Whatever happened to the TEA party?

The religious right for the past couple of decades have been building up a power base that has been scary. Scary to progressive thinkers of any political stripe really, because their mandate is to stop time. Actually, no it is to reverse time and take us back to the 1950’s, based on a doctrine that basically has not changed since the Middle Ages.

This is not about bashing religion however, as I do believe that having faith and believing in the power of the almighty is a good thing, and humankind needs this. At the core Christianity, Judaism, and the Muslim faith are all pure and good. It is just that when the greedy figure out that they can use religion to control the masses, things go offside.

 

Well what many have feared has raised its ugly head. Not led by the likes of a Billy Graham or Jim Baker type, but by you know who.

The current POTUS has to be the most nonreligious leader that the free world has ever known. Can you imagine if Obama would have behaved like Trump! Impeachment would have already happened. If you think the march by the students or the anti-Trump protests is radical, then think about the gun toting rednecks that would have lined the streets calling for a return to the God loving values that are the basis for American society. (and the TEA party would have been backing them up)

 

What I do not understand is why the Christian right are so afraid of change? They have made their followers think that as society changes, that their religious freedom will be stifled. I respect that they do not believe in things like abortion, legalization of cannabis, climate change, gay marriage and so on. However, no one is forcing them to start believing these things are right, but they seem to want to control the narrative and force their beliefs on others. Forcing anything on others is just not right, unless these actions are hurting others. “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you”.

 

So back to the TEA party. Where are they and where do they stand on the behaviors of the POTUS? I believe it is a hold your nose and be happy that he is pushing forward things that they want. Things that force society to remain unchanged, stifles free thinking and progress, and panders to those who refuse to learn and grow, as life progresses.

Comments

EXPAT Added Mar 30, 2018 - 8:59am
THEY WON!
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 9:42am
But did they really Expat? I think if they look inside themselves and apply the teachings of Jesus, they would realize they are hypocrites. 
Pardero Added Mar 30, 2018 - 9:53am
Stephen Hunter,
The beauty of the Tea Party movement was that it was diffuse and did not rely on leaders, per se. 
I take it that you differentiate the Tea Party movement from the Christian right, in that the former was considered secular. Be aware that the movements have considerable overlap.
One profound difference was that before the Tea Party was infiltrated by Neocons, it was anti-foreign intervention.
Ironically, the Christian right tends to be pro war, though many have misgivings about potential war with a Christian nation such as Russia.
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 9:58am
True Pardero. I just find it odd how they have grown so silent in the last couple of years. Perhaps that is as you suggest because they do not have leaders. 
Tubularsock Added Mar 30, 2018 - 10:44am
Well, there is no surprise here. All “religions” are created as a social control and has nothing to do with anything but control. As Karl wrote, "religion is the opium of the people". It is used to divert them from action!
 
From the earliest times once Kings figured out how to use religion as a tool of fear and control you have the perfect control mix and still, at least for the lame-minded, it works today.
 
The Tea-Party are just disgruntled citizens that were loosely bound together mostly over social issues and were used and then lost focus.
 
If they had stayed American and been the Coffee-Party they would have been still awake today!
Dino Manalis Added Mar 30, 2018 - 10:58am
The Tea Party has metamorphosed, but the Right wing is still out there in various forms.
Even A Broken Clock Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:08am
Stephen, it's my belief that the Tea Party became co-opted by the emergence of Trump. By claiming to hold the positions of the Tea Party, he absorbed much of its energy into his base. Then, as his various peccadillos surfaced, and his positions wavered from the populist roots that he espoused, they already had thrown their lot in with him, and could not separate themselves from the man. Now as we see Donald as the ultimate weather vane, lacking true conviction, maybe there will be some defectors from his supporters. but probably not many.
Dave Volek Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:09am
This sort of reminds of the "Promise Keepers". Another Christian-based social movement that died out. 
Bill H. Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:17am
 
From my observations, people who I knew were self-confessed "Tea Party" supporters became Trump voters.
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:21am
Tubular I agree that what you describe is what happens to religions, however I disagree that this is the reason they are formed. They do become a tool for the power mongers though to control the masses. 
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:23am
Dino the right wing will always be "out there" and I would go even further and declare that right wing tendencies exist is all of us. It is human nature to want to protect oneself, one's family, one's ethnic background, and one's religion.
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:28am
EVEN, this is so true. And I would bet that very few will back peddle, because human nature makes us deny facts IF those facts prove we were wrong. Humility is a wonderful human quality, and is actually a key to true happiness. So many just do not get that! Read any books on becoming a great leader, and at the top of the list is be humble enough to admit you were wrong. 
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:29am
Dave it is funny how history has a way of repeating itself.
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:31am
Yes Bill I also believe that to be true. Unfortunately, the left stuck to their ideals and would not hold their nose and vote for Clinton. 
Katharine Otto Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:34am
Stephen,
You might as well ask what happened to the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, which thrived and died when the police and other authorities cracked down.
 
As I remember it, the Tea Party movement was co-opted early by Sarah Palin, who like a migrating duck, rushed in to lead the pack, even though she had no idea (or was afraid of) what it represented.  A group of congressmen, including Rand Paul, loosely professed to support tea party principles, and in some ways, they still do, such as reducing federal spending.
 
I think the kicker was that early tea party enthusiasts supported income tax revolt, but they became afraid of being targeted by the IRS so backed off.
Thomas Sutrina Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:36am
Steven H., you must be on a parallel plan earth >>Can you imagine if Obama would have behaved like Trump! Impeachment would have already happened.>> Both have a Congress of the same party so impeachment is impossible under these conditions.  Only during Obama's last two years was impeachment even possible.  The GOP lead house could have started impeachment but with a Dem controlled senate nothing would have happened.
 
