Berkeley Takes On the Tea Party

Pages: 1 2

In 2009, the University of California at Berkeley established the Center for the Comparative Study of Right-Wing Movements (CCSRWM) “to encourage and nurture comparative scholarship on right-wing movements in the United States, Europe, Asia, Latin America, and other regions of the world over the past hundred years.” They also initiated a Tea Party Working Group to study a movement “espousing fierce antipathy toward American liberalism in the name of ‘tradition American values’ while claiming as well dissatisfaction with the direction of the Republican Party.” In June of 2010, the progressive advocacy group, People for the American Waydonated its “vast and unique” collection of studies on the American Right to the center. A CCSRWM conference — more accurately described as a bash-fest — took place on October 22, 2010. Entitled “Fractures, Alliances, and Mobilizations: Emerging Analyses of the Tea Party Movement,” it included a cast of characters dedicated to one over-riding idea: the Tea Party movement is a seething cauldron of hatred, racism and paranoia, legitimizing the worst elements of right-wing excess.

CCSRWM founder Lawrence Rosenthal, author of “America’s Insurgent Right,” which compares American conservatism since the ’80s to radical right-wing movements in Europe (presumably Fascism and Nazism), opened the conference. He contended much of the Tea Party’s appeal stemmed from the idea that both the elections of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were “deemed illegitimate by much of the right.” That’s a rather curious assertion, considering the only modern election which gained national prominence as being “illegitimate” was the left’s insistence (to this day) that George W. Bush “stole” the presidency in 2000.

Rosenthal also claimed the Tea Party movement did not spring up from the usual sources, i.e. churches, civil movements, or unions, but that it grew “in collaboration with a television network,” that is, Fox News. (If Rosenthal is searching for collaboration between the media and a political movement, perhaps he should study the Journolist scandal, an effort by left-wing media members and political operatives to “coordinate” their talking points during the 2008 election.) Rosenthal concluded his remarks with a theme that was one of the evening’s recurring motifs: the Tea Party movement was energized by a “sense of dispossession–that something that belonged to them, call it America, is being taken away.”

Next up was Rick Perlstein. For Perlstein, the Tea Party arose as a “Yang” backlash to the “Yin” of the ’60s civil rights movement. He contended that the “tree of crazy” (read: conservatism), is “an ever-present aspect of America’s flora.” The Tea Party’s rise is largely attributable to “media devolution” (read: Fox News and talk radio) which occurred as a result of “anxiety about appearing liberal and not understanding the heartland.” A heartland which remains susceptible to “rage, scapegoating, demagoguery and the idea that they are being dispossessed” due to “the psychoanalytic trauma that comes from being dependent on government when being dependent on government is shameful.”

That the same “angry” heartland less than two years earlier helped elect America’s first non-white president and a solid Democrat majority in Congress, is apparently lost on Mr. Perlstein. He seemingly believes that their subsequent rejection of progressivism is based on irrationality–as opposed to their first-hand experience with “hope and change.”

Moderator Jack Citrin then introduced the speakers and read their biographies. The rest of the conference was divided into three panels, followed by question and answer segments. (Q&A was omitted from this column, but can be accessed, along with every detail of the conference, using the hyperlink in the first paragraph.)

Panel One was entitled, “New Forms of Activism on the Right.”

Christopher Parker explained he was working on a theory about the Tea Party that is “not ready for prime time.” Most of Parker’s focus was on Tea Party polling data, which unsurprisingly revealed a movement centered around an “ideology, conformity, and Eurocentrism” that promotes racism, xenophobia, anger, fear and anxiety.

Apparently Mr. Parker’s Tea Party theory is still not ready for prime time. In June 2011, he once again contended that the “more racially resentful you are, the more likely you are to support the Tea Party.”

Ruth Rosen opined that women might be drawn to the Tea Party and its “incoherent” ideology due to the conservative Christian feminism publicized by Sarah Palin, a prophet of the movement. Rosen went on to reiterate much of the evening’s prevailing themes through the lens of feminism, contending that without its grassroot female supporters “the Tea Party would have far less appeal to voters who are frightened by economic insecurity, threats to moral purity and the gradual disappearance of a national white Christian culture.”

Perhaps Ms. Rosen may not have noticed, but such threats have a substantial basis in fact. Economics aside, America now has a culture in which the out-of-wedlock birth rate is now 40 percent nationally and 72 percent among black Americans. And that’s when black babies are carried to term. In New York City, 60 percent of black pregnancies ended in abortion in 2009. The wholesale destruction of the nuclear family is a direct outgrowth of progressive ideology, not conservatism.

