Tag: tea party patriots
‘The End Of The World As We Know It’ — The Tea Party Rallies Against Iran Nuclear Deal

‘The End Of The World As We Know It’ — The Tea Party Rallies Against Iran Nuclear Deal

On a sweltering, Wednesday afternoon on Capitol Hill, the Tea Party Patriots organization assembled a lineup consisting of, among others, two presidential candidates, a former CIA director, and the woman who quit her job as governor of Alaska, to sound the clarion call to Congress, American citizens, and the president: The Iran nuclear deal is very, very bad.

Since the deal is basically a fait accompli — with a cloture-proof Senate minority supporting it — the event was more of a pageant of bombast than of sober address, and the oratory was nothing short of apocalyptic.

The crowd of supporters held signs proclaiming “#JewishLivesMatter;” accusing President Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton of “fulfilling Hitler’s dreams;” calling Republican majority leaders in Congress John Boehner and Mitch McConnell “repugnicant [sic] traitors.”

The headlining acts — Senator Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, and Sarah Palin — were preceded by a parade of speakers who invoked the Biblical rhetoric of the Gospels, skeletons in Obama’s closet like Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and the tired historical comparison of Neville Chamberlain. Obama’s actions, it was said, “bordered on treason.”

Ted Cruz’s reiterated his pledge to “rip to shreds this catastrophic deal,” which he called “the single greatest national security threat facing America.”

“If it goes through,” Cruz warned, “the Obama administration will become quite literally the world’s leading sponsor of radical Islamic terrorism.”

He mourned the demise of “Scoop Jackson” Democrats — among whom he counted John F. Kennedy and Joe Lieberman — who stood firm on defense, he said, not on party lines. “Do you value the safety and security of the United States of America?” he rhetorically asked Senate Democrats. “Or do you value more party loyalty to the Obama White House?”

Cruz concluded by calling the president “lawless” and warning any banks that lifted restrictions on frozen Iranian assets that they would face civil liabilities and a reckoning from the next president “who is not named Barack Obama.”


Despite the hyperbole, Cruz’s speech was a dry and wonkish drone-fest compared to that of Donald Trump, whom Cruz introduced as “my friend.”

The tow-headed mogul took the stage to the soaring chorus of R.E.M’s eschatological Reagan-era ballad “It’s the End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine).” (The notoriously liberal alt-rock act, which disbanded in 2011, has had to deal with conservatives using their music before.)

Trump declared that he need not go into the messy details of the deal, since Cruz and others had covered that, and also since messy details are anathema to Trump — he’s a doer, not a talker. Trump’s speech, as has become expected, was big on bombastic, full-throated, but vague, promises, and low on actual data, tactile proposals, and vocabulary.

“I’ve been doing deals for a long time, lots of wonderful deals, great deals. That’s what I do. Never ever, ever, ever in my life have I seen a transaction so incompetently negotiated as our deal with Iran. And I mean never,” he said.

He swore that, if he were elected, the four American prisoners currently in Iran would be back home “before I ever take office. I guarantee that.” Though he did not explain how he intended to do that, eliding over the details, as is his familiar tactic.

“They will be back before I ever take office — because they know that’s what has to happen. Okay? They know it. And if they don’t know it, I’m telling them right now.”

Inexplicable victories would become the norm under President Trump, he said, in fact: “We will have so much winning when I get elected that you may get bored with winning.”

Finally, Sarah Palin entered, proclaiming, “Let’s bring some sanity to this discussion!”

Though nominally there to protest the deal with Iran, Palin took the opportunity to catalog a host of conservative grievances with Obama, including his use of a selfie stick and his signing off on the recent restoration of the traditional name “Denali” to Alaska’s tallest peak. (Note that when Palin quit her job as Alaska’s governor six years ago, she also referred to the mountain as “Denali.”)

She began with a thinly veiled accusation that the president was guilty of goading violence against police officers: “Since our president won’t say it, since he still hasn’t called off the dogs, we’ll say it. Police officers and first responders all across this great land, we [sic] got your back. We salute you! Thank you, police officers.”

“It’s up to us to tell the enemy: ‘We win, you lose.’ Just like Ronald Reagan would have told them,” she said, alluding to the late Republican president who actually sold weapons to Iran.

“Only in an Orwellian Obama-world full of sprinkly fairy dust, blown from atop his unicorn as he’s peeking through a really pretty pink kaleidoscope would he ever see victory or safety for America or Israel in this treaty,” she declared.