Steven you also must be on that parallel planet with this >>At the core Christianity, Judaism, and the Muslim faith are all pure and good. >>  ISIS and radical Islam is actually the Islam of Mohammad.  How do you think they conquered so much territory in his life time and the next two generations, and continued for centuries?  Their army had a choice convert to Islam or die and prove it by being a soldier of Islam.
 
We do not have to imagine police assassinations, Antifa given free reign by Democratic Mayors, riots in Democratic citie that burn out private citizens businesses while insufficient size police force watch.  More of your crap >>If you think the march by the students or the anti-Trump protests is radical, then think about the gun toting rednecks that would have lined the streets calling for a return to the God loving values that are the basis for American society.>>   Tea party events actually picked up after themselves.  This is not true for socialist events.  Tea party events didn't destroy property.  Not true for socialist events like those I mentioned above.
 
The answer to this question is very simple >>What I do not understand is why the Christian right are so afraid of change? >> We do not want slavery or Jim Crow or interment camps to return.  All thanks to the Democratic Party.  We are tired of Democrats filing suit against free speech of Christian.  The Supreme Court decision that constructed a wall on religion was written by a card carrying member of the KKK appointed by FDR, you know the one that put japanese in internment camps.
 
You have a funny way of showing >>I respect that they do not believe in things like abortion, legalization of cannabis, climate change, gay marriage and so on. >>  I do not think many people that are not on your side believe you have any respect.
 
And you show your lack of respect in the next sentence.  The media itself says it is bias toward the Democratic party, socialism up to Marxism >>they seem to want to control the narrative and force their beliefs on others.>>
 
The swamp (Democrats, Rino Republicans and Corporate cronies) destroyed the grass roots of the Tea Party with the IRS before the 2012 election.  Since it was a grass roots group the people are still around but an effective organization doesn't exist.
Pardero Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:39am
Stephen Hunter, 
I will go along with EABC and Bill H.'s keen observations. The Tea Party defectors that are drifting away, are realizing that they bought a bill of goods that includes ample foreign intervention. Most will grin and bear it, others will turn against Trump. Some will tag along a bit longer until their revulsion causes them to debark the Trump Train.
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 11:54am
Katherine thanks for your perspective. So I guess they have fizzled out, is what you are saying. 
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 12:02pm
Thomas I truly do respect your right to believe whatever you want. Just don't understand why you appear to disrespect mine, by attacking me personally and trying to put into some kind of bad apples group who are plotting to take away your freedom. 
I think you are the one living in another world. No actually you are just living in the past and are scared shitless about the future. I pity you actually for not being able to live in the NOW.  
Pardero Added Mar 30, 2018 - 12:36pm
Stephen Hunter,
I has missed Katharine Otto's brilliant comment. We should not underestimate the damage that Sarah Palin caused to the Tea Party movement. Her celebrity caused an immediate fracture and hijacking. Thankfully, her idiot followers have mostly become distracted and are watching zombie shows or some such.
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 12:42pm
Pardero, do you really think she caused them damage? On the outside looking in, it appears so, however the supporters of groups like the TEA party do live in a bubble. 
George N Romey Added Mar 30, 2018 - 12:48pm
The religious right lost the culture wars. Trump used them for votes and even at that didn’t do a very convincing job that he was on their side.
 
Given the US is going to blow a hole in the deficit of well more than a trillion this fiscal year I’ve got to wonder we are the Ron Paul supporters?
 
Seems as though the Tea Party is dead.
Thomas Sutrina Added Mar 30, 2018 - 1:40pm
Steven, again trying a tired tactic.  I am not a rino republican.  That agrees with most of what the socialist do. >>Thomas I truly do respect your right to believe whatever you want. Just don't understand why you appear to disrespect mine,>>  I know how to be disrespectful and this wasn't that.   I pointed out gross factual errors.
 
I started out with impeachment that lacks critical thinking.   Democrats have said as much.  I am not talking about Waters, I am talking about getting those that are not spinning for a reason. 
 
 
I continued with historical fact on Islam.   Islam was good before Mohammad fled from his original town.   
 
Next you point to gun toting red necks in protest.  Now I remember shots fired at protest but not by tea party or any I attach to conservatives rednecks.  So please provide examples.
 
Christians are afraid of change you present as an overall encompassing fear.  It is specific.  And socialist have different but similar specific fears.   I can not think of any person that doesn't have specific fears. 
 
Christians obviously reject abortion and other believes of socialist leadership.   The christian foundation of the Declaration of Independence starts with LIFE, LIBERTY, AND PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.  The first two are obvious.  Transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor by regressive income tax is a violation of the third one. 
 
And finally when the media recognized they promote liberal/ socialist ideas over others.  Then your statement is unfounded to ridiculous. 
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 5:24pm
And Thomas I am not a socialist! Language is deceptive, and you make it sound like I am part of some movement or pack by labeling me as a Socialist. Seems that you like to put people and ideas in boxes and say "these people are all like that". Guess it is simpler that way for you to try and make sense of the world. I accept that.
I do not believe in rewarding people who do not work hard. I guess you could call me a Meritocratist if there is such a thing. I also do not believe in allowing human beings to starve and die from diseases either. Provide people with basic healthcare and do not let them starve to death. Is that not a Christian value? 
I respect but not do not agree with any of your points except the one about Muslims being nice people before a certain point in time. You are correct on that one. Muslims were responsible for many scientific discoveries and way ahead of their time, until they become more right wing in their approach. They started to have a conquer mentality and science went out the window. Sound familiar? 
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 5:28pm
Thanks George. 
I thought the conservatives would be more fiscally responsible than to run up the debt like that. 
Tubularsock Added Mar 30, 2018 - 6:08pm
Stephen from a spiritual point of view there is no hierarchy.
 
