Come on! What have we got to lose in this state!
I can just hear the wailing and the gnashing of teeth out there from all of you who find the concept anathema. But, our situation is dire, perhaps as dire as when the founders signed the Declaration of Independence—as dire as when Benjamin Franklin declared:
We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.
I can’t articulate how I’ve come to this conclusion, but Angelo Codevilla’s treatise at Forbe’s magazine last week in which he, through the lens of history, tells us how we came to this place—it’s not Republicans vs. Democrats, it is the Ruling Class (which includes Republicans) against the average American citizen Codevilla dubs the Country Class (a citizen who no longer feels represented by anyone) brought it home to me!
Codevilla comes as close as anyone in saying there is no hope for our situation short of a new political party that welcomes all those who no longer feel represented, who feel that the special interests joined with the political class in Washington and in state capitals (Annapolis!) do not have the best interests at heart of the country class person who is completely disrespected by most of our representatives in government.
He also maintains that the huge percentage now of ‘disrespected’ citizens will cause a kind of bubble to burst at some point if they (we!) continue to be ignored.
I’m not articulate enough to explain all this, but urge you all to read Codevilla, here, at Forbes.
Did you attend the first Tea Party rally in 2009? Remember how hopeful it was! Did you participate at yesterday’s Day of Resistance in defense of the Second Amendment? Did you feel like this is all one big futile effort—the Dems aren’t listening and neither are the Republican establishment elitists. And, you can be sure Martin O’Malley isn’t. Democrat and Republican leaders are too busy wheeling and dealing in their crony capitalism cabal to care about us.
Frankly, I’ve listened for the last four years about how the country class needs to take over the Republican Party from within and I don’t see it happening (admittedly I have no stomach for it myself!). It’s time to try something else. And, I don’t mind being the whipping boy for suggesting it because I have nothing to personally gain or lose by doing so. I don’t need to be popular. Scream and shout! Hate me all you want—it’s time to give the Republican Party some “brutal image”—a revolution!
Here are some closing paragraphs to Codevilla’s latest lesson (emphasis mine):
The common, unifying element of the several country class’ sectors is the ruling class’ insistence, founded on force rather than reason, that their concerns are illegitimate, that they are illegitimate. The ruling class demonizes the country class piece by piece.
[Here he means that whether you are a fiscal conservative, a social conservative, a defender of the second amendment, a libertarian, a believer in the rule of law, we must join forces! The present-day Republican Party is forcing you apart!—ed]
Piece by piece it [country class] cannot defend itself, much less can it set the country on a course of domestic and international peace, freedom and solvency. None of the country class’ politically active elements can, by themselves, hope to achieve any of their goals because they can be sure that the entire ruling class’ resources will be focused on them whenever circumstances seem propitious. In 2012 for example, the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms seemed politically safe. Then, one disaster brought seemingly endless resources from every corner of the ruling class to bear on its defenders. The rest of the country class’ politically active elements stood by, sympathetically, but without a vehicle for helping. Each of these elements should have learned that none can hope for indulgence from any part of the ruling class. They can look only to others who are under attack as they themselves are.
Far be it from a party that represents the country class to ape what it abhors by imposing punitive measures through party line votes covered by barrages of insults: few in the country class’ parts want to become a ruling class. Yet the country class, to defend itself, to cut down the forest of subsidies and privileges that choke America, to curb the arrogance of modern government, cannot shy away from offending the ruling class’ intellectual and moral pretenses. Events themselves show how dysfunctional the ruling class is. But only a political party worthy of the name can marshal the combination of reason, brutal images, and consistency adequately to represent America’s country class.
Now! Who would like to step up and lead us?
Ann Corcoran
Judy K. Warner
Potomac Tea Party Report 
Therein lies the problem. Most “regular” folks don’t want to get into the political arena, so what we get are people who want to use the system to their advantage (I’m probably putting it too nicely). Years ago there was a U.S. Congressman (can’t remember his name) who resigned because he couldn’t stand all the corruption. He said “if you’re not corrupt when you come in, you’re corrupt by the time you leave,” or something to that effect.
By: Jo Ann on February 24, 2013
at 12:04 pm
Sigh! I know.
