House of Eratosthenes

Over the course of this year, the tea party movement will probably be transformed. Right now, it is an amateurish movement with mediocre leadership. But several bright and polished politicians, like Marco Rubio of Florida and Gary Johnson of New Mexico, are unofficially competing to become its de facto leader. If they succeed, their movement is likely to outgrow its crude beginnings and become a major force in American politics. After all, it represents arguments that are deeply rooted in American history.
:
Personally, I’m not a fan of this movement. But I can certainly see its potential to shape the coming decade. [emphasis mine]

I place him under mine:

I have had conversations with Tea Party people, and I have also had conversations with those who are antitheses of Tea Party people. The former tend to present pretty solid arguments. They present arguments that are complete. The latter, like Brooks who is “not a fan,” do not. Their arguments are full of contradictions, rough edges, passion elevated above logic. The most notable problem with what they say, is the apparent offering that the Vice Presidency demands all kinds of sophistication when Sarah Palin is being considered for it but suddenly is a typical political-hack job that doesn’t demand anything when Joe Biden is actually in it.

That is the most glaring problem. There are many others.

They seem to be a lot more concerned with what kind of friends they’re making by thinking a certain thing, than with whether the certain-thing makes any sense.

I emphasized Brooks’ statements to illuminate the most simple of the many problems with the arguments I’ve seen him present over the past few months & years. The message of the Tea Party is “deeply rooted in American history” — and he’s not a fan of it? What’s that about, exactly? Isn’t that worth at least explaining? He doesn’t seem to think so; evidently his readers are just supposed to “get it.”

Get what, I wonder?

Something real and glorious and grand,spreads its light all over this land.Auston,Boston,Wichita,and St.Louis;chop suey.
- kermitt | 01/06/2010 @ 09:05
Brooks is not a fan of this movement because it contains ideas that he’s opposed to, even as he recognizes the ideas’ consistency with many of the precepts that have guided this nation for centuries. The Tea Party reference itself goes all the way back to an event which occurred prior to the American Revolution; so does most of its ideas. They’re also echoed by a lot of really smart men who have spoken out since then – Jefferson, Hamilton, Washington, Madison, and other men who lived around that time. Various 19th century presidents and statesmen. 20th century ones also – Teddy Roosevelt, JFK, Ronald Reagan, to name a few.

Brooks and other progressives recognize all this, but are still arrogant enough to think that he and his cohorts can “do better.” Remember, his ilk embrace socialism with a fervor that would make the Taliban blush. No matter how many times it fails, it’s always because the right people weren’t in charge. Coincidentally, those who think that always think that always believe that they themselves are those “right people” (because their hearts are pure and they’re untainted by the human failings that plague the rest of us), or they believe they know who is.

It’s really no different from the Pharisees who opposed Jesus. He asked them, “If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me?” They had no answer for Him, just as Brooks has no answer for the Tea Party movement. In both cases, to answer honestly would be political suicide.

It’s just yet another flaw in the progressive worldview, the one I mentioned that I’m not tolerant of. This is why. It cannot afford to be honest.
- cylarz | 01/06/2010 @ 12:51
Heh. Yup, you did spot a problem with Mr. Brooks’ logic. As I recall, he’s also in the Peggy Noonan wing of the Republican Party — the one that has no room for the likes of Sarah Palin. While I’ve often seen good articles from the both of them, they seem to look down their noses at those who don’t run in the “right” circles.

The Tea Party movement certainly has gathered a wide spectrum of people with opinions that are sometimes at odds with each other. It does need to be goat-roped into basically a Constitution movement and not an “enforce my social issue” movement. For the most part, it is. The fringes are frayed, though.

Still, if you don’t think Democrats are worried about it … I subscribe to a newsletter from a group called “Tea Party Patriots” (http://teapartypatriots.org). And I got this little tidbit in my mail this morning.

Dear Fellow Tea Party Patriots,

There is much talk of the formation of a third political party based on the tea party movement. In Florida, a Democratic operative with absolutely no connection to the tea party movement has filed papers to form a third party called the Florida Tea Party. He has issued legal threats against local tea parties demanding that they cease using the name “Florida Tea Party.”

emphasis, mine.

This is a classic “community organizing”, Saul Alynski tactic.
- philmon | 01/06/2010 @ 12:52
So I can’t spell Alinsky. Oh well. I’m sure there are some good Alinsky’s out there in the world. I don’t mean to offend them 😉
- philmon | 01/06/2010 @ 13:06
“a Democratic operative with absolutely no connection to the tea party movement has filed papers to form a third party called the Florida Tea Party. He has issued legal threats against local tea parties demanding that they cease using the name “Florida Tea Party.””

I’m usually against violence to solve matters of this kind but that assclown needs a serious beatdown…yesterday…and twice tomorrow.
- tim | 01/06/2010 @ 13:16
Let me be blunt. Brooks can go fuck himself, along with the rest of the “educated class” he represents. Until they exhibit some common sense, and can construct a logical argument from sound ideas, their attempts to form an oligarchy are being noted and filed away for future action.
- chunt31854 | 01/07/2010 @ 07:47
If I were giving out points for “blunt” …. 😉
- philmon | 01/07/2010 @ 08:15
[…] “The Problem With the ‘Educated Class’” His Blank Slate X Cut This Story! David Brooks on the Tea Party Movement And That’s Three democrats Stepping Down It’s War, Not a Crime Spree The Epiphany of Avatar […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 01/07/2010 @ 08:19

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

David Brooks on the Tea Party MovementWednesday, January 6th, 2010

David Brooks on the Tea Party Movement
Wednesday, January 6th, 2010