Spirituality is inside out, religion is outside in. Tubularsock contends that “religion” lost its way with hierarchy which played into the hands of the power structure.
 
Why religions were created may have been to do with an attempt for a higher order of understanding. However that was lost once the real knowledge was formed into a concept of religion.
 
Formalized religion today is just a lie that is still perpetrated onto the masses.
 
As Lao Tzu states, “At the center of your being you have the answer; you know who you are . . .”
 
Cheers.
John Minehan Added Mar 30, 2018 - 6:41pm
Seems like some of the TEA Party made a Faustian bargain with Trump.
 
On the other hand, a lot of people who are Constitutionalists or Libertarians are a LOT more invested in local politics than in National (or even state-level) politics.  
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 7:45pm
Tubular you nailed it! Spiritualism is inside out. My son and I had this conversation earlier about the difference, and I just quoted to him your response. Thank-you! 
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 7:46pm
John, this is interesting. I did not know that. Thanks!
Pardero Added Mar 30, 2018 - 7:49pm
Stephen Hunter,
Maybe I give Palin too much credit but she had a huge fan club. 
Sometimes my job keeps me from getting a full picture.
Palin appeared to be a dizzy opportunistic Neo-con that instantly took nonintervention off the platform. Somewhat concurrently, if I recall, Dick Armey gave a nuanced endorsement. He was establishmebt and arguably a neo-con. 
I recall Hannity having contempt and disdain very early but he did get fully on board the Tea Party movement.
 
I agree with John Minehan. The minor parties are most influential at the state and local level where they can have real impact. Usually they infiltrate the Rs, and we Ron Paul supporters did secure my county for him.
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 8:12pm
Pardero, perhaps we need more minor parties? Just a thought but would evolving to more than 2 parties not better reflect the mosaic of thought which makes up society? 
John Minehan Added Mar 30, 2018 - 9:02pm
"Pardero, perhaps we need more minor parties? Just a thought but would evolving to more than 2 parties not better reflect the mosaic of thought which makes up society?"
 
This is common in NYS, but is less common in other states. 
Pardero Added Mar 30, 2018 - 9:09pm
Stephen Hunter,
Absolutely! 
The trouble is massive amounts of money and the party establishment. I don't see a way out. Celebrity politicians give a glimmer of hope, but I see no sign of lasting movements or parties forming. Always, those millions and billions of dobations are in the way, not to mention a public that can be swayed vy slick ad campaigns. Dave Volek has some ideas, but I don't see it going national. I don't have answers but money is the problem.
Pardero Added Mar 30, 2018 - 9:19pm
I would love to see a multi party system. Unfortunately, we see many European countries come down to 2 real choices, bad and worse, just like the US. 
In the US, the voter is buying a bill of goods. They pick the lesser of evils based on their priorities. In parliamentiary systems, the politicians hash out the bill of goods after the fact.
 
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 9:21pm
Yes perhaps Dave does have something with his concept. There has to be a better way, but yes the money always gets in the way of common sense now doesn't it. 
Thomas Sutrina Added Mar 30, 2018 - 9:42pm
Stephen, >> Seems that you like to put people and ideas in boxes and say "these people are all like that".>>  I am in good company.  Democrats have been using 'class', 'race', 'wealth', 'sex', 'religion', 'DACA', 'citizen vs immigrant', etc.  And yes GOP as a much shorter list that includes 'conservative'.  On Tucker Carl a talking heads seem to thing that Trump should pick a cabinet only based on color of skin in stead of capacity to do the job.  
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 30, 2018 - 10:21pm
Cannot disagree Thomas. It is a common trait that is in all of us. However in my humble opinion this kind of thinking limits our ability to be objective, and consider that what the person is saying may have validity, without coming to the conclusion that he/she is just one of "them". 
Pardero Added Mar 31, 2018 - 1:46am
Stephen Hunter, 
You appear to have an open mind. I always believed that the likes were few, considering the membership, here.
I understand, now, that a person can get boycotted by the purist camps. Then the camps vote for fellow camp mates. Kinda like the cliques in high school. I am always grateful if I get a few likes since I am just a dabbler at this, and a truck driver by trade.
I have alienated both camps. I am my own camp, luckily. I am likely to like articles by those that boycott me, if they seem worthwhile.
You write well and strike me as a reasonable person.
I anticipate many more excellent articles, no matter what your politics.
Flying Junior Added Mar 31, 2018 - 3:00am
The Tea Party was assimilated, as was any other remnant of American conservatism and libertarianism.
 
We have one hope.  Resistance is by no means futile.
 
Bright spot?  My father-in-law and his wife met Sarah Palin's parents in an airport.  My sister-in-law met Sarah in Wasilla.  Maybe what we need is a return to normal conservatives such as GWB.  Just nice people.  Is that over and done with?
 
Trump is not nice people.
Pardero Added Mar 31, 2018 - 3:50am
Patrick J. Buchanan.
Now there's a nice guy!
 
opher goodwin Added Mar 31, 2018 - 10:24am
On a tea break?
Out to lunch?
Locked up in the loony bin?
George N Romey Added Mar 31, 2018 - 10:32am
GWB? Please another stooge for the MIC. He’s worst than Trump. Some of the more evil people in the world are the most soft spoken, example Henry Kissinger.
 
