The TEA party movement in this country began when Wall Street traders suggested that taxpayers send teabags to Congress and urged a sort of "Tea Party Protest" of the TARP bill. From those early suggestions a number of people began to use and push the imagery of the famous 1773 event in Boston Harbor.
Business News Network Editor Rick Santelli called for a "Chicago Tea Party" from the floor of the Mercantile Exchange and the whole notion of protests by those opposed to government spending to bail out the failed mortgage lenders caught the attention of news broadcasters and talk radio hosts. Soon the idea of a TEA party (an acronym for "Taxed Enough Already") caught on and was being discussed frequently as a taxpayer protest movement which drew support from all parts of the political spectrum.
Americans attracted to the TEA party movement were driven primarily by concerns over government spending and taxation issues. The movement had vibrancy in large part because it wasn't driven by support of a party platform or any specific candidate or personality. But that would soon change.
I'm reminded of the scene from the movie "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid". The town sheriff had just organized a group of citizens for the purpose of raising a posse. Once the crowd was assembled around the common cause of capturing the bad guys, another gentlemen stepped upon the stage and used the opportunity to introduce and try to sell a new contraption called the "bicycle". I see the TEA party movement much the same way.
The crowds were assembled to protest TARP and the other "porkulus" bills being pushed by the Obama administration. Then those with other agendas took advantage of that assemblage to switch topics, get attention for themselves and harness the energy.
The TEA party movement is not about a single candidate. It is about a philosophy. Candidates may appeal to voters with this TEA party philosophy because they credibly vow to advance it. Rand Paul did that, and is making good on it in the United States Senate.
But others who have been involved in organizing the crowds and who have been identified with the movement for various other reasons, have taken the stage and now want to lay claim that the movement is, or should be, organized behind or against certain campaigns. They do this as if they have somehow become the "leaders" of the movement itself.
No one has any right to claim leadership of the TEA party. And no one has any right to declare a new philosophy or set a new agenda for the TEA party movement. To declare that the TEA party movement has now moved on to become a hard line originalist/constitutionalist, non-inerventionist or a Ron Paul movement is simply wrong. Some attracted by the original anti-tax and spend energy might have an interest in these things, but not all do, and certainly not the majority.
To declare that the TEA party movement is now working to move back to the Gold standard, or working to see to the repeal of the 17th amendment, or challenging the birth place of Barack Obama, or demanding that our nation adopt a "non-interventionist" foreign policy is simply not true.
Yes, some with these agendas who have perhaps been urging them for years, were attracted to the TEA party movement. Some of them came because they wanted lower taxes, fewer government bailouts and reduced government spending, in addtion to these other areas of concern. Some who came saw the movement as "anti-government" and felt they were among kindred spirits, though their revolutionary spirit was far more zealous than many others.
Some who came to the TEA party movement saw it as a new home for them, having spent most of their lives on the outside of the political process after having been treated dismissively by the two major parties as too "fringey". They saw this as an opportunity to join with like minded folks and finally wield some real political power.
Are all of the people who attended TEA party rallies, supported candidates who promised to advance TEA party issues if elected and who would still be part of the lower taxes, less spending crowd described above? No.
It is wrong to assume that my description of these folks paints with a broad brush any negativity on the larger crowd of TEA party supporters. But look around. Do you see any of these folks I've just described working the crowds? You betcha.
Does this mean that their dedication to push their own agendas makes them bad people? No.
Are their agendas so far out of touch with the majority of Americans that they don't deserve an audience? No.
But if they want an audience, they need to get one of their own.
Jumping up on stage with the crazy idea of a bicycle when the posse has been organized for a different purpose was funny in the Butch and Sundance movie, but could destroy the TEA party movement in America just like it destroyed the sheriff's call for a posse ending up with the bank robbers riding around on the bicycle in mockery of how easily fooled the people really are.
I'm not being critical of the Ron Paul crowd, the constitutionalists, the non-interventionists, the birthers or anybody else. Each has the right to voice his/her concerns and to try to build a coalition around them from which to advance their agendas.
I'm just saying that for those of us who like the TEA party, and for those who came under different circumstances, we need to be paying closer attention to who are now trying to stir things up.
I'm a Ron Paul supporter and was there contributing to the moneybombs way back then (in 2007) - it was a very exciting part of the campaign.
But I was also frequenting several other websites back then too (and still do). One of them was the financial blog http://market-ticker.org/ run by Karl Denninger. He played a big part in organizing people for the Santelli event. And even though he's been very critical of Ron Paul, I respect his input on the broader monetary and financial issues.
Bottom line, like Reagan said:
"There is no limit to what you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit."