Well said, governor.

Photo: Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump addresses a Tea Party rally against the Iran nuclear deal at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on September 9, 2015. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

In Defense Of Koch Brothers, Tea Party Group Files Ethics Complaint Against ‘Mean-Spirited’ Harry Reid

In Defense Of Koch Brothers, Tea Party Group Files Ethics Complaint Against ‘Mean-Spirited’ Harry Reid

The Tea Party Patriots have had enough of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) crusade against billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch. On Monday, the right-wing group filed a formal ethics complaint against Senator Reid, in which they called the Democrat’s campaign against the Kochs an “abuse of power.”

“It’s been generations since a member of the Senate has abused the power of his office to attack private citizens the way Harry Reid has sought to vilify Charles and David Koch,” said Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin.

As The Hill reports, the Tea Party Patriots claim in their complaint that Reid “misused Senate staff or resources to engage in partisan campaign activity in violation of federal laws and Senate rules.”

The group also accuses Reid of using his “mean-spirited” attacks as a means of “unlawfully and unethically targeting private citizens.”

The complaint comes after months of Reid’s very public criticism of the Koch brothers. Reid has openly called the right-wing businessmen “un-American,” and accused them of “rigging the system” and “trying to buy the country” by “dumping unseemly amounts of money” into politics.

Tea Party Patriots are not the first to slam Reid for his attacks; many critics have noted the senator’s more favorable views of other wealthy donors — like Republican billionaire Sheldon Adelson and Democratic businessmen George Soros and Tom Steyer — who have poured millions into politics. Reid has argued that a donor like Adelson is “not in this for the money,” unlike the Koch brothers, whom he believes use their money to ensure policies that benefit their business interests.

But the Tea Party Patriots are equally inconsistent in their own views. The sudden concern for “targeted private citizens” is a change of pace for the group that has launched its own attacks against “private citizen” Karl Rove, another wealthy Republican donor with a long history of spending in politics.

In fact, the original purpose of the Tea Party Patriots involved attacks on others: Tea Party Patriots was founded to advance the larger Tea Party movement’s battle against “establishment” GOP candidates in elections.

Reid is taking the Tea Party Patriots’ concerns as seriously as the Tea Party Patriots take ethics: not too seriously, to say the least.

“We are shocked — shocked! — that a publicity-seeking, extremist Tea Party group which has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Koch brothers’ secret bank would attempt a frivolous publicity stunt to distract from the Kochs’ efforts to rig the system for billionaires like themselves,” Adam Jentleson, a spokesman for Reid, responded, in a reference to the Tea Party Patriots’ connection to the Koch-backed Freedom Partners. “The shadowy, billionaire Koch brothers are pulling out all the stops to get Senator Reid to stop shining a light on their efforts to buy our democracy, but he will not be silenced.”

AFP Photo/Alex Wong

Want to keep up with the latest on Capitol Hill? Sign up for our daily email newsletter!

5 Reasons It’s Time For The GOP To Dump Sarah Palin And The Tea Party

5 Reasons It’s Time For The GOP To Dump Sarah Palin And The Tea Party

Ted Cruz Sarah Palin

Conservative columnist Matt Lewis seems relieved.

“We may have finally reached a tipping point: Conservatives, it seems, are finally safe to criticize Sarah Palin (without fear of being written out of the movement, that is),” he wrote on Tuesday.

A flurry of criticism from the right has swarmed around the one-time Republican nominee for vice president since she used her platform at the National Rifle Association’s national convention to defend waterboarding and “comically” compare torture to the Christian rite of baptism.

Most Republicans understand that the former governor of Alaska will never run for elected political office again. Her meddling in primaries has cost the party Senate seats and her star seems to be on the wane even among the devoted who made her book about the fictional War on Christmas a bestseller.

Mrs. Palin became the face of the Tea Party in 2009 and personifies the kind of intolerant nonsense and willful graft that the movement is prone to at its worst. Now that it’s safe for Republicans to point out that Palin hurts more than she helps, the party should use this moment to cast aside the grifters who turned their party’s once-savvy rebranding scheme into a clown show that typifies what many Americans hate about the far right.

Here are five reasons it’s time for Palin and the Tea Party to go.

Photo: Ted Cruz via Flickr

The Scam Is On Republican Donors

Tea Party I'll Remember In November

The Tea Party that was pushed by Fox News in 2009 led to the creation of thousands of organizations that took ownership of the brand. Tea Party Nation and Tea Party Patriots were two of the largest.