Of the Presidents since WW2 Carter was probably the most ethical. In a way he was 50 years ahead of his time when he warned about our developing addiction to crass consumerism. He was the victim of the Feds decision to crash the economy to halt inflation as well as foreign policy blunders.
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 31, 2018 - 10:57am
Pardero thanks so much for saying that what I write has some validity! Yes like everyone I do get the dopamine rush if someone likes my post, however I do try and keep all that in context. 
I am retiring from the Corporate world on June 30th (after 37 straight years in the workforce) and one of the things I want to do is write more. Your words encourage me- much appreciation for taking the time sir!
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 31, 2018 - 11:04am
And Pardero, I am still trying to figure out what my politics are> :)
I have never been part of any movement, political or otherwise, however I obviously have opinions. 
In my dialogue with Thomas I concluded that maybe I am a Meritocratist- if there is such a thing. And if there isn't maybe I will invent it. 
George N Romey Added Mar 31, 2018 - 11:16am
Stephen you are like most people. In the middle of the road tired of a system that has been overrun by the corporate, financial and political nobility. 
Dave Volek Added Mar 31, 2018 - 11:20am
Steven and Padero
 
Thank you for your plug on my TDG concept.
 
Big money of any kind cannot influence TDG elections. With the electoral units being so small (around 200 people), it would be difficult for the parties or factions organize themselves and proffer candidates to the neighbors that would be credible to the electorate. For example in western democracy, a political party can proffer a candidate who has a lot of personal issues in a 40,000 resident electoral unit. There wouldn't be enough people in the unit to really know this person should not be in government. Because most people will vote for the party banner, which is financed by big money, the parties are judged but not the candidates. In essence, the ineffective candidate rides on the party banner and its money train. But in a 200 person TDG unit, the party would be proffering so many dorks that it would lose general credibility. 
 
This kind of brings in one of my 12 limitations of western democracy: "Political parties are not screening processes." Too many people who shouldn't be there do get in. And people who should be there are discouraged to go there. 
 
The first loyalty of any politician is to the party. And the party is quite forgiving to those who have proven to be able to win elections. The second loyalty is to the society a politician governs. The two loyalties may be close together, but the first loyalty always overrides the second. And the two loyalties may be quite far apart. 
 
 
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 31, 2018 - 11:45am
Thanks for your comment Flying Junior. I agree if people would just talk to one another in a respectful manner, we could solve a lot more things. 
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 31, 2018 - 11:49am
Thanks George I do appreciate(and value) your perspective. 
And who is MIC- sorry could not figure that one out. 
And totally agree on Carter! 
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 31, 2018 - 11:50am
Opher- LOL!! Appreciate the comic relief. :)
George N Romey Added Mar 31, 2018 - 12:00pm
MIC=Military Industrial Complex
Stephen Hunter Added Mar 31, 2018 - 12:02pm
Dave thank-you for this explanation of the TDG- just read it to my son. There is something to this- perhaps you should be targeting millennial's instead of baby boomers. (and maybe you are)
TexasLynn Added Mar 31, 2018 - 11:32pm
As a member of the group in question, I'll chime in...
 
I'm not so sure the "religious right" and the "tea party" are the same thing though I'm sure each shares a subset of some members.  The religious right is more concerned with the culture war and the degradation of western society.  The tea party (per its name) is more concerned about the size, scope, and abuse of big government.
 
We (the religious right) do indeed believe that faith in a higher power is a good and limiting factor on human nature.  It's kind-of what the founding fathers understood as well.  Thus, our (the U.S.) system is based on the ideals of two of the three religions mentioned.  (The third no really supportive of liberty or freedom.)
 
In the last election some of us (tea party and religions right members) supported Donald Trump and some of us didn't.  When the question is raised as to why or why do we still?  The real question being asked is "Why aren't they stupid enough to get pissed off at him and allow us (the left) to win and run things."  The inference is that hypocrisy is at play.
 
This would be a very valid and stinging rebuke if... IF a viable alternative had ever been offered.  It wasn't.  It hasn't.  It probably won't be any time soon.
 
I agree that Donald Trump is nonreligious.  But for those of us who take faith seriously, neither was Obama, or Hillary or just go down the list.  Claiming you are a person of faith (or a fiddler crab) does not make you one.  You will know them by their fruits (actions, deeds, results).
 
You wonder why we're afraid of "change"?  Have you noticed the Christians bankrupted for their beliefs lately?  Do you think such persecution won't get worse and things "progress"? 
 
You respect our beliefs?  Really?  There are people calling for the loss of employment, fines, and even imprisonment of those who do not submit to your list.  Have you spoken against this in any way? 
 
And we're the ones who want to force our beliefs on others?
 
So back to the Tea Party and were we stand on the POTUS.  He is a very flawed man.  He is the worst possible outcome of the last election... EXCEPT for all the other outcomes.  Give us an alternative or give us a break.  Or just keep hoping we're dumb enough to just sit things out and turn things over to the not so deplorable.
 
Your "progression" always seems to be rolling over our throats.  Forgive us our audacity of raising a few objections...
John Minehan Added Apr 1, 2018 - 7:11am
I would add one more detail: The TEA Party was really more The TEA Party/Liberty Movement. 
 
The TEA Party were a lot of members of other Conservative factions (the Religious Right among them) as well as people who were alarmed that someone was seriously considering Keynesian Stimulus in 2008.
 
The Liberty Movement were the "Paulists," Ron Paul's ardent and smart supporters, a group somewhere between a cult of personality and the Framers.
 
It is mostly the Paulists who are trying to remake local government.  They are, in my opinion, one important part of the future of the US.  (The young activists trying to ban magazine-feed semiautomatic rifles, in my opinion, are another important part of that future.)   
Dave Volek Added Apr 1, 2018 - 10:18am
Lyn
 
I agree that Donald Trump is nonreligious.  But for those of us who take faith seriously, neither was Obama, or Hillary or just go down the list.  Claiming you are a person of faith (or a fiddler crab) does not make you one.  You will know them by their fruits (actions, deeds, results).
 