By: Ann Corcoran on February 24, 2013
at 12:55 pm
http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2013/01/23/its-time-to-bury-the-re publican-party-and-start-all-over/
Ann
The above article is also from Forbes and it describes what the new party (Republican 2.0) would look like and stand for. I have been thinking about a modern day revolution for a year, but am still not clear as to how we would go about uniting all the groups (NRA, APB, Tea Parties, Right to Life, etc) and forcing out the old dynasties. Do you have any ideas?????
Bill Richbourg
_____
By: billfiscalwarrior on February 24, 2013
at 1:27 pm
Here is how I would start if I could be dictator for the day. I would get a group of our “smart” people in politics, the media, the grassroots and business people into a room and hash it out for a couple of days if necessary. The first thing that they would need to plan is an offensive media campaign to first stave off the hits that will come from the Ruling Class Republicans and Democrats (and THEIR media enablers)—hits attempting to make the new party look like the uncool kids in your high school. If you think about it what has happened is there are no grown-ups wanting the political jobs (Diana West was right) and both parties have devolved into the ‘cool kids’ and the ‘nerds.’ Obama is the ultimate cool kid—everyone else wants to be like him (not necessarily policy-wise) but image-wise.
Once everyone gets the toughest skin possible by redefining cool (as decent people), then we can move on to the grinding work of building a new political party.
By the way, I initially thought it was a good idea that the Tea Party had no central leadership, now I think that was a huge mistake. We need a few charismatic and principled leaders. But, that is exactly what we are missing in America generally.
By: Ann Corcoran on February 24, 2013
at 3:29 pm
Putting labels on people, and then discarding them for whatever reason, is not a sane and rational way to engage and unify people around a principled cause- especially when the aim is to obtain success in elections. Them “Republicans” is us — otherwise, you create a new scheme of “us” versus “them” — this is very immature and irrational when dealing with practical problems of political organization.
What ANY party requires for success is the effort of many (a “sea of locusts”) to the same essential task that unifies around principles, not personalities. If you want purity to your personal preferences, form up your exclusive club, and you’ll be the “one member” that you can count on for sure in the end.
I think if you really got involved in GOP politics in Maryland, you would find there’s plenty of room for your energy linking up with others for the same basic principles. You don’t have to sacrifice principles to find commonground and work in unity within a broad organizational structure.
So many in Maryland especially seem to be very big on the “NO” business, but rather short on the positive alternative. I’m sympathetic with people who want the US out of the UN, but rational people want to know what is the alternative. Now, some simply say “none of the above” as if the world can go to hell as we deal with problems exclusively within our boundaries. I’m not one of the those neo-isolationists, while I do recognize the miserable failure of the UN.
You want to be the next Paruka or Perot in Maryland, run for president; keep it pure; go for it. Join the Libertarian party and fight like the dickens for their principles, if you like. As a seasoned organizer in many areas over many years, I can tell you it’s very hard to get something going from nothing. When you get a dent in the fender, buy a new car — that’s not too sensible is it?
We fought a bloody civil war over strong differences in this country, so you see that going your own way, while appealing in a theoretical sense, is a bit more difficult in practice. The conservatives need to come together and strengthen the basic message that we all share in common, more than dividing over relatively minor differences of tactic and strategy.
Lee
By: Lee on February 24, 2013
at 4:09 pm
Ann,
I hear your frustration with the Republican party. But for now, it’s the best tool we have to unify and energize decent, freedom-oriented thought and action in Maryland. The message is sound – liberty and limited, constitutional government. Everyone seems to agree with that – so that’s a good start. A new party with essentially the same purpose, would just divide effort, which is a big mistake when we are facing such enormous unified energy from the other side.
Look at the Libertarians, if you want a “new” party. Or the constitution party. Or, the Ross Perot effect of a few years back. On the campaign of John Anderson. I don’t see that the GOP is “hopeless” as a political party – it only needs more people like you and me to step up and start taking the leadership role to make the action follow the words.
Unity doesn’t mean caving into the false ideas of others; like a slave. All energy is needed and we all have something to contribute to the common cause. I think your “conservative network” is inspirational to help bring people together. But it doesn’t do the necessary work of a political party, does it? Unity is not harmed by energizing people of the same mind for unity. Working with others to elect candidates to office is always a challenge because people have different “tactics” in mind to accomplish the same purpose. A “new” party has the same strains and struggles of personality. So, that’s an extreme step to take, and I don’t see any basis for that in the present situation.
