Tea Party should channel frustration into practical action

Dear Editor,

I don't even know why you wrote such a thing implying that the Tea Party may advocate revolution or even have such an agenda. Your bias is showing as to the partisan affiliation also. We represent Nebraskans not republicans. One comment not mentioned by one of spectators said it all. "We don't care if you have an R or D after your name as long as you support and adhere to the constitution." One look at current Nebraska elected officials Party affiliations tells you where a majority of Nebraskans already fall in their political leanings, nothing new going on here. No hidden Republican agenda or secret arm of the GOP. Comments like this are just another attempt to marginalize our citizens concerns grouping us into "possible hate groups" over our political dissent with our elected officials behaviors and deaf ear to the people they represent. Maybe the question ought to be if we looked at your party affiliation would we be surprised whose roster you're on?

We welcome constitutional Democrats but reject socialist/fascist/progressive and communist ideologies, but we don't ask anyone to show us their party affiliation at the door. All concerned citizens are welcome and encouraged to participate in protecting their constitution and saving their country from these type ideologists. Dear democrats, we welcome you too and need you.

Jerie Quinty

Tea Party Patriots SW Neb

You gotta love the teabaggers.

http://gazetteonline.com/breaking-news/2010/07/13/iowa-billboard-compares-obama-...

I think that Bruce was referring to the effective ACTION that Americans For Prosperity has engaged in, not their opposition to revolution.

Awkwardly worded, perhaps, but I don't think it was meant as an attack on the local Tea Party contingent.

Meshedup, you might be interested to know that there is no ONE Tea Party, no hierarchy. It's more of a movement than an organization. Sure, there are some people who are trying their level best to use it for their own political or financial purposes, but the local groups are entirely autonomous.

The Southwest Nebraska Tea Party group (SWNETP) is in the embryonic stages of its organizational efforts; and therefore, the comparison to any long-established political machine appears peculiar. The Nebraska Democratic Caucus enjoys the benefits of a well-organized apparatus--including the financial and political support of public unions, and the advantage of a willing advocacy by major media. To report that few Democrats attended our recent event, which necessarily appealed to individuals who seek to uphold constitutional principles, seems awkward, since the empowered Democrat leadership rarely agrees with those principles but rather asserts powers contrary to those enumerated in the Constitution.

SWNETP does not advocate "revolution." If a revolution exists, it is that promoted, practiced, and propagated by those whose intellectual dishonesty masks their seditious socialist agenda beneath a seemingly innocuous progressivism, which some claim to be liberalism. However there exist fundamental distinctions between classical liberalism and progressivism: the first upholds the power of the individual and the rule of law; while the second upholds the power of government and the rule of men. Our present state is clearly the latter, and thus America is not defined presently by "a type of socialized government," but rather it is become socialized government.

SWNETP does not "claim to be nonpartisan"--we are non-partisan. We only require a respect for those principles of republican government defined in the U.S. Constitution. SWNETP repeatedly emphasizes, both privately and publicly, that the group is open to all Americans who hold concern for the direction in which our nation is moving. Any personal "frustration" demonstrated by SWNETP members, mirrors the collective disapproval shown by millions of American citizens, who witness the "frustration" of their Constitutional rights and the rule of law. Whether "all that frustration can be translated into meaningful political change" depends upon whether Nebraskans are willing to put aside lesser distractions, and take up the duties of a responsible citizenship. Those duties transcend agriculture, sports, and the bi-annual visit to the ballot box to reflexively pull the "R" or "D" lever. SWNETP does not necessarily "follow" other organizations, although we may consider their counsel upon its merits; but rather we lead in our own right. At this point in our development, I think we have set a good example.

I will be glad when we get a Rebublican for a president so the tea party goes away.

So let me ask a question...Is the Tea Party for Democrats or Republicans? If they are for neither, then what do you think you are going to accomplish in the election? It looks like you are just after taking away votes from both sides. What good is that? Isn't it better to find common ground from both sides and help bring people together instead of splitting them further apart?

People who join or support the TEA party movement are "for" any American citizen who upholds the Constitution and the rule of law. Whether that individual is a Republican, Democrat or whatever label, is of no consequence. What matters is the restoration of American government to those sound political principles our founders gave their blood and treasure to secure.

If the Southwest Nebraska TEA Party were "after taking away votes from both sides," then we would establish a separate party. We have emphatically stated our opposition to such course. We are not interested in splitting the vote, as that would be counterproductive. We are directing our efforts towards compelling a return to fiscal sanity and constitutional government. Whether a Democrat or a Republican holds office is not the point; what matters is that elected officials follow the Constitution, as prescribed by their oath of their office.

So theoretically the TEA party is nonpartisan, libertarian or independent? If none, why are they so special and different?

In my opinion the TEA party groups tend towards non-partisan. However, if they must carry some label, then that moniker would entail conservative ideals that follow the constitutional principles of government in general and Tenth Amendment advocacy in particular.

