Sunday, October 17, 2010

Tea Party - Dedicated to Core Principals - UPDATED

Radical Tea Party Extremists Protest Obamacare

In today's U-T, fellow SLOB and Tea Party leader Sarah Bond has co-authored a piece with Gary Gonsalves, in the opinion section, laying out the case that the Tea Party is a response to the abuses of the political class and that we are a genuinely grass roots movement dedicated to the principals upon which our nation was founded. In the print version of the newspaper is the opposing view from the chair of the Democratic Party of San Diego arguing that the Tea Party is extreme and Republican, using talking points straight from the White House. I recommend reading both articles, so that you understand what we are up against and how to better make our case.

In the rebuttal, Jess Durfee reaches for the tired ploy of painting the Tea Party as extremist on social issues, when in fact, social issues are not in play. Further, the one social issue that does incense the Tea Party movement, lack of immigration law enforcement, is never mentioned. He never really addresses the chief complaint of the Tea Party, out of control government spending. I have no respect for any spokesman for either party, that won't attack that issue, it is THE issue of the day, as all others fade in comparison.


In the comments, W.C. points out that even illegal immigration is not primarily a social issue, "Education, health care, welfare, courts, and prisons aren't free," he correctly points out. I agree, but there is a social component that is important to Tea Party core principals, respect for the rule of law. Further, we have a vested interest under the constitution and customary law and treaty in ensuring that the federal government maintain sovereignty of our borders.


  1. I think illegal immigration is a fiscal issue, not a social issue.

    Education, health care, welfare, courts, and prisons aren't free.

  2. W.C.
    Correct, and thanks. Realized that after I posted; but I was in a bit of a rush.

  3. I've never viewed immigration as a core Tea Party issue. It seems like an import from tired Republican planks and doesn't have a clear link to freedom, the founders or the constitution. In fact all three might be opposed to closed borders.

  4. Shane,
    I used to take that view, but the left is attempting to use the vast influx of illegal immigrants to swell the rolls of the welfare state and expand their voting base. From a purist perspective, one might argue that we should therefor attack the welfare state. But since it is not going to be dismantled any time soon, we should insist on border enforcement as a good faith down payment on a comprehensive solution. See my previous article on the issue.

    If you don't believe me about the left's intentions, look at all the underhanded attempts to include illegals in Obamacare. I am still not sure that illegal immigrants will be kept out of the subsidized exchange programs.

  5. Debating with morons in the comments on that U-T anti-tea party piece.

    Come on over and join in.

  6. I'm sympathetic to Shane's view.

    I'm for free movement of people as long as you don't have a welfare state.

    But once you have a welfare magnet, I don't see how you can have open borders.

  7. TLT: Great post, and one I have linked to.

    W.C. I added a response to the comments section of Durfee's post, reminding him that Democrats like myself were part of the Tea Party movement. :)

  8. W.C. is correct. A few days ago Bdaddy was surprised I encouraged enforcement of employers. But withholding tax and FICA has made them unwilling partners whereby non-compliance is generating fraud and abuse. This is not dissimilare to looking the other way to our welfare magnet. We can't have it both ways.

  9. Just throwing it out there: I don't believe Rick Santelli's rant on the floor of the CME exchange was the tea party ground zero.

    I really do belive it was the Amnesty debate of June '07.

    Regardless of your views on immigration, everyone... everyone realized we were being colluded against in secret by the (R) and (D) party elites/establishment and people across the political spectrum rose up and demanded a stop to it.

    That leaderless passion and activism was the tea party spirit whether or not we realized it at the time.

  10. Dean,

    I agree to some extent. That was a great moment, but it was all on the blogs, not in the streets. I think the Harriet Miers debacle was similar -- GW was determined to ram her down our throats but we stopped him.

    I love adding the dimension of live protests to the blog revolts. I wouldn't give too much credit to Santelli though. Weren't Sarah and Dawn and Leslie getting started before Santelli's rant?

    As for me, I've been going to various protests for years, but none of them have had nearly the numbers or the impact that the tea parties have.

    We are the ones we've been waiting for! Yes we can!

  11. 10 comments? Thanks guys, that may be a record for me. For some reason, immigration always gets the most commentary. Why, because I think there are some disagreements even within our own ranks, but we respect each other enough to discuss them with civility.