An article: Tea Party 'Revolution' Targets Ron Paul in GOP Primary
"...have fallen out of favor with some Tea Partiers. They say that while Ron Paul's fiscal conservative message is sound, he's a little too fond of pork-barrel projects and nowhere near tough enough on national security."
The fallacious pork-barrel project argumentsmade by the Tea Party candidates running against Ron Paul is just window dressing. Their real concern about Paul is that he is not a Christian Zionist war puppeteer.
Tim Graney is also running against Paul. He has this to say about Paul,"His Weak, Stick-Your-Head-In-The-Sand Foreign Policy." Graney believes Paul is too divisive, and wants to go to Washington because he believes,
"My opponent wants to cut spending on our military industrial complex because he believes in a weaker foreign policy. I support a strong foreign policy and a strong military to back it up. I do not have a problem with our military presence throughout the globe but he does. It is a global economy and America must be ready, willing and able to protect our interests around the globe."</BLOCKQUOTE>
Have you ever heard a candidate proudlysupport the military industrial complex with such glowing praise?
Last edited by gardenstate; 08-31-2011 at 02:20 AM.
As is sometimes said, a "leader" is someone who sees a movement and jumps in front of the crowd and says 'follow me.' What is happening with the Tea Party movement is that establishment Republicans are jumping in front and claiming to be leading it. What was a real grassroots movement is being lead to the left into a new neo-con party by establishment Republicans. If at all possible the establishment will undermined and takeover a real grassroots movement and that is what the establishment is trying to do with the Tea Party movement.
Divide and conquer, confuse and weaken. The Tea Party groups need to be focused locally and be autonomous from each other. Easier said than done however. Here in Nevada a character of dubious patriotic pedigree has decided to start a political party called the Tea Party. His chief advisor is a Jewish Democrat. The original tea party folks want nothing to do with it, but other than that there is endless debating and squabbling among all the various grassroots groups here.
There has to be a final break from the so-called "conservative movement" because it delegitimizes anyone and everyone who doesn't toe the establishment line on all the "taboo" (e.g., most important) issues. Until that happens it will remain all too easy to keep all insurgents like the tea party movementdominated by "respectable" elements. That being said, it's still far from certain that the GOP and establishment conservatives are going to win this battle. The times are tough and getting tougher, which is not lessening the anger at both monopoly political gangs.
In my time I've seen a number of so-called grassroots movements(in the beginning they probably were legitimately "grassroots") either disappear or be hijacked into an establishment auxiliary or clone.
Quite a few years ago, I remember reading something by a psychologist regarding people who seek what his profession calls "therapy," and concluded that if external circumstances remain fairly comfortable, they will hardly ever do anything to solve the problem which caused them to seek "help" in the first place.
Now, however, the discomfort level is reaching the point where Boobus Americanus has nothing to lose and everything to gain. At that point, people can become dangerous.
GS, good assessment sir. I'm a JBS member & vote in-line with the CP (although I'm an Independent). The Globalist's usurpers are doing their damned'est to throw a monkey wrench into the (Tea Party) works. [img]smileys/smiley18.gif[/img]
Don, that "divide & conquer" technique is indeed the M.O. of the PTB & their many pawns. It sickens me to hear these NeoCON chickenhawks like Pawn Vanity rail against Dr.Paul because he's not a Zionist pawn nor pro-Globalist. There's far too many well meaning Americans out there that are duped by these NeoCON mouthpieces (via their endless propaganda). '
Waaal, fun as it can be to puncture everything to the left of Dr. Paul, I'm not sure we should trash the tea party (lower case) movement yet. Two rotters profiled in the article helped stage one tea party, is that the only connection?
Yes, banal GOPers have attempted to take the movement over and have succeeded to some extent, but don't write off the ability of the grassroots people who swelled the TP ranks for its first few months to rise above this putsch. Let's not turn off any of them </span>that might wander our way with any excess of negativity. They'll still be quite wet behind the ears and will need to clearly see Nationalism is the movement they've been looking for.
