I have changed the title, however, to be slightly more nuanced --- the jews will love you for it
On Jun 6, 7:52 pm, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > The Tea Party Is a Brown-Shirt Movement, MostlyPosted byAnthony Gregoryon > June 6, 2011 12:55 PM > It was obvious in the beginning when all of a sudden they sprung up crying > out for their liberty, after years of silence under the fascist Bush > administration. They focused on culture-war hot buttons and symbolic battles > while ignoring the programs that actually threatened fiscal catastrophe: > Medicare and Social Security, which the older demographic behind this > movement tended always to support since they guaranteed their status as tax > feeders. Meanwhile, most of the Tea Party types complained that Obama the > alleged Marxist Muslim wasn’t murdering enough people abroad, torturing and > detaining enough Muslims and enemies of the state, or deporting enough people > for the crime of crossing the border -- although in every case, Obama has > actually been like Bush but more so. > Now a big Tea Party leader says, on behalf of her movement, thatthey will > support any Republican in 2012-- even Mitt Romney, the socialist who doesn’t > even have a better position on free market health care than Obama. This is a > partisan and hypocritical movement, as many on LRC warned from the beginning > (Ryan McMakenandI sounded the alarmmore than two years ago;Laurence > Vancewarned about it consistently, even up to the 2010 election;Lew > Rockwelltold us to brace ourselves for betrayal). Regime libertarians have > been praising this movement for two years, but LRC writers always saw through > the subterfuge. > Is this to say there was no one decent in these protests? That no libertarian > impulse was there? That no good-faith, everyday Americans frustrated by the > status quo jumped on the bandwagon for understandable reasons? Of course not. > But in the main, the Tea Party was always even more of a disingenuous > coalition than the antiwar movement of 2003, which has turned out to be an > anti-Bush movement more interested in electing Democrats and socializing the > economy than stopping the slaughter of innocents overseas. > How do we identify a mass movement that’s actually for freedom? The Ron Paul > movement, especially its youth, is a great example of one: It is passionate > about war, opposed to the central bank, jealous of all civil liberties > protected by the Bill of Rights, opposed to the federal police state, wants > to end the income tax outright and looks at the entire national leviathan as > the enemy, not as savior or an extension of the national will. In short, it > loves personal liberty, economic liberty, and peace with all foreign nations, > and hates government. If you want to know if someone is serious about > freedom, ask him about the last president, U.S. war, or major federal program > that he admires. If he names anything from the last sixty years, he is > obviously not serious about the short-term threat and long-term struggle for > liberty.UPDATE: Am I being far too harsh? After all, there were pro-Ron Paul > “tea parties” in 2007. And grassroots organizers are true patriots who seek > libertynot just Republican victories. Sure, but at some point, whether in > 2008, 2009, or 2010, the movement became hijacked. When almost anyone thinks > about the Tea Party, they don’t think about the antiwar Ron Paul movement of > 2007they think of the Palin/Bachman/Gingrich movement of the last two years. > Maybe it was a good movement thatwas hijacked sometime ago. But today it is > not a pro-freedom movement, just a pro-Republican one. I have changed the > title, however, to be slightly more nuanced. -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
