tea party

The Great Betrayal of 2012

by Mike Razar

It looks all but certain that another man named John is about to betray  conservative American voters. Last  summer, John Roberts fell for the statesman trap and failed to strike down  Obamacare. Now it appears that John  Boehner is about to follow him into infamy by agreeing to raise taxes in  return for an empty bowl of promised spending cuts.  I hope Mr. Boehner  sees the light, but that now appears remote. He is too intoxicated with dreams  of approval from the liberal establishment.

There  are calls for a third party. That would be a huge gamble, but first all  Congressional Republicans must go on the  record with their votes. Those who vote in line with their promises should be  supported. Those who support the appeasers should be defeated in the next round  of primaries. Those who cave should have tea party challengers by early next  year.

I  have always believed in the integrity of Eric Cantor. Let him lead the  opposition or stand down. Personal loyalty must take second place to the good of  the country. Funny isn’t it that both sides are saying that. Every Republican  must decide on the record. There is no place to hide.

It  is a matter of personal integrity for every Republican representative and  Senator to oppose any tax increase at this time. I don’t care about Grover  Norquist, the man. I disagree with him on most issues. I  do care about not electing people who run on a promise of no tax  increase, only to abandon that pledge days later. Don’t let them fool you by  claiming the “pledge” is a decade or more old. They didn’t renounce the pledge  before Obama won. To renounce it now is an act of craven cowardice and betrayal.  They should just resign.

The  Republican Party has a choice. Embrace Tea party Ideals or face extinction.  There is no room for fence sitters. John Boehner won’t you please come home. But  if not, please go home.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/12/the_great_betrayal_of_2012.html#ixzz2EtqfTtHj

US Secret Service Says No Anti-Obama Rallies Allowed!

by Sher Zieve

Over the weekend I received an email from my local TEA Party Director that Barack Hussein Obama would fly into Carlsbad, NM airport on Wednesday 21 March, in order to “make an appearance at the South Easter NM oilfields.”  However, apparently after hearing that an immediate anti-Obama rally had been planned, Obama and his entourage changed the landing location to Roswell, NM… a city 77 miles from Carlsbad.

Note:  Interesting as, despite the fear and trepidation Obama is trying valiantly to instill into the American people, his own panic seems to be showing.

When the US Secret Service discovered that the enterprising group of our Southeast New Mexico Patriots had, also, switched their plans and would drive to Roswell to engage in peaceful and Constitutionally allowed dissent against the Obama policies of the destruction of the United States of America, the SS began to put their respective feet down.  First, the SS made a strong request that the anti-Obama rally not occur…at all.  When the TEA Party members advised them that they still planned to do so, it was announced that the main road (Earl Cummings Loop) into and out of the Roswell airport would be closed.  In other words, only the planned Obama sycophants, adherents and Adoration Groups will be allowed in…all others no longer have any free speech.

Read more here:


GOP Senators Call on IRS to Explain Tea Party Bullying

by Christopher Santarelli

Twelve GOP Senators have sent a letter to IRS Commissioner Douglas Schulman demanding answers to concerns that the agency may be targeting the Kentucky 9/12 Project specifically, in addition to other conservative-leaning groups.

“It is critical that the public have confidence that federal tax compliance efforts are pursued in a fair, even-handed, and transparent manner – without regard to politics of any kind,” wrote the Senators.

They continued, “It is imperative that organizations applying for tax-exempt status are able to rely on a consistent and foreseeable review structure from the IRS. Any significant changes to the IRS review process should be implemented only after appropriate notice and opportunity for comment from the public and affected parties.”

The move was pushed by Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch and Ohio Sen. Rob Portman, joined by Senators Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), John Cornyn (Texas), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), John Thune (R-S.D.), and Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

The Blaze reported in February that the Kentucky 9/12 group filed for non-profit status back in December of 2010. They finally heard back from the IRS on Valentines Day of this year. (A mere 14 months after they sent in an initial request.) Their return message was not in regards to any issues or concerns brought up in there original application, rather a letter requesting detailed documentation to answer 30 questions with sub-bullets (88 total separate inquiries) and only a two-week period to comply.