Posted by: DJ | February 25, 2011 at 06:10 AM
This might give us some insight into the thought of a large gathering taking place 12/16/2007...
How bout' Teddy Kennedy country where the first 'angry crowd gathered in the 1770s?
Marcus, look who's at the mic. search this on YouTube.
Rand Paul at Faneuil Hall (Part 1 of 2)
Rand Paul, the middle-son of Ron Paul, speaks on behalf of his father at the Tea Party Rally in Boston on December 16th, 2007. Video provided by ...
by bostonlibertyproject | 3 years ago | 1,614 views
Posted by: Big Halsey | February 24, 2011 at 09:08 PM
Well by trying not to define the TEA Party you certainly have. Someone take up the welcome mat for people and ideas.
Posted by: Chris | February 24, 2011 at 07:55 PM
Just a few more links just in case there are still people out there that think the tea party movement did not start with the libertarian ideals of Ron Paul and his 2008 campaign.
Rachel Maddow on the history of the tea party ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzufuX_KMq8
Also Ron Paul on Rachel Maddow ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uby-KdBqsGE&feature=player_embedded#at=178
At 2:30 Paul says, "The original tea party was held on the campaign."
Posted by: Mr. Scott Ryan | February 24, 2011 at 04:21 PM
Also for the record ...
Santelli gave his little tea party rant on national tv on February 16, 2009.
His rant was against the TARP, just as Mr. Carey has stated.
But it was not the start of the tea party movement, unlike what Mr. Carey has stated.
Posted by: Mr. Scott Ryan | February 24, 2011 at 03:49 PM
K Elaine:
Of course Dr. Paul is not the founder of the Tea Party movement.
His supporters were.
go to ...
teaparty07.com
Posted by: Mr. Scott Ryan | February 24, 2011 at 03:35 PM
It is actually true Ron Paul supporters were one of the first tea partiers. There's even a youtube video of the very first tea party:
youtube.com/watch?v=JNP1-bokv2g
When the Moderates & NeoConservatives began getting involved with the Tea Party it became partisan (us vs. the Democrats), when it should have been a movement to oppose wars, Republican Party establishment Taxation, Democratic Party, etc..
Once this occurred the american public began viewing the tea party in an increasingly negative manner. It went from being a legitimate anti-establishment movement to being a "lets get republicans elected" movement. The tea party now seems to be slowing down and once a republican gets back into the white house it'll be dead completely. Time to move on and think of something new.
Also.. I want to point out that Ron Paul doesn't want to get back to the gold standard. He wants to just legalized competing currencies.
Posted by: Tim D. | February 24, 2011 at 03:22 PM
Mr. Ryan,
I am not so sure the first "tea party" protest was in December 2007 as you said. I am certain there was a protest before that date.
If you mean rally, that's another story. But Ron Paul never claimed to be the Tea Party leader, to my knowledge.
Posted by: K Elaine | February 24, 2011 at 12:45 PM
You are exactly right Mr. Carey. I had never been to a rally, a protest or any thing like that until the TEA party event in Lexington in the rain that one day. Since then the organizers of that event have become more visible.
They are always on TV and in the news as if they speak for all of us who were there. I agree with some things they say, but not all of them.
I really don't like being lumped in with them when it comes to the candidates they support. They certainly don't speak for me in the Governor's race.
I have only been to one other event since then and I know the kind of people you are talking about that seem to be in the crowd. I have no problem if they want to dress up in costumes. At first I thought it was funny, but now it seems that the people who are starting to take over the Tea Party are those people.
As long as that is what the group has become, I won't be back.
Thank you for what you are doing.
Posted by: Sharon B | February 24, 2011 at 08:58 AM
Everything just stated has tremendous amount of value and merit, with one exception ...
"To declare that the TEA party movement has now moved on to become a hard line originalist/constitutionalist, non-inerventionist Ron Paul movement is simply wrong."
For the record ...
The first modern day Tea Party Protest was on Dec. 16 2007 and it coincided with a money bomb to raise money for Ron Paul's campaign. Rick Santelli simply jumped on the bandwagon.
So technically, the movement cannot move towards the libertarian ideals of Ron Paul.
The movement could RE-move back towards those ideals. Adding the "RE" makes the statement much more accurate.
Noone can control the movement because it is like you said ... And Dr. Paul has said the exact same thing ... Remember that?
Kudos to you for using the right term "non-interventionist" as opposed to "isolationist".
Here is one of the many promos for the event in December of 2007 ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJDqneN4weE
Posted by: Mr. Scott Ryan | February 24, 2011 at 08:17 AM