I see the GOP in Maryland improving quality and message in many ways as new, patriot activists come on with the leadership team. Let’s keep that direction going forward. ( A note to my Libertarian brothers and sisters, I respect and love your energy and commitment to freedom principles; but is it worth a whole separate political party to compete against the GOP candidate? Do you really see so little difference between the Dems and Reps these days that it’s worth all the energy for the small number of voters and activists that come alongside? )
kindest regards,
Lee Havis
By: Lee on February 24, 2013
at 1:59 pm
Lee, It’s not about Republicans and Democrats in the old sense of those words. Did you read Codevilla—the Republican establishment has joined the Democrat establishment to form the ruling class the rest of us are just rubes who get in the way from time to time. I want a rube revolution and am sick of the “smart” people who say it isn’t possible.
By: Ann Corcoran on February 24, 2013
at 3:13 pm
I hate to be a wet blanket, but … the ruling class controls the system … doesn’t let 3rd parties participate, and rigs the vote. A new party doesn’t have a chance without first fixing the system.
By: Henry Heymering on February 24, 2013
at 8:14 pm
Or, maybe just get to a more hospitable state to ride things out—-I hear Oklahoma might be a good choice. Or, maybe Wyoming. There is no hope for Maryland in my lifetime.
For all the talk of taking over the GOP—does anyone see any hope that the likes of Jeb Bush, Karl Rove, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, or Grover Norquist (just to name a few) are giving up the power anytime before they arrive at room temperature? Maybe what they need is a good kick in the pants from people forming another party (even if it is hopeless).
Am I going door knocking to convince low information voters that that pack of thieves (or Maryland’s version of RINOS) are out to help them and have their best interests at heart? Henry, are you and I putting up any more campaign signs for Republicans in Maryland in 2014?
By: Ann Corcoran on February 24, 2013
at 8:49 pm
More signs … ha! Yeah, that was fun … but they didn’t give Murphy a fair chance. They didn’t give Ron Paul a fair chance. They didn’t give Gary Johnson a fair chance. I’ve mostly been registered as a Libertarian since 1980 … seems like every year or two they make it harder for the Libertarians to have ballot access … and they don’t get invited to the debates … or get media coverage. The ‘house’ has rigged the game … going to a different table doesn’t change anything … the house has that rigged too. Reminds me of what Claire Wolfe wrote in 1997, after becoming disgusted with both the Democrat and Republican parties, she helped get a Libertarian elected … only to have her break all her campaign promises and go nanny state… Claire then said,
“America is at that awkward stage. It’s too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards. On the road to tyranny, we’ve gone so far that polite political action is about as useless as a miniskirt in a convent.”
… 16 years later it’s still true – only more so.
I’ve had this “moving” conversation 2x already today … it’s a common thought that things are so bad here – they must be better elsewhere. Wyoming looks good – they even have no-permit-required “Vermont style” carry. However, I think what we’re facing is global in scope – I don’t even think moving to another country would escape it. We’re in for the fight of our lives … I just hope we can win it now – with words, rather than later – with blood.
By: Henry Heymering on February 24, 2013
at 9:06 pm
I love the quote! I know there is no other country.
By: Ann Corcoran on February 25, 2013
at 5:27 am
Going “somewhere else” geographically isn’t a real solution for long. We carry our defects with us. The problem is within us. So, in this sense, Maryland is as good a place as any to make a stand for freedom.
Good news: if the problem is within us, that’s where the answer is also. The language “victim” and “others” in power is a failure-mentality that defeats any effort you might make to change the conditions around you, even before you begin. I choose to take a different way of thinking – that we change by changing ourselves, and acting in the way that is consistent with our values. Communicate this to others, and numbers of truth-believers increase.
As a practical matter, however, I recommend a developmental process of change, starting with others who have not been completely lobotomized by the lame-stream media propaganda. The “target” audience is the angry, upset, and alienated patriots among us who have not realized that it is up to us to make the changes we want to see in government and society. If you don’t recognize that power and ability within yourself, it’s for sure you will not persuade others of that reality.
Lee
By: Lee on February 25, 2013
at 8:51 am
Lee, Good luck convincing the “patriots” that their vehicle is the Republican Party. Unless something dramatic happens and some present Republican leaders get some guts to seriously go after Obama and their own Republican insider class the party is dead!
Obama has effectively destroyed the Republican brand with the help of the gutless Republicans. It’s been coming for a long time. We all knew it with John McCain, Obama just moved in for the kill.