Read more here:


Tea Party Crashes Washington Orgy

by Kevin Jackson

For Obama, the Tea Party fits in Washington like nuns at a swingers’ convention.  The fiscal orgy at Club Fed just can’t continue unless the Tea Party gets the hell out.  Unfortunately for Obama, we just won’t leave.  How could we?  We can’t afford to refuel our corporate jets.

So in order to give the Tea Party the “change we need,” Obama is pulling out all the stops.  He continues his War on Productivity against the “rich.”  Like the preacher said to the congregation, “I have good news and bad news.  The good news is we have the money for the new building.  The bad news is it’s out there in your pockets.”

When Obama can’t just get taxpayers to hand over their booty at knifepoint, he threatens to “Katrina” America and unleash Mother Nature on us.  His timing was impeccable, as he delivered his Mother Nature threat in the wake of the worse tornado season in decades — let no crisis go to waste!

But somebody must have whispered in Obama’s ear that on people’s list of concerns, more tornadoes a hundred years from now can’t measure up to the need to eat every day until then.

This prompted Obama to threaten our food, as not allowing Obama to create more debt might force him to cut the FDA.  How horrible a death would it be to die from E. coli?

Has this guy ever experienced cuisine in Mexico, where merely handling a mango can get you Montezuma’s revenge?  You’d think that being African, Obama realizes that the bugs you can get in the Motherland from eating the wrong foods make salmonella feel like slight indigestion.

We weren’t fooled.  So when the food scare didn’t work, Obama pulled the entitlement card out.   Obama tried to mug old people — gank them like a purse-snatching, wallet-lifting thief in the street — by suggesting that they wouldn’t receive their Social Security checks.

However, even the old “old people will lose their benefits” trick didn’t persuade conservatives to allow Obama to pick their pocket, thus victory was delayed for the battle-worn wannabe hero of the left.

Time for yet another escalation within the Democrat Rules of Destruction of America manual, with willing Democrat Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee pulling out her well-worn but now laminated race card.

According to Lee, there exist racists in Congress who do not want to raise the debt ceiling for this president as they have for all “other” presidents.  Lee points out that there is only one glaring difference between this president and all “others.”  I originally guessed that this president is the only idiot we’ve ever elected, but then I was reminded of Jimmy Carter, who presided during the Peanut Era.

Read more here:



Catholic League: Defund NPR

By David A. Patten

An undercover video that captured National Public Radio’s top fundraising executive disparaging Republicans, Christians, evangelicals, tea-party members, gun owners, Jews, and Americans lacking elite educational backgrounds has touched off a strong backlash across the cultural and political spectrum, fueling renewed calls for Congress to yank NPR’s $90 million in annual taxpayer funding.

Conservatives issued new demands for NPR’s defunding, after the secret video emerged that showed Ron Schiller, who was NPR Foundation president and vice president for development of NPR when the video was recorded Feb. 22, making remarks that various groups found to be offensive.

The video came from conservative muckraking activist James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas. O’Keefe is the same activist whose undercover video of ACORN spurred Congress to defund that group.

In the new video, recorded Feb. 22, Schiller is heard telling two men posing as Muslim donors with extremist ties that the Republican Party has been “hijacked” by the grass-roots tea party movement.

Schiller tells them the current GOP is “not just Islamaphobic, but really xenophobic. I mean basically they are, they believe in sort of white, middle-America gun-toting. I mean, it’s scary. They’re seriously racist, racist people.”

The remarks appeared to confirm the worst fears of many conservatives that taxpayer-supported NPR harbors a deep bias against the values of fly-over country Americans.

In his meeting with the two undercover activists trained by O’Keefe, who said they were Muslims looking to distribute $5 million, Schiller traces many of the nation’s problems back to the fact that “the educated, so-called elite of this country is too small a percentage of the population.”

He also states that he perceives Zionist, or pro-Israeli, bias in American newspapers.