Anyone who gets into politics will find themselves compromising on certain principles for many reasons:
1. It's easy to degrade the decisions of the government when you is in opposition. Once in government, you learn how complex things are. Sometimes the previous government had good reasons for getting things done.
2. Voters want you to say certain so you will vote for them.
3.  Band-aid solutions are necessary to get certain things off your desk.
4. Effective societal change takes at at least a decade. You need to voted back in a  few years.
5. The world is still far from a consultative mindset.
6. You have enemies all over. Even within your own party. 
7. Donors to your campaign are looking for results.
8. 
 
I could go on. But it's folly to assume that somehow we, the unelected, could do a better job than current politicians. 
 
 
George N Romey Added Apr 1, 2018 - 10:57am
As I’ve said before we’ve become such a complex and large country we are impossible to govern. This leads to only the powerful being served because they have the resources to control the process.
Stephen Hunter Added Apr 1, 2018 - 2:26pm
Texas, perhaps I just do not understand the persecution and injustices to Christians that is happening and will get worse. What is being forced on you? How are your rights or free speech being stifled. 
Stephen Hunter Added Apr 1, 2018 - 2:31pm
Thanks John for the clarity around that.  I do like and totally agree with more local influence on the governing of the nation. More people would get involved in politics and take an interest, and as you suggest that is happening with the young ones involved in the Gun violence protests. 
Stephen Hunter Added Apr 1, 2018 - 2:36pm
George it is that CONTROL that worries me. Cause you know what kind of government that leads to. A Dictatorial/Totalitarian regime. My point is that the religious right would like nothing better than to force their beliefs on the general population. 
Stephen Hunter Added Apr 1, 2018 - 2:39pm
So true Dave. I do see that Trump is now starting to blame many things he cannot get done on the liberals/left.  
Benjamin Goldstein Added Apr 1, 2018 - 2:58pm
I think that the Tea Party reemerges if Trump does not start to build the wall soon.
TexasLynn Added Apr 1, 2018 - 7:30pm
SH >> Texas, perhaps I just do not understand the persecution and injustices to Christians that is happening and will get worse.
 
That does seem to be the case.
 
SH >> What is being forced on you?
 
The most obvious are the recent cases where people are forced to choose between participation in homosexual weddings or financial ruin.  (Bakeries, photographers, florists, etc...)
 
There are calls from the left to fire any doctor or nurse who under conscious will not perform or assist in abortion procedures.
 
There are calls from the left to fine and financially ruin any company that "denies" climate change equating it to the tobacco industry.
 
This is exactly what the Romans did to early Christians who would not worship pagan gods or the Emperor.  It all comes back around so that there is nothing new under the sun.
 
You (the world) are gracious and content to let us have our little religion as long as we conform to your gods of progress.  Failing that, there is a price to be paid in ability to make a living and we'll see where it goes from there.
 
If you believe in the same "progress" I've seen espoused over and over again, I expect all of this will be OK from your viewpoint.  All the above is simply justice and forcing those close-minded, bigoted, Christians to conform to reasonable norms of society.
 
I have my expectations... feel free to surprise me.
Pardero Added Apr 1, 2018 - 7:57pm
Stephen Hunter,
I share TexasLynn's concerns about the left forcing their group-think on the right by financially ruining those who resist. Some pay lip service to free speech, while trying to suppress it for
those who dissent.
Those totalitarian tactics do not serve the interests of a free people.
People who take principled stands because of their faith or other convictions should not have to fear for their job or being set upon by a mob, whether in person or by electronic means.
Stephen Hunter Added Apr 1, 2018 - 10:30pm
Pardero and Texas, I think we share the same concern. I feel that the right group think will impose their version of morality on society. Perhaps my fear is unfounded. (just as you feel that left group think will shut down companies who do not comply with Green policies) But let us look at one moral issue for the sake of brevity; cannabis. As long as one is not hurting anyone else why should consuming it be illegal? Why did Sessions say that no good people smoke that stuff? (or something like that) 
Flying Junior Added Apr 2, 2018 - 5:56am
Stephen,
 
I can't abide with mentioning Billy Graham and Jim Bakker in the same sentence.
Flying Junior Added Apr 2, 2018 - 6:04am
The Tea Party was just a bunch of dummies that didn't want the government to interfere with their Medicare.  And they hated the first African-American President.  Don't ever forget that last part.
 
The only thing that bugged me was the appropriation of the Gadsden Flag.  The, "Don't Tread on Me," thing.
 
I considered buying one of those flags and a big, steel flagpole for my front yard just to reaffirm that the American Revolution belongs to each and every one of us, not just to right-wing reactionaries.  If I was lonely and crazy and had too much time on my hands, nothing would please me more than erecting a flag of that design smack-dab in the middle of my front lawn.
 
It would be a refreshing change to go back to 2009.
 
It's only got worse.  Nobody really cares about the Tea Partiers because they really don't have all that much money.
Tamara Wilhite Added Apr 2, 2018 - 11:19am
The Obama IRS still delayed and denied non-profit applications to undermine them in the 2016 election as it did the 2012 election. This hindered their ability to raise money or do much.
Pardero Added Apr 2, 2018 - 11:32am
Stephen Hunter,
Tamara Wilhite's observation should not be underestimated. 
Ron Paul, with his huge base of donors, could not compete with the big money donors. 
The IRS was used as a weapon by the establishment, and played a role in the suppression of the various Tea Party groups.
Many with a Tea Party mindset would be better served by a viable third party than by putting their faith in a politician.
Thomas Sutrina Added Apr 2, 2018 - 11:37am
Stephen H.,  We have the first Amendment freedom of religion and speech.  So any religious group can present their beliefs.  Gays, cannabis users, witches, atheist, tree huggers, climate change supporters, etc.  all have a right to try to convince other of the truth of their beliefs with WORDS.   
 