Clarence Lo, co-author of “Recent Developments in Marxist Theories of the Capitalist State” saw the Tea party as a “program of economic conservatism that primarily benefits the wealthy, supported by a relatively broad section of the population.” Once again social conservatism equals “opposition to civil rights” and economic conservatism equals “supply side economics.” He views the movement through conflicting hypotheses: it is either “an artificial grassroots movement directly controlled, funded, etc. by elite, national groups,” (he cites the Koch brothers), or a “genuine social movement that is broadly based[.]”

Mr. Lo fails to mention that Democrats have also been well-funded by elite national groups, most notably Wall Street, who contributed more to Democrats than Republicans in 2010, the year this conference took place.

Debra Saunders provided the most enlightening moment of the conference when she opened with a question “How many people here are Tea Party members or supporters?” One or two people reportedly raised their hands. Saunders, ostensibly a conservative, contended that the Tea Party is “talked about in a condescending way.” Yet she also described Tea Partiers as “unsophisticated,” reiterating the tiresome elitist meme that many ordinary Americans are stupid.

Dave Weigel, contended the Tea Party has a “closed-loop silo of information about why things are the way they are,” much of which is “inchoate anger,” adding that they “haven’t quite figured out how government works, but they’re for whatever side is loudest.” He also blamed a lack of trust in the media for the success of conservatism in general. Ironically, Weigel was fired as the Washington Post’s conservative blogger “after leaked online emails showed him disparaging some Republicans and commentators in highly personal terms.” So much for cultivating trust in the media.

Panel Two was entitled, “The Tea Party and the Right.”

Marty Cohen contended that the Tea Party is the third wave of conservatives to enter the Republican party since the ’70s, noting they resemble “first wave of the Religious Right” and are driven in part by the idea that “the country is going in the wrong direction morally” which “arises out of a reaction to threats to various forms of status.” He then cited the “racial status posed by an African American president, ethnic status posed by a majority-minority future, and economic status fueled by the current crisis.”

Pages: 1 2

  • Larry

    Conservative is an essentially reactionary mindset, in that conservatives don't set out to change things that aren't broken, but rather act when it becomes obvious that things are about to go down the toilet.

    In the light of this an increasingly strong conservative movement is a clear reaction to an increasingly radical and out of touch left.

    • Halsey59

      When the pendulum swings wide one way, it always comes back just as far the other way…they sure are swinging way out there

      • intrcptr2

        Actully, it doesn't.

        US history quite clearly follows a trajectory of concentration of power at the center. Yes, this is both a Dem and GOP dynamic, ALL the politicians in Federal office like having it and getting more of it.
        But the last two years have seen a breathtaking power grab, at the very same moment that the Federal government is avoiding its real duties; border security, international security, trade imbalances, economic regulation(As opposed to economic lunacy), election integrity.

  • Halsey59

    Your papers pleeece! Ver are you going?

    • intrcptr2

      Um, yeah, it was Napolitano's TSA which began shoving heir hands down people's pants. You really think the Tea Party is going in that same direction?

      And anyway, why does the PATRIOT Act still exist, wasn't The One going to trash it, along with his super-majority Congress?

    • quark1912

      Sorry man, I smoke a pipe.

    • astra

      "To vote for that nikker in 2012"
      "Carry on"

  • PatriotX

    You can call it left, right, center or call the Tea Party anything that you want, the problems that exist in this country today existed long before the Tea Party was even an idea or a name. This slowly eroding of values, morals and our society started happening before Obama was twinkle in his mama’s eye, although his current policies aren’t helping any. Calling the Tea Party a bunch of extremists or terrorists is wrong. It’s just as wrong as generalizing that all blacks are gangstas, drug pushers or generalizing that all white southerners are ignorant bigots. My question is, for the people that are going out of their way to criminalize the Tea Party, Who do they pose such a threat to you?

    • palidin911

      The Tea Party poses a threat to the Marxist ideology they have been trying to foist on America for the last 50 years.

  • StephenD

    "…a conference in which America’s self-purported champions of tolerance and diversity managed to make sweeping generalizations about an entire political movement, virtually every one of which came down on the negative side of the ledger. In the real world, that’s called “prejudice.”"
    This perfectly sums up the far left.
    Apart from their becoming irrelevant, we should expect more frequent and increased vitriolic noise being made as the TEA PARTY naturally gains and they decrease. It's like watching the Wicked Witch being melted…with all of her "beautiful wickedness."