The other dismal news in the piece isn't so far mentioned here -- the allegation that Rand Paul is a GOP heart-throb endorsed by the Wicked Witch of the North, Palin. Somebody who knows Rand's record, please disabuse me of this </span>gloom -- quick. His Wikipedia article says he's also endorsed by Steve (UGH!!!) Forbes but alleges he's pro-peace and opposes many evils that we do too. Somehow he smells more like a Michael Peroutka than a Ron Paul encore.
I don't expect him to be a clone of his father's -- why it would be fine</span> with me if he went racialist.[img]smileys/smiley2.gif[/img]
Edited by: Nelson3
Your experiences are so similar to mine, GS. Basically, I'm a weird combination of conservative-populist-Deist who believes and practices, so far as my mortal flesh is capable, the old Boy Scout virtues.
Unfortunately, humanity generally craves membership in some kind of herd; the feeling of security in belonging, I guess, which the loner/thinker never enjoys. It always seemed to me that to "belong" it is often necessary to compromise or "double-think"--the capacity to hold two mutually contradictory positions at the same time.
"Let me have men about me that are fat;
Sleek-headed men, and such as sleep o' nights.
Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look;
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."
Re CPAC, I was merely opining that times are radically changing when people get so mad at politicians -- for the right reasons for a change -- that the beltway scum run for the back door out of town meetings.
"Opining" --got it? It is not required that everything I write be considered carved in stone.[img]smileys/smiley14.gif[/img]
Re trying to reason with banal GOP dittoheads, it can be very painful. This past week's dustup happened last Sunday at church. A meek and mild deacon who's one of the few conservatives with a pulse there has a neocon-boosting son. He reports to me on him and leans on me to read the kid's website, but it's so mindlessly Republicanoid I can't stomach it. I think he knows the truth but likeso many people will do anythingto shield kids from reality.
The dad comes up to me to test the waters sometimes -- or maybe to effect a litle casual values clarification?[img]smileys/smiley7.gif[/img] This time he had, what doyou know, something to say about CPAC.
"Wasn't it great?" I say. "Do you believe such a busting-up of business as usual?"
"It was great," he replies, "those folks did a lot about the need to defend the country from its enemies. The only problem was when Ron Paul gets up and starts talking about how we need to bring the troops home" etc etc. etc.</span>
Sometimes ya chill, sometimes ya just throw t all at 'em. Especially (I've learned) with people you know you'll never drive away -- let's face it, we have an ingown need to fight, and socially proper people have buried it so low they get neurotic! So, we had a friendly if passionate whispered shouting match as the ladies said their rosary. OF COURSE he dragged WW2 into it, and of course I pointed out that sacrificing 350,000 prime young ameriKans to save 150,000* gews isn't such good business. He threw in some last word thing and went to robe up.
It's painful to realize how many of the prime people around you have been body-snatched. It's intoxicating to know you can still say whatever you want </span>to people in most situations if you play your cards right. (Quick! Somebody shoot that down!)
*IHR estimate of actual gew casualties circa 1987 -- probably way too high, too.
It takes a certain IQ & level of cerebral flexibility to get from the NeoCON phase to paleoconservative/Constitutionalist. There's some common ground with the NeoCON followers...dislike of "Bacrock Obuma's" big government empowerment, taxation, the attack on traditional American values & the 2nd Amendment. However, that's about where the common ground ends (with the Republicruds). They don't seem to grasp that the "war on terror" is a sham to push Globalist empire building and service to/for the Zionists. If I'm wanting to play nice (with NeoCON friends), I'll keep it on common ground. However, if they push their rhetoric too far (or I'm full of piss & vinegar), I'll do my best to "edu-muh-cate" them a tad (not that I'm any scholar). [img]smileys/smiley2.gif[/img]
Edited by: DixieDestroyer