The difference occurs when force from regulations or laws are put with the words.  Examples were presented by Taxes,  He missed Hobby Lobby and the Little Sisters of the Poor dealing with the regulations of Obama Care that imposed paying for abortions medical care when the establishment clearly stated long before Obama Care there position.  Employees knew their position and had choices of other employers.   
 
The same was true of the photographer or baker.  Other choices were available.  They were not denied in the community what they wanted.   
 
As situation of a national drug store with a particular pharmacist that would not sell the morning after pill.   The store is responsible to insure the companies policy is upheld.   They should fire the pharmacist for not following businesses policy.  Also in a small community where there is one business that could offers a service without excessive travel.  Then the local community should show cause to compel the store to offer a service.    
Thomas Sutrina Added Apr 2, 2018 - 11:50am
Junior here you go again with bigoted proclamations, "The Tea Party was just a bunch of dummies that didn't want the government to interfere with their Medicare.  And they hated the first African-American President.  Don't ever forget that last part."  
 
The Tea Party started to be organized under George. W. Bush and was established.  I agree that since Obama continued the high levels of spending the Tea Party had reason to continue to grow."   I know the media wants to skew the start of the Tea Party to have occurred during Obama by ignoring its smaller size under Bush.  But the critical formation of the Tea Party which is the hardest period of any grass roots group did occur during Bush.  When in appeared to be viable other joined, that occurred during Obama.   The tea party was the result of the wild out of control spending of RINO President Bush.   Part of that spending was the bill that paid for drugs of Medicare.  Normally interference is the reduction of services not the expansion.  The Tea Party thought the cost on the tax payers was not justified.
Thomas Sutrina Added Apr 2, 2018 - 11:57am
Junior I thought that liberals like you said the founders were from a simpler time and we should ignore them.  You know a Living Constitution or as Wilson said a flexible Constitution.   Socialist believe that we are much more knowledgeable and the times are more complex so out experts can make life better for all by changing the Constitution and creating bureaucracies to enact social engineering programs.
 
>>The only thing that bugged me was the appropriation of the Gadsden Flag.  The, "Don't Tread on Me," thing.
 
I considered buying one of those flags and a big, steel flagpole for my front yard just to reaffirm that the American Revolution belongs to each and every one of us, not just to right-wing reactionaries. >>
TexasLynn Added Apr 2, 2018 - 2:57pm
SH >> I think we share the same concern.
 
I hope so... but I'm not completely convinced.
 
SH >> Perhaps my fear is unfounded. (just as you feel that left group think will shut down companies who do not comply with Green policies)
 
Were my examples hypothetical, I would agree... but since I'm seeing real world examples of bankruptcies, I'm going to say my fear is not unfounded.
 
SH >> I feel that the right group think will impose their version of morality on society.
 
Can you share some instance where the right (particularly the religious rights) has bankrupted an individual for not following their doctrine?  Or maybe a prominent conservative advocating for the fining and taxing of individuals/companies for not holding the right beliefs?  I just don't see the equivalence.
 
SH >> But let us look at one moral issue for the sake of brevity; cannabis.
 
Of all the issues you listed... why did you pick the one that has the least to do with morality?  Don't you think it's possible to be against the legal consumption of cannabis from non-religious or right-leaning reasons?
 
I against the legalization of cannabis.  None of the reasons I'm against it have anything to do with my religious perspective.  Granted those of us on the right are more likely to be against it, but that is because of our basic common belief in individual responsibility and that IT DOES indeed hurt people and society.
 
SH >> As long as one is not hurting anyone else why should consuming it be illegal?
 
The same argument could be said of meth, heroine and many more drugs/intoxicants.  The same argument can be said for polygamy, prostitution, or incest.
 
Assuming we bought in to the "not hurting anyone" argument (which we don't); is that the standard?  Is that the only question to be asked?
 
Someone advocating for something you don't like... isn't persecution or imposing.  It's free speech.  You advocating for something I don't like... is the same (free speech).
 
Under your logic, any time I disagree with you I'm pushing religious dogma down your throat and need to shut up.  Granted... that's a common leftist theme; it just also happens to be nonsense.
 
SH >> Why did Sessions say that no good people smoke that stuff? (or something like that)
 
That would be a good question for Sessions.
 
Maybe I can clean it up…
 
“People who smoke that stuff or allow any consumed substance to affect their relationships or their ability to hold a job, contribute to society, or care for their family… are failing morally.  There are way too many of them today.”
 
Better?
TexasLynn Added Apr 2, 2018 - 2:59pm
Tamara, Very good point!  Add that (the IRS as a weapon) to the list of actual persecution the left does in reality and imagines as prevalent on the right.
A. Jones Added Apr 2, 2018 - 7:28pm
My point is that the religious right would like nothing better than to force their beliefs on the general population. 
 
For example, by allowing public schools to post the Ten Commandments in hallways, or perhaps by allowing prayers in public schools, or maybe by expanding the right of parents to home-school their own children.
 
Those are instances of "forcing" beliefs on the general population?
 