Last weekend, the suspicion of many appeared to be confirmed: “A Washington Post analysis found that some of the top national Tea Party groups engaged in this year’s midterm elections have put just a tiny fraction of their money directly into boosting the candidates they’ve endorsed,” the Post‘s Matea Gold wrote.

Red State’s Tea Partier-in-Chief Erick Erickson defended his fellow fundraisers, pointing out that “71 percent of the money it spent went to its non-electioneering operations. That looks terrible. But it is not.”

Erickson often pontificates about how much primaries matter. So if he’s happy with where the money is being spent, why are the results in the primaries looking so miserable for his movement?

Photo: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Tea Party Candidates Are Getting Crushed

bevin

Businessman Matt Bevin has a simple case in his Republican primary: He’s polling better against his likely Democratic opponent than Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). Despite this, Bevin is getting crushed by double digits and was caught dissembling about an event he attended supporting cockfighting.

Ex-shock jock Chris McDaniel is being similarly clobbered in his attempt to primary Senator Thad Cochran (R-MS). And the Tea Party hasn’t been able to find a candidate who can beat its least favorite RINO, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-#Benghazi).

Tea Partiers will point to Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rand Paul (R-KY), who both beat establishment Republicans to win seats the GOP would have won anyway. But Cruz worked in the Bush administration and Paul inherited his dad’s movement.

The Tea Party’s chief accomplishment thus far is helping Democrats keep the Senate. This year they’ll be shut out in the primaries before they can do that again.

Photo: Matt Bevin for Senate

Its Outrage Machine Dooms The Party

immigration reduction tea party

If Republicans don’t pass any sort of immigration reform this year, the issue becomes absorbed in presidential politics.

Mitt Romney regretted the self-deportation stand he took to beat Rick Perry. How will the next GOP nominee feel about endorsing mass deportations as the Latino vote becomes even more essential?

Tea Partiers punch above their weight. They know the numbers to call and the buttons to push to scare Republican politicians, especially when it comes to immigration reform.

Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) knows some reform needs to get done and that Latino voters who supported President Obama by 70 percent aren’t going to accept the GOP’s plan to blame the White House for reform’s failure. He also knows that the polls say reform won’t hurt his party at the polls this year and it will likely help in 2016.

The question is whether can he ignore his party’s loudest voices to do it.

Photo: Fibonacci Blue via Flickr

Voters Are Tired Of It

cruzandpalin

The 2014 election was made for Tea Party economics, but each successive election finds the electorate more and more opposed to policies that leave the middle class to fend for itself.

The Washington Post‘s Greg Sargent explains:

The GOP’s stance on many economic issues seems to remain in thrall to the basic Tea Party economic worldview, which holds that a leading problem in American life is excessive downward redistribution of wealth, unfairly penalizing hard work and discouraging investment by job creators while government aid traps people in dependency.

Some national polls show broad disagreement with this basic worldview. Pew found that a majority favors taxing the rich to fund programs for the poor, and a plurality of Americans think government aid to the poor does more good than harm. CBS found that Americans disagree with the idea that unemployment insurance makes you less motivated to look for work by 54-42. In those cases independents sided with the public at large.

Republican economics is Tea Party economics. But the frame of rigidly siding with the rich is a loser for the party, given the way the American people’s views are evolving, which leads us to the real reason the Tea Party is no longer necessary for the GOP…

Screenshot via Senator Ted Cruz YouTube channel

The Establishment Has Won

George W. Bush

The dirty secret of the Tea Party is that it’s always been just another way to label the party’s base, a base embarrassed to identify with the GOP after eight years of George W. Bush.

While some will credit the Tea Party with making the party more insistent on spending cuts and less driven toward war, those claims are ridiculous. Republicans were driven to cut spending after the Contract for America in 1994, and the entire “anti-war” wing of the party is pretty much made up of three elected officials — namely Reps. Justin Amash (R-MI), Walter Jones (R-NC) and Senator Paul. Republicans abided them and opposed intervention in Syria for a simple reason — it was a way to oppose Obama.

Amash and Jones face a primary challenges from the establishment, while the wave of scary Tea Party primary challenges to House members always promised has not materialized.

Tea Partiers may be losing primaries but their extreme policies have been appropriated by Republicans when convenient, and ignored when it’s time to keep the government open.

The Tea Party brand is less popular than the GOP’s. So why should a party that’s united in its agenda to cut taxes, spending and regulation (except for marriage and reproduction) pretend that it’s actually divided?