Frankly it’s too late to knock on the door of the uninformed voter and persuade them that the Republican Party stands for them. Hell, you can’t even get new people out to Republican club meetings—most everyone there is gray and graying.
I’ll take all of that back (and say I was wrong) if some brave and honest LEADER steps up and FIGHTS BACK.
By: Ann Corcoran on February 25, 2013
at 9:28 am
Anne,
When we look around for some brave, courageous leader for freedom, the finger usually comes back to us. So again, look within yourself, and stop the “victim” accusatory mental business. The 270 attending the Md conservative network convention is some evidence we are not alone. We have to unify more, because divisions reduce our individual efforts.
Let me say that I already know you to be an inspiring leader, making great contributions to freedom here in Maryland. And there are others — many, many others right here in “river city”. Let’s go find them! As you know, I have the “sea of locusts” campaign that is in planning, and I have met quite a few “leaders’ around the state in the GOP who are taking good steps forward. If you like to knock on doors, and train others to do that, I’ve got a job for you. I always feel better when I’m doing something positive to deal with the problem, rather than just looking at others and complaining about what they are doing or not doing.
By: Lee on February 25, 2013
at 10:10 am
Lee, I am not saying that the uninformed can’t be found and educated. I am saying the Maryland Republican Party has no message that interests them. And, we are talking in circles to ourselves. We are not talking to the millions of people who watch TV comedy news, if they watch any news. By the way, I need to be clear that my views at Potomac Tea Party Report do not represent the views of MD CAN (or they might, its just that we have no ‘position’ on this). Our mission is to facilitate networking.
By: Ann Corcoran on February 25, 2013
at 11:59 am
Anne,
I hear what you’re saying. However, even the deluded and uninformed are human beings with basic inherent intelligence and reasoning ability; however buried and under-utilized it may be. In addition, some are more deluded than others. We live in a world full of hypnotized masses, and this has been a condition of mankind for thousands of years. So, changes in government can only reflect changes in this basic conditions over time.
The practical answer, for me, is developmental. That is, approach those who have more self-awareness and commonsense than others — get them on board, to then reach out to those who are only semi-clueless (such as the so-called “independent” or “unaffiliated” ) Even among the GOP voters in Maryland, thousands didn’t vote in the last election. So, these “inactive” republicans need to be converted to active as a first priority. That alone would be a considerable task in the short run. But, once you get the patriots on to the field in some numbers, then you have options for wider outreach you didn’t have before – to reach many more as well.
It’s a philosophical perception to see people as inherently good by nature, but that is a positive attitude that works for me. So, the idea is gradually, to bring around more and more voters. That it works is well-proven by anyone who has actually done the experiment. Ronald Reagan not too long ago won Maryland in the presidential race; and Ellen Saurbrey, a rock solid conservative came within a whisker of winning governor.
By: Lee on February 25, 2013
at 12:18 pm
Ellen Saurbrey should have contested that election and perhaps by not doing that she ceded the playing field to the Dems for decades! She showed that we weren’t going to fight! The Bob Ehrlich RINO wing still controls the MD GOP. And, btw, partly thanks to immigration that Saurbrey helped along while heading the refugee resettlement program in the State Department under Bush, Maryland doesn’t have the same demographics it had thirty years ago.
By: Ann Corcoran on February 25, 2013
at 1:30 pm
Chicken or egg? imho, the reason thousands of Republicans didn’t vote is because they had no one to vote FOR. Do we make them active voters first? … or get someone to vote FOR first?
By: Henry Heymering on February 25, 2013
at 7:35 pm
They have to have someone to vote for, someone who demonstrates gutsy leadership not just a desire to warm a seat in Washington or Annapolis.
By: Ann Corcoran on February 25, 2013
at 8:01 pm
Henry and Ann:
Someone to vote “FOR”? So Romney wasn’t the “cup of tea” for many republicans who stayed home? While Romney wasn’t my first choice, politics is fighting for the best possible, and given the alternatives, the choice is obvious, isn’t it?
When are you ever going to be satisfied with anyone at all, except maybe yourself. Heh! There’s a concept, run for president yourself! Yeah! That’s the ticket!
So why did so many Republicans stay home? Well, maybe no one knocked on their door and said “heh!” We need your vote. There are always many excuses when you lose, but you always win the same old boring way — knocking on doors.