Got it.
Stephen Hunter Added Apr 2, 2018 - 8:35pm
Want to thank all for the comments and taking the time to explain your point of view. I truly believe that we are all more alike then perhaps we think. We all just want to live in peace at the end of the day. Yes we get riled up if we think the right or the left or whomever are ganging up to curtail our rights and freedoms to live life as we see fit. I know I resent being called a leftist and thrown into a group who all think the same way. And I need to learn to not say things which rile up in this case those who feel their religious beliefs and freedom are at stake. 
Stephen Hunter Added Apr 2, 2018 - 8:45pm
Texas I would agree that anyone who allows substance abuse to affect their family relationships and ability to provide for their family, is certainly wrong morally. (and probably legally) In the case of cannabis though, there are many successful people who have smoked the stuff for decades, and it has NOT affected the above, at all.  To have a law which says these people are criminals is just not right. Most realize that alcohol is far more addictive and does cause those who abuse it to behave criminally. 
Did you know that 0 people have died from an overdose of cannabis? But thousands die every year from alcohol and tobacco. Makes no sense wold you not agree? 
Stephen Hunter Added Apr 2, 2018 - 8:50pm
Texas and Tamara let us hope that the current IRS under this gov't takes the high road and does not do the same to their political opponents.
Ace Added Apr 2, 2018 - 10:58pm
Mr. Hunter, I think the Religious Right was a phenomenon more accurately associated with Jerry Falwell and those times.  The Tea Party no doubt appealed to the RR but to me it seemed more like a purely middle class, taxpayer, producer movement that was concerned about fiscal lunacy, for one.  Perhaps there was anger over the departure from constitutional government, over-regulation, taxes, and immigration but I'd have to research that to be sure.
 
Mr. Sutrina is right about some substantive matters.  Islam, as well as Judaism, have some pretty virulent core doctrines that are out of place in a decent society.  Islamic supremacism is seen in their hostility to our Constitution or any law that is not shariah law.  Death for apostasy and "blasphemy" is a core doctrine of Islam.  Islam has not one thing to offer mankind.  The Talmud expresses the hope that Jesus is boiling in excrement in hell and encourages exploitation of non-Jews. Some Jews spit on Christians in Israel and conversion to Judaism is not something Jews welcome.  Inclusive and universal it isn't.
 
I take issue too with your view that the RR is somehow resistant to change and wants to jam its views down the throats of enlightened liberals.  Forgive my mild sarcasm but Roe v. Wade was an unadulterated lie, purporting to find a constitutional right to privacy, hence abortion, in the emanations from the penumbra of the Due Process Clause.  Seriously, the Court said that garbage. That was no different from The Great Karnak putting the envelope to his turban and guessing the question written on the paper inside.  The same with homosexual "marriage."  For over two centuries it never occurred to Americans that homosexuals had a right to marry but, voila, a majority of the Supreme Court -- a mere five American dressed in black robes -- announced that homosexual marriage is now legal.  These days if you refuse to bake a cake for two men who are committing themselves to sacramental anal sex and you're in line for a fine of over $100,000.  So . . . it's the RR forcing their opinions on innocent, tolerant enlightened people, is it?
 
People who take exception to this kind of judicial tyranny, this judicial pulling "rights" out of thin air, are not people who object to "change," thereby showing what neanderthals they are that they disagree with enlightened liberal thinkers.  They are people who recognize that representative government is being snatched from their grasp.  They may also be people who are well aware of the judicial tyranny that simply, as Judge Bork put it, ceased to enforce the Interstate Commerce Clause back in the '30s.  This has led to a federal government that is to the original constitutional scheme of 1789 what an aircraft carrier is to that rubber ducky I like to play with in the bath tub.
 
So, in short, the idea that all change is good and that people who resist change are neanderthals is fatuous, progressive nonsense.  My face has changed over the last 40 years and, take it from me, not all change is good!  :-)
 
I was quite curious what your take would be on the disappearance of the TP.  I think it was a momentary flash of anger that put the fear of God in a not a few politicians.  Why, it actually looked like the electoral system could hurt politicians who thought that voters were just rubes!  But, not enough good people got voted in and in the end the weight of entrenched cabals and political professionals overcame people who were mere amateurs and had their own lives to live.  Maybe the election of Trump was a partial resurrection but I think he tapped into something more.
 
But I do think they're still out there.  Trump looked like a good change agent but I'm not sure how he's going to work out.  Why anyone gives a damn about the DACA "dreamers" and why we, AGAIN, have to put up with from 800,000 to 1,500,000 foreigners being allowed to stay is beyond me.  It's NEVER that they LEAVE.  It's ALWAYS American citizens who have to slobber over foreigners who think it suits them better to sneak over our border.
 
Bottom line, however, a lot of people are waking up and the elites have completely demonstrated their hostility to normality, fiscal responsibility, military non-intervention, and immigration. The lies and dissembling they engage in to are more than obvious.  If Trump fails to address this and change things radically, it's going to be hell to pay.
 
Ms. Otto and Pardero, I saw Palin as an immensely positive person.  Compare her to Pocahontas or Pelosi or Boxer and what do you see?  An amazing, personable, articulate, energetic woman who had risen from small town Alaska politics to destroy the Alaska establishme
Stephen Hunter Added Apr 2, 2018 - 11:26pm
Ace thank-you for your comments and pov. You covered many things and while I do not agree with your narrative/interpretation of these events, I do respect your thoughts. 
A couple of things I would like to assress; I think our definition of 'elites' may be different. To me elites are the people making multi-million or billion dollar per year incomes. These people want to keep all the rest of us bickering and fighting so they can continue to get richer. Elites imo are not the people making 200K per year.
The other is change. Change is life. When you cease to change(physically) you are dead. On the mental side, if we do not learn something new every day, keep an open mind and be creative, we are dying mentally. 
 
Flying Junior Added Apr 2, 2018 - 11:35pm
Hi Thomas,
 
I don't know where you got that impression of liberals.  I believe strongly in the principles that shaped our young nation.  Maybe you are simply thinking about opposing interpretations of the Second Amendment?
 
