Why Is The Left So Afraid Of The Tea Party?

By Semperpapa

There is an obvious fear running through the ranks of the Left in America these days: the Tea Party.

But why is this group so maligned by a broad spectrum of the political establishment?

The short answer can be found in its popular origin, more specifically in the fact that it was not born from one specific political party, but from everyday Americans becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the direction America was taking.

Effectively, the TEA Party is not a Party at all. It does not have its very own place in the electoral arena. What it represents is an ideology that is founded in the United States Constitution and in the principles of the Founding Fathers: limited governmental intrusion in the lives of the People; the end of enslaving entitlement programs; the re-establishment of personal responsibility.

It is true that the majority of the candidates supported by this new popular movement for the 2010 mid-term Elections were registered as Republican candidates, but the dissatisfaction of those who started and fostered the movement was not directed solely toward Democrats. Primary after primary within the Republican Party demonstrated that the people are growing increasingly angry with the establishment candidates, those who have been benefiting greatly from the “business-as-usual” approach to governing. Thanks to a grassroot campaign of information, Americans who had previously shown very little or no interests in political affairs, comfortable in their personal slice of America, were now exposed to the way politicians were handling the affairs of the Nation.

Common people started to understand how unbridled government spending was affecting their lives; how increasingly out of control taxation and regulation was crippling the economy and the security of the Country; how printing money with abandon and having our enemies in China holding so much of our debt was mortgaging the welfare of many future generations.

As unemployment hovered at less than 5%, Americans were too busy making a living to pay much attention to the increasing national debt. As the real estate bubble kept on growing, home prices were skyrocketing and little attention was paid to the looming danger of that bubble finally bursting.

From what it seemed one day to the next, the market collapsed. The politicians blamed the shady lending practices of financial institutions, which was truly a good part of the problem. But than the details of the federal government role in that financial disaster started to surface, in spite of an all out blitz on the part of the Media to keep the whole thing under controlled wrap.

Financial institutions, which get no reprieve from me in the least, were forced in the assumption of high risk lending by a political leadership exercising their powers of coercion in forcing lending to individuals who had absolutely no chance of affording to repay the loans. What was intended to be a way for minorities to own a home, became instead a disastrous social experiment that only benefited the pockets of very few politicians (i.e. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd).

Once unemployment begun to inch upward, common Americans started to see their jobs first in jeopardy then disappearing, with any prospect of finding new employment very bleak. The value of their properties plunging and the inability to sell their assets for the inflated prices they purchased at, only added to the disaster.

With plenty of blame to go around, the only positive aspect of the situation was that many Americans begun to pay attention. They started to question the frivolous spending that politicians keep on putting on the backs of the working people: millions of dollars spent for non-existing road projects; millions spent to fund sex studies in Argentina or China; millions spent to address bogus issues like global warming. And politicians still demanding more.

Suddenly, the America people started to hear terms like “trillions” when we were still in the process to wrap our arms around the concept of billions. Jobs continued to disappear and the politicians in Washington only saw as a solution to spend more money that the Country does not have, taking the whole Nation deeper into debt.

Lost were the lessons of countless other nations around the world that had tried to spend their way into economic recovery. The failed examples of Europe, from Greece to Ireland to Spain, were discounted as insignificant and from both sides of the Congressional isles. Republicans, as much as Democrats, have persisted on a path of spending orgy, using money not available, borrowing from China and looking for revenue sources domestically that would pay for the endless entitlements programs that had kept them in power election after election.

With such backdrop, it was only natural that at some point the common American, faced with increasing economic hardship, with the need for drastic modification of life style, would start to pay attention and start to ask questions and accountability from the government. That is when the TEA Party took shape.

Interestingly, the most vociferous attacks against the TEA Party have come from the fringe Left. This is the same portion of the political spectrum that has always counted on the power of protest in its attempt to impose their will on society. From student protest to union organized rallies and demonstrations, when the protest came from the Left, politicians supported it as a manifestation of the rights granted by the First Amendment of the Constitution.

During the George W. Bush presidency, those elements who descended in the streets of America to attack the policies of that President, were hailed as patriots, regardless of the vitriol adopted by the crowds. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton screeched that dissent was patriotic. Nancy Pelosi continuously incited protest against the Republican President as a right of the masses to voice their discontent. Even after she became Speaker of the House in 2006, she would exhort the political Left to manifest its displeasure with the Republican Senate and White House, all in the name of Freedom Of Speech.