  • tagalog

    These are the selfsame people who think that the Patriot Act threatens American freedoms. Right. Got it.

    "Big Brother is watching you."

    This left-wing monitoring of right-wing activities, I suppose, is legitimate and passes constitutional muster, but I can't help thinking that it's a classic example (or series of examples) of the psychological process of projection.

    • Jim_C

      "This left-wing monitoring of right-wing activities, I suppose, is legitimate and passes constitutional muster, but I can't help thinking that it's a classic example (or series of examples) of the psychological process of projection."

      You might be right–but isn't that EXACTLY what David Horowitz does? "Discover the Networks?" most of his books?

      • tagalog

        Yes, and what David Horowitz does with the "Discover the Networks" passes constitutional muster too. I doubt, however, from what I've read and seen, that he's engaging in projection. Perhaps you can show me I'm wrong and that it's exactly the same thing.

        Undoubtedly Horowitz is using some form of psychological compensation to deal with his leftist past, but I don't think it could rightly be called projection. Although it IS true that Horowitz advocates the right using the same tactics the left uses. But that's not projection. Projection is accusing someone of wrongdoing for doing what you do. In one, A precedes B; in the other, B precedes A.

        The fact that I like one endeavor while I dislike the other is inconsequential.

        • Jim_C

          Actually for David H I like your "compensation" theory better. Maybe people engaged in the partisanship industry are all at bottom "projecting;" endless accusations of hypocrisy–the easiest and least important charge one can make against an opponent–flying back and forth.

  • Gamem

    All the Tea Partiers want is that we don't spend money we don't have. The hostile reaction of the left is astonishing and teaches us a lot about the left. They want to spend money we don't have and demonize anyone who gets in the way of their destructive agenda

  • tagalog

    My experience with the left and its attempts to persuade us that it is right is that such attempts involve such things as riots, trashing Starbucks cafes, breaking windows, disrupting traffic, getting tear-gassed, fighting with the police, and so on.

    My experience with the tea party is admittedly limited (observing two tea party demonstrations) and my observations of them is that they make speeches about patriotism and not abusing representative government, that they have on one occasion insisted on elected leaders who claim to believe what they believe not compromising on that vision of things, and that at demonstrations, they are well-behaved, remain within the bounds of the area licensed to them, and even clean up after themselves.

    So who are the dangerous subversives again?

  • Bill

    Set reality aside for a moment, and imagine that our governmental functions in Washington DC are run by people (or entities, such as computers) whom we don't know, can't see, and of whose political bent and racial makeup we have no knowledge. In other wrods, we have no idea who they are or what they stand for.

    Now, imagine that these Unknowns have done exactly what Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid did, increasing the national debt, worsening the economy, losing jobs, ignoring the will of the people, passing a budget-busting health care system, etc., etc., etc.

    It is my contention that not only the "Right," but the "Left" (even Hollywood!) would be reacting negatively to this Unknown Government. And how would they react?: Their movement, which would cover the spectrum of Americans, would look a lot like what the Tea Party Movement looks like right now.

    If Barack Obama weren't a "symbol," of the left's hate for America, in other words, and was an absolute unknown entity, his policies in general wouldn't be supported by the Left … or the Right.

    • tagalog

      If your scenario were truly the case, the left-wing tea party you describe would be characterized as a widespread, spontaneous, grass-roots upheaval of virtuous and democratically-minded souls determined to hold on to their freedoms.

    • Jim_C

      "If Barack Obama weren't a "symbol," of the left's hate for America"

      What the hell does that mean?

      "his policies in general wouldn't be supported by the Left … or the Right."

      They aren't. read any "leftist" site on Obama. They basically think he's a Republican. Of course, Republicans think he's Pol Pot. So if the Left thinks he's too Right, and the Right thinks he's too Left–what do you suppose you've got?

      • Indioviejo

        We have a timid Marxist.

        • Toa

          A timid Marxist, and members of a balance of powers in America which haven't seen fit to cater to his every arrogant whim.

  • Brujo Blanco

    The left has identified the Tea Party as being violent and racist. No real examples of TP violence have been presented. However, the left has been using identifiable union thugs to beat TP personnel and call black TP members the N word. In fact one TP his finger bit off. My fear is that the left may react to their own rhetoric like Hirler’s Nazis.

