. It seems that many groups and even businesses clamoring for reforms want privileges and protections more than freedom.
I do not seek to make judgments of others in a civil or legal sense but I can and will make them on a personal level.
I believe that to still forever the beating of a human heart without great cause is wrong. This belief may even be heard someday over the shouting voices.
My mind is free. I will not allow my own wants, desires, or even needs, to be its master. Why then would I allow those of another to enslave it?
Others are free to stamp or label me as they please; but I will not be led, pushed, prodded, conscripted, assimilated, or indoctrinated. My mind is my own and free.

There are consequences to that and I can live with them.

Of course,ignored is not looking too bad for a consequence right now.

Will   ·  November 16, 2010 06:53 AM

Will,

I'm with you on the abortion question (after quickening) before that IMO we have an acorn - not a tree.

The problem I have is putting the question in the hands of the government.

Suppose the enforcement goes along the lines of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riboisae0JY&feature=related

Note: video extremely disturbing. Co-blogger Eric sent me the link.

So I support a civil society answer to the question:

Rockford Pro Life

They want government out of the question.

M. Simon   ·  November 16, 2010 07:02 AM

Will,

The only way the wants and needs of others can enslave you is through the power of government.

You are paying $25 bn a year for the wants and needs of dopers. And that is just the direct cost. You are paying for the welfare of families whose males are incarcerated. And there is other social damage:

Demographics

Regulation (along the lines of alcohol) would be far cheaper.

Many of the ills of this country derive from the "need" to punish people for their bad habits. (as opposed to direct harm to others)

M. Simon   ·  November 16, 2010 07:10 AM

I agree that "the power of government" is what I need to worry about and I do. That video is disturbing. Power can corrupt and it always draws the corrupt, who yearn for it.

I do have doubts that a "Leave us Alone" group will be able to overcome Pournelle's Iron Law.

California Prop 19 may have been defeated because there were concerns that drug testing would be challenged as a reason to dismiss or not employ persons.

Will   ·  November 16, 2010 07:49 AM

Drug Testing Lowers High Tech Productivity

I'd rather have a guy stoned on pot operating heavy machinery than a drunk. The pot heads tend to be safer since they overestimate their relative impairment. The drunks wildly underestimate their condition.

In any case the Prop 19 folks will be back in 2012. 2014. 2018. etc. until they figure out a winning combination.

M. Simon   ·  November 16, 2010 08:12 AM

M.Simon, I see that you are all over* that thread I pointed out earlier. I agree, a socon national Republican party will not work. However, a national Rockefeller Republican party won't work either, for the same reasons in reverse. As several people pointed out in that thread, especially LibertarianHawk Federalism is the only possible way to thread that needle in a stable arrangement - a national party focused on fiscal, foreign policy, etc. and a full-throated support of federalism, and officially neutral on these hot-button issues. And then various state parties taking differing stances on them...

Maybe the real problem is with this is the need for a unified national party that crosses these boundaries (the Dems have the same problem, again in reverse). Because of personnel issues (the state political parties being "farm teams" for the national parties), and up-ticket/down-ticket/coattails effects, the drive for a unified platform is strong.

So, yeah, the federalism component of the platform would have to be full-throated and strong. And the Republicans may not be able to adapt and do it in a timely fashion.
But the political niche that they occupy will be filled by some party - and the Libertarian party is not that party.

(* Long ago, due to a platform change at RS in combination with issues with my password recovery email address, I lost the ability to log in and post there - although I was not banned and still have a viable (dormant) account. It was too much trouble getting it fixed (they didn't respond to emails), so I just lurk there now.)

Eric E. Coe   ·  November 16, 2010 10:48 AM

Who is willing to stand up and say on behalf of a fetus about to be aborted "Leave me the F' alone"?

I mean, since he/she can't speak and all.

Paul A'Barge   ·  November 16, 2010 02:57 PM

Paul,

How do you keep enforcement from looking like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riboisae0JY

And don't forget the above was a mistake.
The woman was only charged with a misdemeanor.

M. Simon   ·  November 16, 2010 04:07 PM

And Paul,

You want to trust your mate's vagina to the government?

Are you insane?

M. Simon   ·  November 16, 2010 05:24 PM

Paul,

The Jewish position on abortion is different:

The Jewish Position On Abortion

The Jews And Partial Birth Abortion

What Is A Fetus Worth?

So you want to get your religious position enacted into law? Trying to start a religious war my friend?

I see no faster way to kill the TEA Party and give the Democrats an opening to finish their Socialism for the USA project. And you know what? I'd help them.

No idle threat my friend. Because I have done it before:

Obama/Keyes vs Kerry/Bush

M. Simon   ·  November 16, 2010 05:33 PM

"trying to start a religious war my friend"

Nice.


And stupid. How exactly did Russia treat its gays? So go join the dems. That's much easier than trying to reason with someone who disagrees with you and, you know, maybe work toward other goals you have in common and then influence them. But your way lets you maintain your moral superiority unscathed by, you know, actual arguments. It's much easier to find the extreme, paint it as the norm, and conclude those who disagree with you are evil, isn't it? Nice job on that, at least.

To wit:
1. Old guard republicans = anti-abortion. Bull crap and you know it. Its lip service to appease social conservatives. That may be a problem but that's not what you're implying. You're saying Republicans are defined by the abortion issue.

2. ""if we don't have government guns to enforce our moral vision what is the point?" Evidence that this is what socons want? And not from a fringe element. Unless you're willing to say the dems want to ram socialism for the USA down our throat at the point of a gun, something you said you have more affinity with and are more willing to befriend and cede power to than with an anti-abortionist, you're creating a straw man. I'm glad you're so passionate but, obviously, you can't see straight on this stuff.

3. "And you know what? I'd help them." Let's put this in exact terms: If Republicans/Tea Partiers allow anti-abortionists a place then you will actively aid moving this country to socialism. Are you really so small and petty?

4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riboisae0JY : Reductio ad absurdum. And, in the same way, we've established that you would rather this country be socialist/communist than have any restrictions on abortion. See how it works?

In the end, there is not a single issue where I don't have libertarian leanings. Then I read drivel like this and realize your worse and more intolerant than any social conservative I've ever met. You'd rather live in a communist country than one where people use the political process to try and push their agenda and want restrictions on the things YOU find most important. Bully for you. What makes you think that when the communists take over, with your help, they'll see eye to eye with you?

Oh, I forgot, because you're so morally superior that it is simply self-righteously evident to all, without real argument, since you found extremists who disagree with you.

So go ahead, work for a communist society. When I'm sitting beside you in a gulag, I'm going to say, "I told you so." (Look, I used your logic to draw another conclusion!)

rrr   ·  November 17, 2010 02:40 PM

Post a comment

You may use basic HTML for formatting.





Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)


November 2010
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail



Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives



Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits