Tea Party Tory

Discussion in 'US' started by alib, Oct 24, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. From The American Conservative Tea Party Tory by Patrick J. Buchanan
    This is an interesting moment.

    We have a second rate POTUS succeeding a profligate third rate one in the midst of a well deserved economic crisis. The result: mostly stasis, his modest and ineffectual tweaks to a plainly failing domestic system are described pejoratively as radical. Despite the atmosphere of near hysteria, Pat is right if the GOP get's its paws on the tiller of power concern about the deficit will go onto the back burner as political realities set in and America lines up for their usual diet of Federal pork, tax breaks and entitlements like elderly bums queuing for soup.

    In the UK things are systemically different. A shaky and in some way rather progressive coalition has come to power and despite a limited mandate is determined to govern and has the legislative power and will to do so. Team Dave glorying in its moment. The PM speaks proudly of his radical policies. Time will tell if they are wise but you could mistake the UK for the younger creature that is prepared to risk failure for gain.

    This is arousing some interest across the pond as folks on the wings of the narrow spectrum of US politics actually watching fiscal austerity in action. While the IMF and Bond markets applaud such idealogical rigor their Liberal economists regard it as a nearly suicidal policy and so discretely do many GOP policy makers. One fears Team Dave may succeed setting a worrying precedent the other that in leading with it's chin they'll tip the UK into a deep recession and be seeping claret and on the canvas by 2012.
     
  2. My bold etc. Do you mean progressive as used in the US political vernacular, i.e. socialist, or did you mean forward looking?
     
  3. rampant

    rampant LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    That bit concerns me, the rabidly freemarket policies that the IMF and others inflicted on the economies of South America and Africa were an utter disaster for them. A purist freemarket is as deadly and destructive as centralist communism in the mould of Stalin et al.

    The biggest worry for me, that although the cuts are necessary there is not enough diversity of in the economy to pick up the slack, just as in the 80s very little is being done to foster a sensibly mixed economy or create jobs in the private sector to enable people to change career or find employment.
     
  4. Progressive is Septic code for liberal, and something timidly far from socialist in Yurp terms their liberals tend to be pretty conservative in reality. They have no conception of what socialist means beyond death panels and murdered babies.

    In US terms the Tories are barking mad, green tinted, Godless Commies, at least if you've trouble yourself to actually read Team Dave's manifesto and have enough knowledge of US politics to see how hysterical Tea Partiers would see it.

    Any POTUS who made this sort of brutal defense cut while promising to preserve the affront of a free at the point of care granny murdering NHS would risk being burnt in effigy on the DC Mall. It's worse than socialist, it is disturbingly Canadian.
     
  5. Hmmm. I would argue that since the Republican Party - like the Democrats- is a pretty big tent, some Republicans would find a spiritual home in the Conservative Party of the UK. The basic gut - The state isn't the solution, it is the problem would be equally at home in either party. I wouldn't call all the Tea Party "Hysterical". They're not all Sarah Palin. What I found amusing was listening to Tim Robbins on Radio 2 denouncing the Tea Party as a Astroturf Movement funded by Millionaires. That is spectacularly untrue, and I guess is symptomatic of a gut Liberal Luvvie feeling that anything that doesn't fit into their little view of the world is some sort of Right Wing Billionaires Plot.

    For the record, I suspect the Anti-Tea Party movement called the Coffee Party is also grassroots. What most certainly isn't in terms of spontaneous interest from the masses is Jon Stewarts "Rally to restore sanity". It hopes to target "Overheated debate and laziness in the media". Now I think the guy is funny, but if he really wanted to calm political debate down, he had plenty of time during the vilification of George W Bush. He's simply afraid of, or unwilling to understand a large block of taxpayers grouping together and saying that they're no longer willing to fund state profligacy. Basically Godwins law. I don't like you, I'm worried about loosing the argument, I'm going to call you all lunatics.
     
  6. All of the "liberal" mass movements are astroturf (ever see one of their rallies without SEIU and/or ACORN T-shirts and pre-printed signs in evidence? Thought not...), so they just cannot conceive that the tea party isn't. It's outside of their frame of reference. Thus it must have been cooked up by evil billionaires, like... err... George Soros... err... wait one...

    Just like what they are waking up to this morning: they've been told by NPR, MSNBC etc that the tea party is just a slack handful of kooks, Glenn Beck is an irrelevant nobody and almost nobody turned up to his rallies, and eleventy bazillion turned up for the Jon Stewart rally. Thus, how could the Democrats have possibly lost? Must have been cheating... must have been those evil billionaires like old George (see above)... oh wait...
     
  7. I don't think this is accurate but of course to find out depends largely on the traditional media that has demonstrated its unreliability in terms of true journalism. There is a much greater degree of centraliz(s)ed, top-down control (not surprising given the modus operandi of progressivism) among those against the "tea party movement."
     
  8. I am not sure what you intended in this but I would argue very forcefully (and with many facts in support) that He (and perhaps this is the explanation in that I consider Him to be the focus of all the "transformative" efforts since he was elected even though, as you may be implying, many of these are not actually of His making with Him rather being the front for them) has gone far beyone mere "modest and ineffectual tweaks" and I do not agree that our "system" (again I am not sure how broadly you intended this) was "plainly failing." As in any "system" of human origin it will have problems needing "fixing" but not a complete (and IMHO un-Constitutional) overthrowing.
     
  9. To a babbling shock jock perhaps. It's what a lot of US liberals self identify as these days, the traditional term liberal having been comprehensively trashed as something near to dread socialism, the spineless wimps have abandoned it along with their other weakly held principles.

    Even the hawkish and really rather conservative Hills Clinton backs away from the toxic L word fearfully here:
    You can argue this harks back to an era of the Bull Moose Party and Teddy Roosevelt when the US genuinely had a recognizable left wing. Now there is just a tiny fringe that Micheal Moore can barely wallow in.
    TAC has another piece this week by Pat this week Deadlock of Democracy
    And the next dysfunctional bun fight: preserving the deficit bloating Bush Tax cut, the entitled's beloved entitlement and a Teaper favorite. Makes Dave's Broken Britain look strangely sane.