  • Cuban Refugee

    If the leftists at Berkeley were not so wedded to their collective ego, they would come to realize that the issues the Tea Party promotes are what every American should also desire: to respect the Constitution that has served us well since our nation's founding; to secure the border; to defund and repeal Obamacare; to ban earmarks and the raiding of the Social Security fund; to return unspent "stimulus" funds to the taxpayer, and many other fiscally responsible issues. At the Tea Party meetings, there are blacks, Latinos, and people of every political stripe and color. The reason the patriotic movement has become an incendiary talking point for the left by decree from the Oval Office is that it speaks truth to power, and its members are not susceptible to the daily brainwashing barrage from the central office and its compliant media.

    • angel


      The Left's agenda has been handed down to them by the Party. The campaign is to attack and demonize the Tea Party or any other group/individual they perceive as a political threat. The logic of your message is irrelevant because it does not serve the desired purpose. Logic and reason is not truly the stock and trade of the Left despite their elitism and so-called moral superiority that they delude themselves to think they have.

      What we have is a war for the hearts and minds of the voters, they hope to demonize and make the Tea Party the cause of the bad economy, Irene, unemployment and maybe the common cold. They don't care how ridiculous or outrageous it is. They hope to strike a nerve with at least some of the American people and whatever stick they'll take. The second thing they hope to do is distract from the real issues. Keep everyone looking the other way. This are old tactics that have served them well in the past. Unfortunately for them, I don't think is going to work this time.

  • Spider

    The profilgate spending is the key to what the AMERICAN LEFT wants and needs. (and some republicans) This because unlimited spending means unlimited power – which is their true goal. This will in turn lead to unlimited corruption because of their ability to stear the cash anywhere they want. (Does the stimulus bill ring a bell ?) The Tea Party is a threat to this goal therefore war has been declared on them.

  • sedoanman

    The Leftist view of the world is a result of their distorted, irrational perception of reality. It is the fascination and obsession with death and communism that are the prime movers of their dementia.

  • Spider

    One thing you can usually count on from these Berkley LEFTISTS is that if they accuse some other group of doing something it usually means they are engaged in that something. i.e race baiting – media manipulation – mob violence – slanderous rhetoric – using minorities for political pawns – indoctrination of youg people etc.. This is the Orwellian way of these self diluded hypocrits…

    • Jim

      You are right. What they accuse others of wanting is called projection.

  • Stephen_Brady

    Here I am, Marxist scum. Start monitoring!

    Good posts, Spider …

  • Jim_C

    You know, I remember this very site back when the Iraq War was proposed. People like me who were opposed to it were routinely called "traitor," and worse. It was basically sport for people, here.

    Now that it's suddenly fashionable for conservatives to admit the Iraq War was a bad idea–after all the blood and treasure we spent in that misguided reaction to 9/11–you wonder why this happens at Berkeley?

    • tagalog

      Berkeley has always been, since at least the days of Mario Savio, a dependable, thoughtless, knee-jerk leftist reactionary bastion that routinely displays a Stalinist attitude toward its own leftism.

      At first the Iraq War seemed to have some good underpinnings: getting rid of a tyrant, going to bat for the U.N. and its resolutions, etc. Then as time went by, and most particularly after Barack Obama said we'd be getting out in 2011 or 2012, whatever time it was, the war in Iraq lost its force and our leaders were just getting people killed in some sort of lame-duck exercise that seems to be totally unnecessary. I always thought, since our forces swung into Baghdad, that turning the administration of the peace over to the U.N. (which they said they wanted) would have been the best thing to do.

      • Fritz Becker

        There's an idea, hand over a country to the inept and corrupt Eurocrats of the U.N, first the Islamo Facists would drive them out, take over, and we have had another Somalia or Afghanistan style terrorist base to deal with.

        • tagalog

          Why would a U.N. failure to keep the peace in Iraq necessarily result in Iraq becoming a terrorist base? I mean, come on, isn't the leftie world convinced that Iraq was filled with kite-flying pacificists living under the peaceful rule of Saddam Hussein before the coalition (oh, excuse me, the UNITED STATES, jeez, get it right, willya?) invaded?

    • Indioviejo

      I supported the Iraqi war but opposed the Neocon notion of instituting democracy and nation building. I believe in kicking our enemy's ass, mercilessly. Purely punitive. We make our point less expensively.