“I mean it’s there in those who own newspapers, obviously,” he tells his potential benefactors. “But no one owns NPR.”

Schiller, who was accompanied at the meeting by another high-level NPR fund-raiser, described himself as “very proud” of NPR’s controversial firing of news commentator Juan Williams, despite the fact that NPR CEO Vivian Schiller — no relation to Ron Schiller – apologized for how the Williams matter was handled.

Also in the video, Schiller remarked: “The tea party is fanatically involved in people’s personal lives and very fundamental Christian — I wouldn’t even call it Christian. It’s this weird evangelical kind of move.”

The timing of the video’s emergence could hardly be worse for NPR. It already faces a tea-party-led push to yank its taxpayer funding, in part due to perceived left-wing bias. NPR quickly released a statement Tuesday saying it was “appalled” by Schiller’s statements.

According to NPR, Schiller announced last week that he was leaving the organization to join the Aspen Institute, a seminar and think-tank closer to his Colorado home.

That did not mollify Catholic League president Bill Donohue, who blasted Schiller’s remarks Tuesday and urged that all taxpayer funding of NPR be eliminated.

“This guy, he not only tolerates Jew-baiting, he expresses animus against Christians, he sides with the Muslim Brotherhood… He’s very proud that Juan Williams has been fired, yet at the end of the day, he considers liberals to be better educated and fairer than conservatives. That says it all in my mind,” Donohue told Newsmax.

Regarding Schiller’s suggestion that evangelicals are not to be called Christians, Donohue protested: “He must have thought they were like another species. I mean, I’m Catholic, and I consider evangelicals my brothers.”
In one of the most striking passages in the videotape, Schiller appears to suggest NPR would be better off without taxpayer dollars.

“Frankly, it is very clear in the long run we’d be better off in the long run without federal funding,” Schiller says. “And the challenge right now is if we lost it all together we’d have a lot of stations go dark.”

Schiller nods in agreement during the video as one of his prospective patrons refers to the “radical, racist, Islamaphobic, tea party people.”
Schiller, then replies: “Exactly.”

Donohue told Newsmax that the controversy over the Williams firing, and now the remarks by Schiller, indicate a serious problem with NPR’s corporate culture.

“When patterns develop, when you see it over and over again, and it becomes part of the culture, then clearly you know there is something rotten from the top down,” he said.

Donohue added: “When you’re asking that taxpayers to pay this man’s salary, and any pretense they have of objectivity is totally blown away, that is the end of the story.”

Donohue had plenty of company Tuesday in expressing outrage over the NPR video:

  • Family Research Council President Tony Perkins told Newsmax that while Schiller is free to express his opinion, NPR “facilitates the advancement of that stereotyping and that type of maligning of a large portion of the American public with taxpayer dollars.” He said Americans for years “have said we’re tired of their left-wing agenda that’s being promulgated and being promoted on the taxpayer dime. And that’s what it comes down to.”
  • The video provoked a sharp rebuke from tea party leaders. “Mr. Schiller himself candidly admits in the video that NPR doesn’t need federal funding, and welcomes the opportunity to slant their reporting without the oversight of the taxpayer,” Mark Meckler, national coordinator for Tea Party Patriots, said in a statement. “…Let’s take his advice and pass legislation that would defund the clearly biased news organization that is out of touch with Americans across the country.”
  • Tim Graham, media analyst for the conservative watchdog Media Research Council, told Newsmax: “This is the latest outrage that underlines how desperately this system needs to be removed from taxpayer funding. This system has so much contempt for the middle America taxpayer that pays their lavish salaries, it is time for this to be defunded. It is way past time.”
  • Virginia Republican and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor sent an e-mail to The Daily Caller stating: “As we continue to identify ways to cut spending and save valuable resources, this disturbing video makes clear that taxpayer dollars should no longer be appropriated to NPR.”


Tea Partiers and the Spirit of Giving


By now everyone knows that the dramatic November election was not an endorsement of Republicanism, but rather a rebellion against expansionist government and an attempt to re-establish America’s culture of free enterprise.