Unless they’re just trying to make a buck.

How Ugly Racial Ideology Mars CPAC — Year After Year After Year

How Ugly Racial Ideology Mars CPAC — Year After Year After Year

Efforts at “rebranding” the American right have plunged into still another highly embarrassing pothole at the most anticipated conservative event of the year. Almost as soon as the 2014 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) kicked off just outside Washington, D.C., the event became mired in a controversy over white nationalism.

ProEnglish, the white nationalist-led English-only outfit that created serious headaches for the conference back in 2012, has been quietly allowed to return as an official exhibitor at CPAC 2014, which opened on Thursday.

According to the CPAC 2014 website, the ProEnglish booth is number 538, sandwiched between the booth for a movie about the IRS “scandal” and one occupied by Tradition, Family, Property, a right-wing Catholic organization.

The site lists the ProEnglish contact for CPAC as Robert Vandervoort.

Prior to becoming executive director of ProEnglish, Vandervoort was the organizer of the white nationalist group Chicagoland Friends of American Renaissance, while he lived in Illinois. During that period Vandervoort was at the center of much of the white nationalist activity in the region.

While Vandervoort was in charge, Chicagoland Friends of American Renaissance often held joint meetings with the local chapter of the Council of Conservative Citizens. He also made appearances at white nationalist events outside Illinois, for instance participating in the 2009 Preserving Western Civilization Conference.

Vandervoort was hired by the Tanton-founded English-Only group ProEnglish during the autumn of 2011, after the organization lost three other executive directors in less than a year. Shortly after Vandervoort took the job, ProEnglish hired Phil Tignino as the group’s webmaster and social media coordinator. Tignino was the former head of the Washington State University chapter of the white nationalist college group Youth for Western Civilization.

The Vandervoort problem shouldn’t be new to CPAC staff. After the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights raised concerns over Vandervoort’s white nationalist attachments during CPAC 2012, a significant discussion ensued. The Kansas City Star, the Wichita Eagle and Mother Jones were among the publications to take note of these events. American Spectator, a decidedly conservative periodical, weighed in with the comment that “if Vandervoort indeed organized events for an American Renaissance affiliate … he should explicitly and publicly renounce his old associates; that is a crowd that no one should touch with a 10-foot pole.”

Instead of taking that advice, Vandervoort tried to bamboozle the public by claiming, “I have never been a member of any group that has advocated hate or violence.” No one has accused Vandervoort of advocating violence. But the record clearly shows that he not only acted on behalf of American Renaissance, but that he shared its white nationalist views. Which, as American Spectator aptly noted, should not be touched with a 10-foot pole by CPAC, or anyone else.

White nationalism has become a recurring problem for CPAC. On the eve of last year’s conference, the group responsible for organizing CPAC chose to feature the work of a controversial white nationalist professor on its website. The American Conservative Union (ACU) website featured an article by Dr. Robert Weissberg, a retired University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign political science professor with a second career as a white nationalist. Like Vandervoort, Weissberg has been active with the white nationalist group American Renaissance. Inside the hall last year, CPAC’s problem with white nationalism flared at a Tea Party Patriots workshop entitled, “Trump the Race Card.” White nationalists turned the workshop into a pro-segregation apologia for slavery. There was a speaker who had previously advocated the execution of gays and lesbians. There were birther bigots and Islamophobes.

In 2012, white nationalists had officially broken down the gates to CPAC. That year, the conference featured Vandervoort on stage — twice. He was on a panel with Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, and he also moderated a panel entitled “The Failure of Multiculturalism: How the Pursuit of Diversity is Weakening the American Identity.” The other speakers on that panel included Peter Brimelow, editor of the white nationalist website VDARE; Serge Trifkovic, an Islamophobic Serbian expatriate who before becoming the foreign affairs editor at the paleo-conservative magazine Chronicles was a spokesman for the convicted war criminal Biljana Plavsic; ProEnglish board chair Rosalie Porter; and John Derbyshire, once a contributing editor at National Review (until his racism got him fired), who now works with Brimelow at VDARE.

The organizers of CPAC don’t seem to have trouble changing their minds regarding to whom they sell exhibit space. On February 25, after an uproar, CPAC organizers reversed their decision and decided to not allow American Atheists to have an exhibition booth at this year’s event. Will CPAC do the same for a group run by a white nationalist?

Devin Burghart is vice president of the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights. He will be live-tweeting throughout CPAC 2014. You can follow him on Twitter @dburghart