It was not the majority of Americans who fought for the founding of our country. Rather, it was a handful of very committed idealists who found a way to hang together so they wouldn’t hang separately. The only president in our country’s history who had an overwhelming consensus from everyone was George Washington. Learning to work together for principle is still the main task for success. Let’s rally the patriots on the green in the same old way in the past.
By: Lee on February 25, 2013
at 8:24 pm
Lee, I could go on and on for hours as to why Romney was ‘not my cup of tea’ – Obamacare, government surveillance, gun rights, bank bailouts, foreign wars of aggression … but the killer for me was his support of the NDAA indefinite detention – saying he would have signed it into law. I’m sorry … I cannot vote for anyone who thinks they should have the right to indefinitely jail anyone they want without charges or due process.
By: Henry Heymering on February 25, 2013
at 10:28 pm
Henry,
Well, now, I must admit I was not up on the particulars of the NDAA bill and Romney’s apparent support for it. I watched the primary debates, and I guess I missed that.
I do know that Romney took a solid line against illegal immigration; and had an excellent plan for lower government spending – and given experience in running successful businesses, he would likely achieve a very high level of commitment to free enterprise. Romney struck me as sensible and patriotic (and constitutional) in everything I heard him say. Romney also said squarely he would defund public TV, and that cost him some support, I imagine. I doubt if he would embrace homosexual marriage as some type of “right” like freedom from slavery. It’s pretty certain that he would secure the southern border, which is something that Bush didn’t do.
So, you refused to vote for Romney because of his position on NDAA? Despite all the other issues? So, who did you vote for for president? If you wrote in your own name, then I’m sure you found someone completely agreeable to your satisfaction. If not, then I’m pretty certain there would be something objectionable in your choice. Politics is a matter of practical choice among available alternatives; and whoever gets the most votes wins. If you can get 50 million people to agree with you, then you probably are an “alternative” we should consider. But if not, maybe you should look around for someone with a little wider appeal, and who comes closest to your position on most important issues.
The other option, of course, is the nullity of sitting back and not voting at all, like it makes no significant difference whether Obama or Romney gets elected. Is that your position? In politics, whatever you decide to do, it’s a pretty good idea to see if you can get others to go along with you. Sell the message, as it were. But doing “nothing” is a poor choice, wouldn’t you say?
By: Lee on February 26, 2013
at 6:54 am
Lee, I did not say that the only reason I didn’t vote for Romney was the NDAA. I said I could go on for hours about what I didn’t like about him. I said the NDAA by itself was sufficient reason not to vote for him. To vote in favor of someone who supports indefinite detention is to vote for your own slavery and the destruction of the constitution and bill of rights. It’s a crap sandwich … and it doesn’t taste any better with rye rather than white bread.
As for his ‘solid line against illegal immigration’ … well, not so much. http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profiles/Governor/Massachusetts/Mitt_Romney/Views/Immigration/
By: Henry Heymering on February 26, 2013
at 10:19 am
Lee, do you really want to vote FOR a president who thinks he should have the right to jail anyone, forever, without a trial? Do you vote FOR a president who wants to watch your every move, and aids China in their repression of their citizens?
“…some of the most controversial aspects of the U.S. intelligence apparatus constructed after Bush declared war on terrorism have Romney’s fingerprints on them. As governor, he pushed for vast data-mining centers, wiretapping of mosques, spying on foreign students and enlisting average citizens to keep tabs on fellow Americans. Romney has vowed to continue the policies as president.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/04/mitt-romney-homeland-security-massachusetts_n_1467940.html
“As the Chinese government forges ahead on a multibillion-dollar effort to blanket the country with surveillance cameras, one American company stands to profit: Bain Capital, the private equity firm founded by Mitt Romney.”
By: Henry Heymering on February 26, 2013
at 10:31 am
Henry,
AGain, I’m not up on the NDAA thing like you are. However, I wonder if this issue is so clear cut denial of constitutional protection, and Romney is prominent supporter, that the issue never came up in debates in the primary, when folks like Gingrich and Bachmann had a chance to draw that distinction. When the matter was briefly discussed in candidate debate in 2012, Ken Timmerman offered comments to indicate that the NDAA did not violate constitutional protections; and, I also found the same true when I looked at the disputed language myself.