The tea party activists behind the wave—and more importantly, the nearly one-third of Americans who classify themselves as “supporters” of the movement, according to Gallup—endure endless abuse from the politicians they have dethroned and the pundits they have challenged. One particular line of attack focuses on their supposed selfishness.

It is common to hear that the popular uprising against the growth of the welfare state, with rising taxes and deficits, is based on a lack of caring toward those who are suffering the most in the current crisis. As soon-to-be ex-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi puts it, the tea party is working “for the rich instead of for the great middle class.” Others have asserted that the backlash against the growth of government is nothing more than an attack on the poor.

Few would disagree that free enterprise is grounded in one’s self-interest. But self-interest is not the same thing as selfishness in the sense of unbounded consumption or disregard for the less fortunate. In fact, the millions of Americans who advocate for private entrepreneurship and limited government—whether they are rich or poor—may be stingy when it comes to giving away other people’s money through state redistribution, but they are surprisingly generous when it comes to giving away their own money privately.

Americans in general are very charitable, by international standards. Study after study shows that we privately give multiples of what our Social Democratic friends in Europe donate, per capita. But not all Americans are equally generous. One characteristic of givers is especially important in the current debate: the opinion that the government should not redistribute income to achieve greater economic equality.

Consider the answer to the question, “Do you believe the government has a responsibility to reduce income differences between rich and poor?” Many surveys have asked this over the years. In 2006, the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) found that Americans were almost equally divided on this question (52% in favor, 48% against). This is in stark contrast to the Europeans. For example, 94% of the Portuguese in the 2006 ISSP survey were in favor of redistribution; only 6% were against.

When it comes to voluntarily spreading their own wealth around, a distinct “charity gap” opens up between Americans who are for and against government income leveling. Your intuition might tell you that people who favor government redistribution care most about the less fortunate and would give more to charity. Initially, this was my own assumption. But the data tell a different story.

The most recent year that a large, nonpartisan survey asked people about both redistributive beliefs and charitable giving was 1996. That year, the General Social Survey (GSS) found that those who were against higher levels of government redistribution privately gave four times as much money, on average, as people who were in favor of redistribution. This is not all church-related giving; they also gave about 3.5 times as much to nonreligious causes. Anti-redistributionists gave more even after correcting for differences in income, age, religion and education.

Of course, there are other ways to give than with money. Here again the results may be different from what you might expect. The GSS in 2002 showed that those who said the government was “spending too much money on welfare” were more likely to donate blood than those who said the government was “spending too little money on welfare.” The anti-redistributionists were also more likely to give someone directions on the street, return change mistakenly handed them by a cashier, and give food (or money) to a homeless person.

So what does all this tell us? Contrary to the liberal stereotype of the hard-hearted right-winger, opposition to income-leveling is not evidence that one does not care about others. Quite the contrary. The millions of Americans who believe in limited government give disproportionately to others. This is in addition to—not instead of—their defense of our free-enterprise system, which gives the most people the most opportunities to earn their own success.

Obviously, not all charity has ideological connotations—nor should it. But for many, especially at this time of year, giving is a cheerful, productive protest vote against the growing state. It is America’s quiet tea party.


The New Infrastructure

by Jim Soviero

On April 4th, 2009 about four hundred people gathered in a park adjacent to Northport Harbor, on Long Island, in New York. The group, some dressed in 18th Century garb, braved miserable, threatening weather to participate in a faux tea dumping ceremony. There were clever signs, and brief speeches. At one point a speaker asked the crowd, “How many of you have never done something like this before?”. Close to 100% of the attendees raised their hands.

Eleven days later there was another “Tea Party”. This one was held along side a packed highway during rush hour. The crowd swelled to about 3,000. There was a common thread joining these people together. They were frustrated by billions of dollars in unending debt, the unchecked growth of government, and a looming, murky, healthcare bill. There was a collective, instinctive sense that disconnected politicians were quickly changing policies in ways that would forever diminish this nation’s greatness and limit opportunities for hard working Americans, their children and grandchildren.