I love learning about everything from the first thoughts of separation from the Crown to the early establishment of our system and traditions of governance.  The Stamp act.  The Boston Tea Party and everything that happened up to the War of 1812.
 
I study Thomas Paine.  I love to read about Benjamin Franklin.  I am a scholar of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia whereupon sat the great General Washington upon a dais.  It is the greatest history to be found of our young nation.  It was fun to know that it took months and years for all of the delegates to arrive in Philadelphia.  They had to cross through rain, snow, muddy wagon tracks.  Arriving by horseback, carriage and wagon.  And when the Convention was eventually convened, it was deathly hot in the wretched hall with no breeze.  Great stuff.  I absolutely love John Adams and Thomas Jefferson.  I have read the Virginia Articles as well as the original Confederation of States which preceded the Constitutional Convention.
 
Great stuff!
 
I first became interested by a simple seventh-grade textbook from circa 1960.  It was such a wonderful resource I used it to lead many history activities for the elderly.  But in 1960 when Eisenhower was leaving office and Kennedy was just getting ready for his inauguration, it didn't seem like such a toxic political climate.  The textbook merely taught the children that there were two prevailing political theories advance in our early government.  The Federalists as represented by Alexander Hamilton and the Democratic Republicans as championed by Thomas Jefferson.  I think the editors were trying to teach the children that political was a healthy thing.
 
Fifty-eight years ago sounds like an awfully long time, doesn't it, Thomas?
Flying Junior Added Apr 2, 2018 - 11:40pm
I think the editors were trying to teach the children that political was a healthy thing.
 
Should read, "I think the editors were trying to teach the children that political discourse was a healthy thing.
Flying Junior Added Apr 3, 2018 - 7:03am
Pardero and Tamara.
 
You both have much research and learning to do before you can be qualified to comment on IRS-classified 527 groups.  Tax-exempt status is not always clearly defined.  My memory tells me that 527s are allowed to advocate for causes and political opinions but are not allowed to maintain their tax-exempt status when the specifically promote one political candidate.
 
There has been more grey area than a murky sea clouded over by storm clouds.  You don't have any idea what you are talking about.  It may be true the IRS under Obama unfairly targeted conservative 527s.  But they were simply trying to enforce federal law as written.  It is just possible that they did not target an equal number of democratic-leaning 527s because there were not quite as many?
 
Both of you eat propaganda for breakfast.  But it's not just you.  It's forty million Americans.
 
I do not claim to have a complete understanding of the federal law controlling these entities.  But ask yourselves. "Just when does a PAC cross the line between tax-exempt status and organizations which exist solely to promote one political candidate?"
 
I do not expect either of you to understand what I am talking about.  Clearly you are letting other media sources do your thinking for you.
 
Research the law.  Decide for yourselves.
Thomas Sutrina Added Apr 3, 2018 - 8:44am
Junior I am talking about modern liberals where the founders were classic liberals. Like all groups there is a distribution of beliefs from the extreme to mild.   Socialism is considered part of modern liberalism.  Karl Marx is a socialist.
George N Romey Added Apr 3, 2018 - 8:59am
People see black and white and often don’t get the full picture. RR ran huge deficits and doubled the debt. He was anything but small government. Obama was a shrill for Wall Street and anything but the “socialist” those on the right painted him to be. JFK started off a “hawk” but became a “dove” once he personally encountered the MIC and surveillance state.
 
There are multiple definitions of socialism other than a state controlled and planned economy.
Ace Added Apr 3, 2018 - 1:07pm
Mr. Romey, all too true about the great RR.  He was also hors de combat on the great issue of immigration.  Clueless might be a better word.  It's true that the deficit increased under him but his supply side approach to the economy did fuel an economic boom.  Too, the deficits were in aid of a military build up which I think reasonable people understood to be necessary at a time after previous neglect and when the Soviets were very, very aggressive.
 
The big picture is that the Constitution has been gutted in favor of massive fedgov and judicial tyranny, with a huge helping of cultural Marxism that has so infected our (and all Western) elites that they are incapable of making meaning distinctions between nations, races, cultures, social groups.  The elites have done all in their power to undermine what is unique about white European culture and to conceal the grisly record of leftist totalitarianism, of which National Socialism is a variant.
 
I think socialism is quite limited in its meaning.  One can retreat from direct state ownership of the means of production and edge into fascism which controls industry indirectly by leaving ownership in the owners but forcing them to operate to serve the ends of the government.  Both have industry serving government purposes but different on the question of direct ownership.
 
One can see also a variant where government achieves its control indirectly by law and regulation relying on exemplary prosecutions and fines to send the message of who's in charge.  No direct ownership of the MoP or intimidation and control of business owners, but still control.  So the spectrum is socialism, fascism, and statism but the reality is not socialism = fascism = statism = socialism.  Word do have meaning and your proposition is no more helpful than someone saying, "It's all relative."  Well, no.  It isn't.  It is possible to make distinctions.
 
Obama may have taken orders from moneyed interests.  (Say it isn't so!!)  And it's true he wasn't a socialist.  He was a communist.  He began his political career in the living room of two communist terrorists and his childhood mentor had been an undercover member of the communist party with a 700-page FBI file.  His closest adviser in the WH was Valerie Jarrett who father, grandfather, and father-in-law were communists and he and she were delighted when they were able to hire Van Jones, the communist, to work in the White House.
Bill H. Added Apr 3, 2018 - 11:15pm
Seems that lately, the ones that are doing all of the flag waving are also the ones who apparently are unconcerned with the Russian influence during the election, or the Trump/Putin bromance.
Wasupwitdat?

Recent Articles by Writers Stephen Hunter follows.