The tea party as a ‘hostile takeover’ of the GOP
Two tea-party promoters, Dick Armey and Matt Kibbe of Freedomworks, offer a “manifesto” for the movement in today’s Wall Street Journal. The bit that’s getting all the attention doesn’t come until the end:
[L]et us be clear about one thing: The tea party movement is not seeking a junior partnership with the Republican Party, but a hostile takeover of it.
The American values of individual freedom, fiscal responsibility and limited government bind the ranks of our movement. That makes the tea party better than a political party. It is a growing community that can sustain itself after November, ensuring a better means of holding a new generation of elected officials accountable.
So, it’s a hostile takeover of a political party, but it’s also better than a political party? I think I know what they are getting at: that they are part of a movement that will try to infiltrate the GOP and change it from within, rather than compete with, or take orders from, it. But it’s a little obtuse, as is the notion of setting out a manifesto for a group that, as they write within said manifesto, is not a top-down organization:
The many branches of the tea party movement have created a virtual marketplace for new ideas, effective innovations and creative tactics. Best practices come from the ground up, around kitchen tables, from Facebook friends, at weekly book clubs, or on Twitter feeds. This is beautiful chaos — or, as the Nobel Prize-winning economist F.A. Hayek put it, “spontaneous order.”
Decentralization, not top-down hierarchy, is the best way to maximize the contributions of people and their personal knowledge. Let the leaders be the activists who have the best knowledge of local personalities and issues. In the real world, this is common sense. In Washington, D.C., this is considered radical.
As I’ve said before, the tea party’s best chances for “sustain[ing] itself after November” lie in changing the way Americans engage with politics and politicians — for changing the framework for debate, not working within the old one. And it needs to be done locally before it can expect to have more than a fleeting impact nationally.
I don’t think Armey and Kibbe are wrong about their description of the tea party to date. But if they are right about its intention to remake the GOP nationally, I think the movement will end up using its energies in ways that don’t fulfill its potential.
P.S. — As a challenge to those who will come on here and disparage tea partiers, try to say something more original and insightful than accusing all or most of them of racism.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
310 comments Add your comment
Grand Forks
August 18th, 2010
10:52 am
Bosch
What’s up girlfriend! Looks like Jay locked you gals out of the closet for the week. Oh boy, am I gonna have fun with you!
Grand Forks
August 18th, 2010
10:53 am
“Fiscal responsibility does not equate to less government spending — as well as socialism does not equate to government spending.”
Bosch has the IQ of a carrot.
Grand Forks
August 18th, 2010
10:54 am
“The role of Tea Party patriots to the Republican Party is a lot like that of the political commissars of the Red Army in World War II”
LOLOL!!!! Gotta love the left wing retards.
Grand Forks
August 18th, 2010
10:57 am
From the front page of this website: Poll: Obama’s ratings at new low
Love it.
Ivan Cohen
August 18th, 2010
11:16 am
To HBD: While following your talking points regarding blacks and their relationship to the Republican party, I was reminded of the “Southern Strategy” employed by Richard Nixon and his administration to out do George Wallce. I was reminded that Clarence Thomas worked at the EEOC during the Reagan years and while he(Thomas) has come a long way to Supreme Court Justice, if one was to research his tenure at EEOC, he probably left it a shell and unable to advocate for anyone. I was reminded that during the Reagan years how “Silent Sam Pierce” his secretary of HUD had no hang ups about dismembering the agency. I was also remind of how Reagan mistook Pierce for mayor in a reception line. That tells me someone else in the Reagan administration selected Pierce for the HUD position and also a telltale sign that Reagan was starting to get senile only his loyalists chose to ignore the signs. The Republican Party is going to have to realize that trotting out Abe Lincoln who has been dead for over a 100 years as some kind of political savior for black folks won’t cut it. Truth be told the late Jack Kemp could run circles around Abe Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation. For every conservative who view Hannity, Limbaugh, et. al. as entertainers, there are others that take what they say as the gospel. Who will enlighten them? I do not listen to either as I am not near a radio when they are on the air, so I have no way of knowing whether they issue disclaimers. For what it’s worth, the late Barry Goldwater had more integrity in his little finger than these Conservatives have in their entire bodies.
RW-(the original)
August 18th, 2010
11:54 am
No wonder Fitz is so anxious to go to retrial
Hillbilly D,
That link also has most of the video of Blago’s statement after the verdict that I was referring to last night.
Linda
August 18th, 2010
1:32 pm
left wing @ 8:24,
Wall St. Journal, 2-6-09, “The Labor Dept.’s official unemployment rate hit 7.6% in Jan…”
USA Today, 2-6-09, Christina Romer said, “…The unemployment rate rose from 7.2% to 7.6%…”
Time.com, 7-14-09, “Back in early Jan, when B.O was still pres.-elect, 2 of his chief economic advisers…predicted that the passage…would keep the unemployment rate below 8%.”
In the actual document described above (Job Impact of the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act, 1-10-09, by Romer & Bernstein), “…even with the large prototypical pkg., the unemployment rate in 2010Q4 (NOW) is predicted to be approx. 7%, which is well below the approx. 8.8% that would result in the absence of a plan.”
George Will, Politifact.com, 7-11-10, “…With the stimulus, they predicted the unemployment rate would peak at just under 8% in ‘09.”
The bill passed 2-11-09 before the unemployment figures came out in Feb.
An unemployment rate of 10% is higher than 8%. What do you not get? I have already commented on the Council of Economic Advisers, 3 professors who have never have been in business. They have a tract record of zero. Unemployment is at least 2 1/2 to 3% higher than their predictions!
We are a free-market, capitalist society. We as a country should support widows, orphans, veterans, etc. but it is unconstitutional to bail out multi-billion corporations. It creates moral hazard by removing consequences & responsibilities to insulate corporations from their risky behavior. It encourages more risky behavior & more bailouts. It will bankrupt our country. It’s highly unfair for politicians to decide what campaign donors to bail out & who to let fail.
If you agree that “corps. & rich people don’t pay taxes,” how will “more heavily” taxing them bring one dime into the treasury?
Southern Harmony
August 25th, 2010
4:08 pm
dick armey is selling abook
Dreaming of Some Other Place | Just Above Sunset
September 13th, 2010
3:56 am
[...] them, but they’re openly and explicitly, in the Wall Street Journal no less, talking about a hostile takeover of the Republican Party – a big change. Cue Madeline Kahn singing I’m [...]
FreemonSandlewould
September 19th, 2010
11:53 pm
In the age of wikipedia what would you expect? A trend towards centralized authority? NO!
….the Great Disintermediation has Begun!