If our allegiance is to no party, but rather to principles, then we are able to support candidates based only upon their merit as faithful constitutionalists, rather than their party affiliation. This makes the various TEA Party networks beholden to no single organization. We seek no favors, but only a practiced consistency in governing principles.

The party establishment knows that we cannot be bought, nor swayed by party loyalty. For that reason they fear our existence (as they typically fear most successful "grass roots" efforts).

The zeitgeist is that a rapidly growing majority of American citizens have had enough of the good-old-boy establishment skullduggery, which has brought us to the brink of social and economic collapse. We are fed up, and are willing to make whatever personal sacrifices to arrest a renegade government and bind it down with the chains of those constitutionally-imposed boundaries the founders knew from experience to be absolutely indispensible to the security of individual liberty.

always amazes me that, the tea party folks being of so little consequence, so many folks exert so much energy to marginalize them.

Hey, db, I'm just trying to understand in plain English so I can make a sound judgment. So Bruce, what party affiliation are you and why?

I have voted in every election: local, state and national, since the age of 18--I am now 50. Until 2008, I was "undeclared," having no party affiliation. However, Senator John McCain's record of trampling the Constitution and his refusal to secure the borders while yet pushing for another amnesty bill, were each in themselves sufficient cause to compel my vote against him in the Nebraska primaries. To do this required my joining the Republican Party.

Unfortunately our primaries occur so late in the process that McCain was already a done deal. Only Governor Sarah Palin's presence gave McCain a marginally acceptable position of respectability over the alternative horror--Marxist candidate, Barack Obama. Of course, Senator McCain fell to his usual standard of incompetence, and for that we now have a Marxist occupying the Executive Office, Socialists in control of the Congress, and the Constitution in the trash can.

That's what I suspected...thanks but no thanks. I don't completely support Pres Obama, however I also don't support ANYONE who calls ANYONE a capitalist or worse. We should be coming together to find common ground and living as one. Not dividing each other even more by calling each other names, chastising, degrading,etc. without sufficient evidence. Unfortunately, what McCain and/or Bush tried...didn't work. It was time for someone else to try. We teach our children compromise in a marriage makes the best of marriages. Why can't we apply that to every day living and government? Think outside the box and better ourselves by working together. Just because you may not like a way to do things doesn't mean it's wrong. If it doesn't work, try something else. But you don't beat each other up over it.

First, you do not compromise core principles, whether in government or in marriage. Adultery is wrong; so there is no compromise. Socialism destroys a country, both economically and demographical; so no compromise there. How many examples of failed socialist experiments do we need across this world before people finally learn the lesson?

Second, well-established government is not something you "experiment" with... and even the founders understood this salient point. We have a written Constitution. It is the supreme law of the Land. It alone sets the parameters of what is allowed and what is not allowed. In fact, we are in this present mess precisely because we have played fast and loose with the original and natural meaning of words in this little game of "compromise" you advocate. Save through the amendment process, the Constitution is not open to endless interpretation beyond its original intent, and then only in the context of the natural meaning of the words as their definition was understood at the time of the composition. Contrary to the popular myth, the Constitution is not a malleable "living" thing--it is no more negotiable than marriage vows are negotiable. How would you like to be party to an agreement that was a "living" contract, open to a constant unilateral revision of its terms?

Third, if you object to my use of the term "Marxist" for Barack Obama, or Socialist for those in Congress who are advancing fascist policy, then you know neither the definition of the word nor the history of its application. Likewise if an individual's performance demonstrates a gross incompetence, malfeasance or perfidy, I am not inclined to reward those derelictions for some imagined value of expedience. I do not mince words. I use the terms that are appropriate to the facts at hand. This constant desire by some individuals to tolerate all manner of divergence from truth for reason of preserving self-esteem is neither honest nor conducive to advancing the good of society and the ascendance of men. Choosing a lesser of evils never improves one's position, it only increases evil, albeit perhaps at a slower pace.

Bruce, i am impressed by your writing. there are those who say i do so because you may appear to be leaning toward the conservative viewpoint. be that as it may, i await their disputing your facts.

Exactly my point db. I'd like to hear Bruce talk about a Republican that he doesn't agree with now. Then, I will base my OPINION on whether or not the Tea Party is really a right wing movement holding up a smoke screen to pull votes.

The Tea Party has shaken up the incumbents of the Republican Party, endorsing many challengers. Bob Bennett is one republican I didn't agree with.

In Texas alone there were many Tea Party endorsements of challengers to the incumbent GOPS that don't tow the tea party principle lines. I am sick of the hill and business as usual. The place is a snake pit. To me it's the same coin with a head and a tail. You can flip it all you want, but it's the same coin.

I would like to see democrats more active in the tea party. There is nothing wrong with a lot of their social veiws. Some of those things are necessary in society to improve the quality of life of it's citizens. Myself I think social programs are better run at the closet level to the problem and most definately not by the Feds! I am not totally against regulation, but not on every front to grow the fed. Minimum interference with free markets and let evil doers pay the piper when the sky falls.