      • jasonz

        i completly agree. they can live how they want. they attack us, we kick the crap out of them and take their stuff…no more rebuilding our enemies infrastructure

    • jasonz

      what treasure? the problem is that it was not a bad idea, just badly executed. obl was getting supplies and funds from the the militants are still getting. the problem is our tactics. we went in thinking they wanted American freedom, when in fact the middle east is just wanting a different kind of opression. liberals were wrong on everything about the war, and its even further shown in their reaction. Berkly is nothing more than a school for contraryans, spoiled children, limo libs and echochamber intellectiuals. its the mental equivalent of inbreeding

    • Maxie

      The Iraq "war" turned into "Nation Building" as is the case now in Afghanistan. Our military was turned into doing social work in bad neighborhoods under suicidal rules of engagement. That's why it's "suddenly fashionable" to oppose what's going on. The scum politico's who get our troops killed and maimed in this way are contemptible. We sent our best people to their death's with their hands tied behind their backs. It's not war it's involuntary mass suicide and it infuriates me. Not in my name.

    • Viiit

      Actually the Iraq war was a good idea. Especially removing the Iraqi Hussein.
      The war was executed amazingly well and enhanced Americas image in the world.
      It was the idiotic occupation that ruined the whole thing.
      It was G.W.Bush naive idea that he can create a free-market democracy in an Arab Muslim land that got us into the trouble.
      He should have done the normal thing. Remove the Hussein, and replace him with a new dictator. Keep the army after removing a few leaders, same with police, and the Baath party.
      A more radical alternative would have been to divide Iraq into 3 parts. Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite. Kurdistan would have become America's most reliable ally next to Israel.

      So it was Bushes idealism and believe in democracy for all, that got us into the trouble.
      Democracy is incompatible with Islamic Arabs.

  • keoke888

    Another similarity is that the left and right share an obsession with morality and are convinced the governments job to enforce their version of it, domestically and in foreign interventions.

    • Jim_C

      I would also add a fixation on the other side's "motivation." Who cares? What's the policy, will it work?

  • Moshe Pupick

    F., 09/02/11 common era

    As an Alumnus of U.C. Berkeley, I well remember the mid- 1960's campus: Lots of guys wearing blue denim pants and work shirts, some with red bandanas around their heads. Women without makeup and lots of body hair who wore granny dresses and often peace buttons. . .
    They were mostly a bunch of spoiled brats, phoney to the core. Their kids seem to be even worse. "Diversity" is touted as an inherently good thing– except when it comes to diversity of viewpoints. I believe that I read somewhere that the words "diversity,"
    "sensitivity training," and "multicultural" are derived from Communist mind control methodology. Stalin would plotz.

    • keoke888

      Their kids are what happens when "enlightened revolutionaries" and 'goddesses" breed: a great chance to examine the heritability of Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

  • Bert

    For me, as an America Jew, it is especially sinister that so many of these enemies of society at Berkeley are themselves of Jewish origin (as opposed to being normal Jews.) We Jews have always been cursed by our fringe lunatics from ancient times when some Jewish leaders tried to get rid of Moses so they could seize power for themselves. We should also recall that mass-murderer Joseph Stalin had his enthusiastic Jewish storm troopers who volunteered to help destroy Judaism in Russia. Today we have the Jewish fifth column in both Israel and America that is committed to infiltration of the society to destroy both Israel and America. The shame of it all is that the Jewish establishment itself is too debased to vomit our this trash that postures as some kind of "intellectual elites"..

    • Choi

      and they SELF-HATE themselves yet they KEEP their Jewish names and FLOUT them creating JEW-HATERS,per their agenda.
      They are known as JEWICIDALS.

    • polipath

      Don't fret Bert there are far too many real Jews who make up for the pseudo Jews of whom you speak. It's my (goy) belief that those pseudo (Khazar) "Jews" were the Bolsheviks who were at the heart of the Russian Revolution and carry that revolutionary compulsion even now. When/if I get discouraged I listen to Mark Levin and re-read Horowitz' "The Politics of Bad Faith" and my faith is restored.

    • Jim

      Every religion has such people.

    • Toa

      JOIEs (Jews Only In Ethnicity) tend to act in conniving ways, as did Jacob ("the Supplanter") before God met him in the way and changed him. Satan hates the air breathed by Jews (the only people group in human history which God made a Covenant with as a people group) and Christians, and therefore works overtime at deceiving them.

  • Pat in Colorado

    How can something (in this case the alleged TP racism) be both "unstated" and "vocal"?

