Tea Party defeat= harsh 
? http://www.theunion.com/article/20101017/NEWS/101019792/1056&parentprofile=1056
Dear neighbors and fellow citizens,
I write you as an independent-minded Democrat sickened by the corporate bailouts, yet extremely concerned by inconsistencies and dangers I see in your “populist” movement. My hope is that you will genuinely consider the following points, offered in respect.
Of first concern is the theoretical basis so often quoted by your members – i.e., returning to the original intent of the Founding Fathers and a strict interpretation of the constitution (as written in the 18th century). In fact, it is a misguided premise that there was any consensus among the original framers.
History clearly shows that the Fathers were sharply divided. Federalists, such as Hamilton and Adams, favored a strong central government; Republicans, such as Jefferson, Madison and Monroe, favored states' rights. Interestingly enough, the same conflict separating us now separated them.
There was one great difference between then and now, however. The unshakable faith of our ancestors in the need for ongoing negotiation! And their guts in staying at the bargaining table, sacrificing rigid positions for the national good. This was our founders original intent.
Secondly, there's no evidence suggesting our ancestors believed they had finalized a governing document meant never to be changed. In 1791, four years after our Constitution was ratified, the first U.S. Congress added the first 10 amendments – the Bill of Rights. Further amendments were added in 1795 and 1804.
Finally, in 1865, 1868 and 1869, the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments abolished slavery and guaranteed full citizenship rights to racial minorities. These amendments were fully in line with the attitudes of the Northern Founders, and later, in 1920, the 19th Amendment was added, guaranteeing women the right to vote.
Constitutional history therefore points to one inescapable conclusion. It is impossible to be a true Constitutional originalist while, simultaneously, celebrating our country's ban on slavery and the granting of full citizenship to racial minorities and women.
One can't have it both ways. You either accept the injustices preserved under the original Constitution, or you believe in the amendment process that views the Constitution as a “living document” meant to evolve with the unfolding of our nation. Anything else is a deceit.
A far more crucial concern relates to the notion that the Tea Party is simply a populist grass roots movement. Accumulating evidence strongly suggests that several large corporations are co-opting your “insurrection” on behalf of their long-time agenda to basically eliminate governmental regulation of industry (particularly environmental protections). Please read Jane Mayer's article in the current New Yorker Magazine to see how corporate giants like Koch Industries are using the Tea Party to maximize profits by fighting governmental oversight of any sort (remember the Gulf oil spill?).
Therefore, I say that Democrats, Independents, and sensible Republican vote November 2nd against this corporate Tea Party.
Reported now in no less than 20 newspapers/dailies nationwide.
Koch Brothers, Cato Institute, Chamber of Commerce and FreedomWORKS bankroll tea party 'grassroots' movement:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer
http://www.nj.com/hudson/voices/index.ssf/2010/10/us_chamber_of_commerce_campaig.html
http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/massey-energy-don-blankenship-million-dolla
I'd also like to add, is there any correlation between the Tea Party & the large number of closeted gay men in the GOP?
Dick Armey, I'm looking at you.
? http://www.theunion.com/article/20101017/NEWS/101019792/1056&parentprofile=1056Dear neighbors and fellow citizens,
I write you as an independent-minded Democrat sickened by the corporate bailouts, yet extremely concerned by inconsistencies and dangers I see in your “populist” movement. My hope is that you will genuinely consider the following points, offered in respect.
Of first concern is the theoretical basis so often quoted by your members – i.e., returning to the original intent of the Founding Fathers and a strict interpretation of the constitution (as written in the 18th century). In fact, it is a misguided premise that there was any consensus among the original framers.
History clearly shows that the Fathers were sharply divided. Federalists, such as Hamilton and Adams, favored a strong central government; Republicans, such as Jefferson, Madison and Monroe, favored states' rights. Interestingly enough, the same conflict separating us now separated them.
There was one great difference between then and now, however. The unshakable faith of our ancestors in the need for ongoing negotiation! And their guts in staying at the bargaining table, sacrificing rigid positions for the national good. This was our founders original intent.
Secondly, there's no evidence suggesting our ancestors believed they had finalized a governing document meant never to be changed. In 1791, four years after our Constitution was ratified, the first U.S. Congress added the first 10 amendments – the Bill of Rights. Further amendments were added in 1795 and 1804.
Finally, in 1865, 1868 and 1869, the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments abolished slavery and guaranteed full citizenship rights to racial minorities. These amendments were fully in line with the attitudes of the Northern Founders, and later, in 1920, the 19th Amendment was added, guaranteeing women the right to vote.
Constitutional history therefore points to one inescapable conclusion. It is impossible to be a true Constitutional originalist while, simultaneously, celebrating our country's ban on slavery and the granting of full citizenship to racial minorities and women.
One can't have it both ways. You either accept the injustices preserved under the original Constitution, or you believe in the amendment process that views the Constitution as a “living document” meant to evolve with the unfolding of our nation. Anything else is a deceit.
A far more crucial concern relates to the notion that the Tea Party is simply a populist grass roots movement. Accumulating evidence strongly suggests that several large corporations are co-opting your “insurrection” on behalf of their long-time agenda to basically eliminate governmental regulation of industry (particularly environmental protections). Please read Jane Mayer's article in the current New Yorker Magazine to see how corporate giants like Koch Industries are using the Tea Party to maximize profits by fighting governmental oversight of any sort (remember the Gulf oil spill?).
Therefore, I say that Democrats, Independents, and sensible Republican vote November 2nd against this corporate Tea Party.
Reported now in no less than 20 newspapers/dailies nationwide.
Koch Brothers, Cato Institute, Chamber of Commerce and FreedomWORKS bankroll tea party 'grassroots' movement:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer
http://www.nj.com/hudson/voices/index.ssf/2010/10/us_chamber_of_commerce_campaig.html
http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/massey-energy-don-blankenship-million-dolla
I'd also like to add, is there any correlation between the Tea Party & the large number of closeted gay men in the GOP?
Dick Armey, I'm looking at you.