| richardhutnik said: In mass political movements, one can't expect things to be logical at all. People who are powered strongly emotionally to go out and protest, will not be consistent. You see this, for example, in the reactions to Ron Paul. If you follow what Ron Paul speaks on, it is fairly consistent. But, when you went Tea Party, the "Ron Paul Revolution" morphed into something else, where it ends up being said "smaller government" and "freedom" but then there is the whole "War on Terror" which then means that personal liberties get reduced in the name of safety, and smaller government ends up being a lie as you need to bloat government to manage a war economy meant to declare preemptive wars against this nation and that to supposedly "secure peace" in the name of Neoconservatism. Well, in short, it is opposing anything a Democrat does, because they are a Democrat of course. |
Sure, but I'm assuming the list of demands posted on their website was compiled by one person or a small handful of people. Some logical consistency there shouldn't be a Herculean feat, although I suppose it still is when you're wallowing in such abject economic illteracy.
Also, I don't recall there being any "War on Terror" element to the tea parties. There were certainly pro-war conservatives who were affiliated with the tea party, but the movement itself did a good job of narrowing its focus to be solely on fiscal conservatism and economic liberalism.