    • jasonz

      because liberals need an enemy and a problem in order to remain relevant. without a legit problem they just make one up to impliment their 'solution' which is more control

  • Flowerknife_us

    These "professors" read more like bad writers of fiction novels.

    The real problem here is that the Tea Party types pick up after themselves while the Marxist types claim they are denying someone a good paying Union Job.

  • Texasron

    I heard that California was closing many state parks. You need to look at your state park closings in another light. Rather than just saying that it takes so many millions of dollars to reopen the parks, think this way:
    There is a cost associated for each illegal in the state. So the better question is:
    How many illegals should California deport to pay for the parks to reopen?
    Even your liberal professors might consider this.

  • Choi

    Guess What?
    Senator Joe McCarthy WAS RIGHT about the COMMUNIST LEFT,
    and the "Hollywood Black List"of the 1950's: LOOK at TODAY'S HOLLYWOOD LEFTY FREAKS and their ANTI-AMERICAN works of "art"..

  • polipath

    Since the time of Marx and his fanatic desciple Lenin, the Left has been obsessed with shoving a collectivist, coercive utopian, "heaven on earth" onto an unwilling and wiser world. Marxism has been subsumed by tikkun olam (hence all the Jewish names in the CCSRWM) but it amounts to the same thing: an intolerant, condescending, secular religious movement. Capitalism, the Constitution and individualism are anathema to this utopian collectivist mindset – hence its' fear and loathing of the Tea Party. The Left, impossibly, wants to effectively 'homogenize' the world socially and economically in the belief that such is the way to 'heaven on earth'.

    • Indioviejo

      "The left,impossibly, wants to…" In other words the creation of a New Man, in spite of the eternal failure from all sides. On the other hand, they understand totalitarian power, and the place for the Intellectuals in the new world order. Unfortunately, they may do more damage than their numbers suggest.

      • jasonz

        the left thinks it can have success without failure and keep the imagination without the neccesity. all gain no pain. but it dosenot work…people are not equal. thats why the left is so delusional.

  • jasonz

    notice they didnt have any actual speakers? just a bunch of leftists working through the echo chamber of berkley. apparently we dont "know how govt works" as they think the govt rules us like a big parent. well i agree..i dont want to know how govt works if its like that. if they actually had some good speakers there FROM the TP they would have been screwed as there is very little they could refute logically. thats why colleges are nothing more than giant liberal circlejerks

  • Jim

    Next time the professors write a polemic they should put away their bongs for a couple of weeks.

    The Tea Party represents the will of the people. The accusing professors are the reactionary rear guard defending their privileged Government paid salaries at the expense of the down trodden public.

  • ebonystone

    Mr. Parker … again contended that the “more racially resentful you are, the more likely you are to support the Tea Party.”

    So, according to Mr. Parker, the Tea Party ought to have the support of most blacks, including virtually all the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, several Cabinet members and "czars" and even BHO himself. They're the most "racially resentful" people around.

    • Cuban Refugee

      Excellent point, Ebonystone!

  • Patriot Zombie

    These Berkley "red diaper doper baby's" are living proof that leftist /liberalism is a persistent vegetative state of mind. The Tea Party Movement has caught them off guard and they have become deranged and are coming unhinged.

    The Tea Party movement can be called the New American Awakening . There are four basic values the Tea Party ascribes to : Defending the Constitution, Promoting Capitalism and a Free market economy, Requiring Fiscal Responsibility By Our Government, and Demanding Smaller limited non-intrusive government .

    The two party establishment "politics as usual" game is coming to an end . Say hello to Citizen Government. Topple The Obama Regime in 2012. Let's Restore America.

  • Wally

    I hear Pyongyang is lovely this time of year, why not move there self-hating Marxoid anti-Jews… You're empty clanging cymbals and you've done so much weed your rational faculties have been put onto stun permanently.
    Wally, Auckland NZ

  • Amused

    Ahhh it's all "fluff " ,whether it comes from the right or left .
    For anyone with an attention span of about 25 minutes – get The Hardfacts :

  • Rockman

    ": a symposium dedicated to understanding the Tea Party movement failed to present even a single member of the Tea Party at their meeting."

    Perhaps it's because they could not guarantee the safety of any Tea Party member who showed up…

  • alexander

    Leftists – educated beyond their intelligence and cannot comprehend basic facts………liberalism is a mental disorder.

  • Traveler

    They don't have a clue!