Seems to me the basic NDAA has been in place for a long time. However, I did attend an 8-hour marathon debate on the original bill at the LIbertarian MD convention, the “Patriot Act” I think, and I listening to the concerns expressed. Nataurally, the LIbs were vehemently against the bill. (I’m only sorry they didn’t spend more time trying to get some honest, patriotic candidates elected to enforce or repeat all these laws in reality… but I digress) But what I mostly got out of that is that the Act could be misused, not that it required unconstitutional acts.
Any government power can certainly be abused; and giving strong surveillance power to government is not desirable in an ideal civil society. However, attacking the legislation isn’t always as good as getting good people in office who will not abuse the great power given under it. I prefer to have someone like Romney with great surveillance power, rather than a certifiable fraud and liar, with questionable bona fides as a loyal American. You get my point?
By: Lee on February 26, 2013
at 12:46 pm
Lee, yes, it’s clear cut. There was a court trial on the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA. The judge found it to be unconstitutional … and Obama immediately filed an appeal and a request for an emergency stay.
That no Republicans, other than Ron Paul, spoke against the NDAA is one of the huge reasons we can’t trust either of the major parties. Please educate yourself on the NDAA – as if your life depends on it – because it does.
“When the US Government said in Federal Court that they would not guarantee that I would not be indefinitely detained without charge under Section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act FY2012 for articles I had written on the ‘War
on Terror’, you set aside partisanship. You realized that what is as stake is more than an election. What was at stake is the safety of your friend, your daughter, a fellow citizen or journalist, as well as this nation and people across the globe. The NDAA, after all, was passed with bi-partisan support, and signed into law by President Obama.”
http://www.alexaobrien.com/secondsight/ndaa_hedges_et/ndaa_letter_to_my_friends_and_family.html
By: Henry Heymering on February 26, 2013
at 9:03 pm
When I first heard Michael Peroutka (IOTC) say ‘Republicans are only yesterday’s Democrats’, I didn’t want it to be true. But, I am now cured of that naivety. (sp?) With Maryland probably being the bluest state in the nation now (shamefully even more so than California), I agree the chances of actually getting a 3rd party established in Md are just as naive. HOWEVER, like Ann suggests, if the right leader stepped up to galvanize all the now- fragmented tea party entities across the nation, to create an official, national Tea Party, I think it could be a big step forward. The Republicans threw the Tea Party people and value systems under the bus, pure and simple. That was their last chance to prove they are anything other than a ruling class mentality (“yesterday’s Democrats”). Recall the definition of insanity is ‘doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results’ ? I won’t be rolled under that bus again. It’s time for an OFFICIAL/3rd PARTY Tea Party bus to put the flashing lights and sirens on, caravan across the country, drive right up to the White House, then get out with a bull horn and say to DC Dems and Repubs: “Hi – we’re your new neighbors. Step aside please, because we have just as much right to be here as you do. And quite frankly from the looks and smell of things, this place needs a fumigation. Now, if you’d like to help we’d love to have you – otherwise, please get the hell out of the way so we can get some work done and save our country”.
OK….. am I dreaming again ?
By: InGodWeTrust on February 25, 2013
at 1:28 pm
Right on! That is the spirit! And, I want to be carrying pitchforks in one hand and a bull horn in the other! BTW, Are pitchforks illegal in DC?
By: Ann Corcoran on February 25, 2013
at 1:38 pm
Ann,
Unity among tea parties can be achieved, if at all, without starting a new party. I attempted to do that on a national level by a voluntary form of consensus vetting of candidates. Although there was some success in getting around a single patriot candidate in some races, by far, the groups didn’t want to get involved in taking a hard position on candidates. So, forget about these groups, even as individuals, coming together and doing the work for an entirely “new” party anytime soon.
The practical work that is happening quietly among the tea parties is by individuals in these groups stepping up to fill vacancies and contesting positions on the local GOP central committees. Is this a smooth and easy ride? No. It’s ugly and bitter at times to make changes whenever the status quo is upset.
I see this process of reforming the GOP party structure taking place in Maryland as well. If the patriot tea party groups don’t want to get together in vetting candidates, such as through consensus endorsements, then they are certainly not ready for the more complex structure of a whole new party. Coming to unity is the key. In nature, form follows function. If the tea parties can’t unify in function, trying to get the form of a “party” first is just not going to work.
By: Lee on February 25, 2013
at 2:00 pm