As in the first gathering, “rookie activists” spanned the age spectrum, and were from all walks of life. Perhaps the most surprising demographic was that the two largest subgroups consisted of women and seniors. The latter mentioned probably held the greatest plurality, were quite vocal, and very well informed. Folks chatted and exchanged business cards as they patiently waited upwards of forty five minutes to either register their email address and/or sign a petition reaffirming the Constitution. This scenario was being played out, in hundreds of different locations, all across the country.

Those email and personal contacts created networking that gave birth to a number of organizations focused on halting or reversing the direction of government. These different groups spawned rallies, attended “town halls”, called elected officials, and showed up about one million strong in Washington D.C. on September 12, 2009. The “mainstream media” mocked and misrepresented them, while “ruling class” politicians ignored their pleas. Stimulus, bailouts, then finally a hugely unpopular and basically unintelligible healthcare bill were all forced on an unwilling and increasingly angry public.

The elected elitists simply knew what was best for all, and there was nothing the huddled masses could do about it. Wrong. They badly underestimated the intellect, passion, and resiliency of Tea Party People. Smart candidates running for office against the big government tide began speaking to different conservative memberships, attracting supporters. There were primaries, some ugly, and occasionally people who were selected to run may have been in over their head, but a bunch of newbie volunteers were in the thick of it all. They canvassed door to door, attended fund raisers, sponsored rallies, manned phone banks, placed signs, handed out palm cards, and called elected officials. When it was all over the nation had its second “historical election” in two years. As of this writing, somewhere around 65 House and 6 Senate seats were picked up by Republicans. The GOP gained 680 state legislative seats, booting Democrats from control of 19 state governing bodies. They added 11 governorships. The Grand Old Party hasn’t enjoyed that kind of success in around 80 years.

And here’s the scary part for President Obama and others living, isolated, in their big government bubble. These conservative activists are not going away. They have gained a tremendous amount of real time knowledge working in both successful and unsuccessful political campaigns. That invaluable experience will only serve to make this genuine grass roots force more powerful in the run up to 2012. The irony of it all is that much of what upset the Tea Partiers in the first place was the president and Congress citing a need for rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure as an excuse for their reckless spending. Well they’ve caused the rebuilding of an infrastructure all right, but it’s political in nature. And it’s made up of men and women, teens and seniors, poised, and in place to undo what has been done over the past two tumultuous years.

Nationwide Poll: The Success of GOP Depends on its Loyalty to the Tea Party Agenda

By Kara Pally on Nov 02, 2010

Polling data reveals the “Contract FROM America” will be the most accurate roadmap for a new Republican majority.

Washington, DC — This morning, FreedomWorks released astounding polling data from a recent national survey of 1190 American voters (including 306 self-identified members of the Tea Party) to shed light on the top political and economic issues motivating voters this election cycle. The data gathered by the polling group The Word Doctors highlights what issues matter to the general public, what issues matter to members of the Tea Party movement, and the undeniable overlap between the two.
Contrary to the myths created by the Left to discount the credibility of the tea party movement, polling data reveals that members of the Tea Party movement are more engaged, more likely to vote, more knowledgeable, and more active in the political process than the general American public.
“These [Tea Party] people are your great Americans, who cherish freedom, who take their privilege to vote seriously, and who appreciate what it means to live in a democracy,” commented Frank Luntz, a pollster for The Word Doctors. “Given this new data, the Tea Party is just as viable as the Republican and Democratic Parties. It’s vibrant, it’s sustainable, and it is not going anywhere.”
Of the nearly 90 percent of Tea Partiers who “definitely will vote” on November 2nd, over 80 percent plan to vote Republican. Given these numbers, the success of the GOP will not merely benefit from the Tea Party vote, it will depend on it.
In a point-by-point analysis of the ten policy items addressed in the grassroots-generated “Contract FROM America,” almost every item polled at least 60 percent positive for the general public and nearly 90 percent positive for Tea Partiers. A resounding 31 percent of Tea Party members consider their top policy issue to “repeal and replace the health care reform bill.” 

Back to top

Submit your Feedback