A third view of the Tea Party

[yurbud]

Among Democratic pols and on the left, there seems to be two dominant explanations for the Tea Party:

1. It represents real grassroots angst and as such, it could be steered to the benefit of Democrats

2. It is a sock puppet to get the rubes excited about Republican candidates without calling them Republicans too loudly. This seems a lot more likely since those pull the strings and giving the money are the usual suspects who have backed decades of right wing Republican candidates.

There is a problem with that second explanation though--why run primary challengers against perfectly rabid Republicans who probably fell into line with every despicable thing Bush did?

I would submit it is a third explanation, that is a nastier variant of the second:

3. The big money people that have backed conservative candidates for decades were disgusted that the Bushies and Republicans in Congress didn't cross the Rubicon into open fascism, and drop even the pretense of democracy. The Bush people went right up to the edge, and Karl Rove even floated a trial balloon about canceling the 2004 election because of ''terror threats,'' but the Republicans in Congress would not go that far. Some still had a brain and conscience, however withered with disuse they both may have been.

The Tea Party candidates, especially those cast in the Sarah Palin jello mold, do not have the flaw of reflection and self-doubt. When their wealthy patrons tell them to pull the trigger there will be no hesitation, and our democracy will be done.

And even though the represent a demonstrable minority of the population, it's a minority whipped into a frenzy with the media filling their sails from behind.

By contrasts, Democrats in office seem to almost intentional beat the enthusiasm out of their base, so that we wait breathlessly for a crumb like Elizabeth Warren being appointed to run a new consumer investment protection agency.

The tragedy is Democrats could have headed this off by putting a stake in the heart of the Republican Party once and for all, not with any Machiavellian rigging of the system but simply by saying honestly how destructive their ideas are and acting accordingly. Instead, they gave their credibility CPR with talk of bipartisanship and even using many of their pet ideas in the stimulus and health care reform.

I don't know if it's too late for elected Democrats to get their shit together, but their performance during the Bush era and especially once they retook Congress in 2006, earns them a share of the blame if the GOP regains power.

[underpants]

1. It is a media driven diversion like Acorn, Sherrod, WMD, birthers, beheadings, and the tea party

"Empty spectacle" as Frank Rich so accurately described the Bush administration.

The first story out is all that is important.

[Warren Stupidity]

3. Conquest of Iraq not exactly 'empty spectacle'

these clowns are struggling for control of one of the two institutional parties in our system, and they are winning that struggle. Their intentions go way beyond empty.

[Warren Stupidity]

2. (3) works for me.

Big money, e.g. the Koch family, and big assets, for example Fox Noise, have been put into play since the summer of 2008 to create the far right insurgency in the Republican Party. They obviously have intentions that are not met by the normal variety of Republican. They intend to do something at least as spectacularly f'ed up as the Conquest of Iraq.

[yurbud]

4. today's ''normal'' Republican would have been the 80s mental patient

[wiggs]

5. Agree with last two paragraphs. Dems could have been in control rather than

putting out fires and reacting defensively. Haven't understood dem strategy the last 12 years.

There's still time...and I hope the posters that suggest that dem leaders are waiting till last minute to put pedal to metal are right. Issues, past performance, personalities etc are all on the dems side...just needs the will.