I am so against handouts to those who don't need or deserve it. I am against ENTITLEMENTS for people who can work and FOR benevolence towards the helpless and indigent. I think that being a constitutional conservative is not against democratic social ideas, it actually makes them more effective. I would like to see the state grow and the fed shrink. We should take care of ourselves and our own. There is nothing wrong with looking out for the family and the worker, but do you think either are being looked after by the feds?

I would like to see the end of the dem and rep coin and see a real citizen driven/active political process. The way it was meant to be.

I truely resent that being a constitutionalist alienates me from my own countrymen. It should be the tie that binds us. It use to be our banner of National pride. What could possibly be wrong with that? I wish we could get rid of the entire hill and start over but we can't so I say lets just get back to basics, the constitution as it is written, not twisted.

Mesh,

It's funny how you think the word "teabaggers" is a good term for the tea party activists since there is no "bag" in the term and it's been added by ignorant liberals.

Well, there is no "bag" in the word Democrat either. So, knowing what tea bagging refers to and seeing how that's pretty offensive, I 've got a new label for you...since I'm pretty sure you're a democrat.

How about douche bag? That starts with a "D," so I think that's what I'll start calling you "tea bagger" haters. I think that has a nice ring to it and it's pretty offensive too, just like tea bagger. That's also pretty classy for you being a Gazette employee as well.

Justin,

That was not necessary or helpful.

JQ

I'm sick of being called derrogatory remarks by ignorant liberals who may or may not even know what what tea bagging is. It doesn't matter if they know because I know what it means.

The other sad fact is that this is a Gazette employee making the derrogatory remark and I figured they'd take my comment down anyway as well as his. This was to prove a point that they are allowed freedom to call us anything derrogatory they want while maintaining freedom of speech, but if we were to do it it would be labeled as hate speech, racism, fill in the blank. We see this every day.

This has nothing to do with the movement or this article. This is about lazy ignorance. This is about an employee making derrogatory remarks and cheap shots at readers. Whether they know what they are saying or not is beside the point. If they know what they are saying they are just trash. If they do not understand what they are saying they are just truly ignorant sheep following a bunch of Marxists over the cliff!

Yeah Justin you pretty much nailed me.

http://blog.reidreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/proud-teabagger.png

Just to set the record straight, Meshedup is not a Gazette employee. His/her user name came about because his/her very first comment on our web site was a criticism of former Gazette sports writer, John Mesh - see link:

http://www.mccookgazette.com/story/1472799.html

He/she has continued to let readers think he/she is employed by the Gazette, but that is not true.

Shary Skiles

Publisher - McCook Daily Gazette

Shary never in my wildest dreams did I think that people ever thought I was a member of the Gazette team. I am flattered at the thought and apologize for the confusion.

Thanks for setting us straight Shary. My apologies for the mistake. It doesn't change my resentment for the derogatory remarks. We all know what's being said and why. Just because there's a picture on the internet of some paltry old man holding a button someone probably gave him to make fun of him, doesn't make meshed up' s use of it okay. We all know what it means.

deraogator remarks that members of the tea party wear as a badge? those remarks? I like your style justin, sink to the level of the person making remarks you don't like. You should be in office now, not later through the tea party. Another tea bagger excuse, someone else gave him the badge to wear so everyone can have a laugh, just like the billboard that the northeren iowa tea party put up. Like the comment about there not being one tea party from owen. What a great out.

Bruce Desautels, you speak well, and are worth reading. Thank You. I agree, also, with your meaning, and no-nonsense verbiage.

This country is in a mess, folks. This system of tricking people into barking like a dog, may well be more detrimental than you realize. An AKC, or Pound-Mutt, barking at a car, is still just a 'Barking Dog,' to the folks listening to the 'yapping.'

Please share your opinions, and let everyone make up their own mind. Please do not try to make someone look stupid, by attacking that person. This country needs us to work together, argue, perhaps, but all toward the same end, 'Fixing the Problem,' and in this case, the twisting, and mis-interpretation of the Constitution of the USA. We are spending our country into Bankruptcy, both Mortal, and Spiritual. Ponder, Please.

I'm curious what your opinion is on the amendment creating prohibition and the subsequent repeal of it. I'm all for the constitution and all that it stands for. Personal freedom, the ability to make choices.

Personally I would like conservative policy's if they were more in line with Goldwater politics from days gone by. Sadly though I haven't seen that from either party.

Warrant less wiretapping, among other trampling of Americans liberty continue on under this party as well as the one that instigated it. Yet, we are no more safer now than we were before 9/11. We simply have more government in our lives.

We need to stop the war on drugs. This does more harm to the country than any terrorist sect. This would also allow us to free up resources for the immigration issue were having so much trouble with.

Allowing people to make there own mistakes instead of punishing everyone for crimes with no victims. Then turning those same people against each other lowers the moral fabric of our society. It doesn't make it stronger, it enables the all for me attitude that we need to get away from.

The most ironic is that Democrats and Republicans want the same things. Their ideas on how to get there are different.

I Think all of you need to get a life