Aggravating the situation was a Republican contingent in Congress that was totally incapable and unwilling to contest the obvious actions of the Left. As the 2008 Presidential Elections approached and the mood of the Country was clearly taking a left turn, career Republican politicians sought to simply survive the coming election and they also abandoned the little conservatism that was left in them. It became politically justifiable to compromise with the left in order to maintain that seat of power and to continue the pillaging of the American economy via more entitlements, more pork spending and corruption.

How things change! Suddenly, as the TEA Party started to gain popular support, the voices of the regime begun to have a change of heart in regard to the “right” of the people to express their dissatisfaction. As the primaries for the 2010 mid-term approached, well informed TEA Party members would challenge incumbents with no nonsense questions regarding their complicity in the economic debacle of the Nation. Both Republican and Democrat incumbents witnessed the slow but inexorable erosion of their elitism. It looked like no longer the “unwashed masses” could be silenced by the intimidation of power. Incumbents started to be challenged by candidates that were supported and inspired by the demands that the TEA Party was promoting, and these new candidates were gaining ground fast.

So the strategy was for the political elite to attack the people, greatly aided by the always complacent media.

In April 2010, Brian Montopoli of CBS News wrote a piece “analyzing” the TEA Party, starting his article with these words: “They are white, older and angry” establishing a premise that was not only false but completely discriminatory toward the people involved. But those were the marching orders from Obama, Reid and Pelosi.

TEA Party demonstrations were described as “extremists”. Nancy Pelosi stated that swastikas had been seen at the rallies, but evidence of that was never provided. Accusation of racism was leveled against organizers and participants to the demonstrations, even as proof of the contrary was given on a consistent basis. Nothing seemed to deter the Left from its goal of silencing the People’s voice.

As TEA Party supported candidates won elections in November 2010, the attacks against the principles behind the grassroot group has not subsided, but it has changed somewhat.

From the Left we see continuous denigration of those freshmen who are today sitting in Congress: Allen West, Tim Scott, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and many others are targets of unhinged accusations.

From the Republican side, they are defined as a distraction to the necessary compromising that politicians consider indispensable for the job of governing. Actually, the level of compromising that the Republicans are willing to stoop down to is mostly aimed at their political longevity.

So why is the TEA Party frightening the Left, which includes the RINO also, so much?

Because it is the manifestation of popular intentions. Because it is a denouncement of political elitism in Washington. Because it represents the worst case scenario for those who seek power for the sake of power and not for the sake of service.

TEA Party supporters are the worst kind of Americans, those who get informed and are not easily conned into submission. They are those who ask poignant, direct and at times embarrassing questions that deserve answers, regardless how difficult the process may be for the questioned.

Mostly, they are the American people, searching for accountability for the damages that unscrupulous politicians have done to America. Many American do not sign up to the TEA Party even if they are not happy with the situation in our Nation’s Capital, but the telling fact is that the results of the actions of such “extremists” will benefit them too, that they like it or not, because if the actions of the group and of those elected with their support will bring spending under control; if National security will become paramount again thanks to the defeat of political correctness; if politicians will be held accountable for their actions and fired if they fail to truly represent the people, even those non-aligned with the TEA movement will in the long term benefit, as the Country benefits.

Finally, there is also a cultural reason for the fear from the Left. In the ever rotting world of political correctness, the forces of the Left have gotten used to succeed in the labeling war. Disagreement with the increased government control of the people has been met with accusations of Nazism and the like. Any dissent with President Obama has been labeled as racist. Any vocal call to confront the illegal immigration issue and to secure the southern border met the same fate.

The difference with the TEA Party is that being an all inclusive popular organization, such accusations are finally ignored by the people. Herman Cain is one of the favorite candidates of the organization for the 2012 Presidential nomination. All allegations of racism, sexism, and whatever other –ism have been consistently disproved, as a matter of fact, the opposition to the TEA organization, like union members at rallies and American Communism party followers, has been shown using racial slurs like “uncle Tom” and “oreos” when addressing blacks who agree with the TEA platform.

When the Left expects all blacks to be in agreement with Obama and his policies, with the unions and their extortion tactics only because or their race, when the Left attacks blacks for not conforming with the plan of victimization of Sharpton and Jackson and because of it they are maligned, I ask the level minded folks: who is the racist?

From a personal prospective, if the extremists who have been hijacking the Nation are feeling nervous because of the TEA Party, the movement deserves a serious look at and the common American’s support.

I have attended couple of TEA events and saw people of all races and beliefs, united in one common concern: the departure of the political leadership from the guidelines of the Constitution.

Just my thoughts!