It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gingrich: Tea Party will become ‘militant wing’ of GOP

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 09:58 AM
link   
rawstory.com...

Former President Bill Clinton got into trouble with conservatives after he compared today's political climate with the climate preceding the Oklahoma City bombing. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich seems to be having a moment of his own: in a little-noticed appearance Wednesday, he suggested that the Tea Party will become the "militant wing of the Republican Party."

But this time, conservatives aren't up in arms.

While speaking at an event in York County, Pennsylvania Wednesday, Gingrich left some in the audience scratching their heads. According to the The York Dispatch, Gingrich said the movement is a "natural expression of frustration with Republicans and anger at Democrats," which is "more likely to end up as the militant wing of the Republican Party" than a third party.


How anyone can take Newt seriously is beyond me. But perhaps he may have it right this time; as the TPM seems to be more and more coopted by the neocons and less and less of a grass roots movement.

I find it hard to predict the future of the TPM with exgov Palin on one side and Dr. Ron Paul on the other.





[edit on 23-4-2010 by whaaa]




posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   
I think the RNC has been trying to co-op the TPM as its own from the begining, because a lot of the people involved used to be core voters of the Republican ticket. They now are just as disgruntled with RNC as the DNC. Add in the independents and other disgruntled groups that are part of the TPM, and you have a large bloc of disgruntled voters.

I think Gingrich was trying to demonize the TMP as "militant" for the same reasons the DNC and recently the CEO of ACORN did. They are scared of a large constituency that will not vote for either party.

This goes right after the heart of the two-party, 20th Century scam. It's always been assumed by both parties that the party in power takes the blame for whatever is wrong, the other party takes control, they get blamed 4, 8, or 12 years down the road and the other party takes over again.

What scares both established parties is that the people have had enough with BOTH parties, not just one or the other. This threatens their "pass the power back-n-forth, while we all get rich" status quo.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by indianajoe77
I think the RNC has been trying to co-op the TPM as its own from the begining, because a lot of the people involved used to be core voters of the Republican ticket. They now are just as disgruntled with RNC as the DNC. Add in the independents and other disgruntled groups that are part of the TPM, and you have a large bloc of disgruntled voters.





I think though, when push comes to shove the TPM will fall in line behind the GOP which is why the GOP is pretending to align themselves with the disgruntled voters. But if the TPM dosen't have a viable person to vote for and stays home...the dembs will deliver a nother "thumpin"



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by indianajoe77
 


I do believe you just got it right. For the most part the Tea Party people are fed up with both parties and as you said it is a threat to both the Dems and Reps. It is an even bigger threat to the Special Interest though because if an alternate party ends up getting voted in they no longer have the power of senior influence in the two current parties. The third party will tell them to go to hell and possible criminal charges.

That is one of the major problems with two party system and special interest, nothing ever changes when new people get in because the senior members of the parties have enough power to threaten the new members to bend to special interests will.

I hope Celente is right though and we do see a Third party take the helm in 2012.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by whaaa
 


Judging by what happened recently in NY (or was it NJ) with a Conservative Party candidate running the Republican out of the race and almost beating the Democrat candidate, I think they will fall behind indepedents (not Independent Party) running against both parties.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by whaaa
 


I certainly won't vote for either an R or a D any longer. I guess that is his definition of a militant seditionist.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 11:18 PM
link   
Newt is correct in this case although militant wing will mean domestic terrorism organisation . Newt will go down in history as helping to create the bitter partisan divide that resembles how the USA was divided in the lead up to the Civil War .

Cheers xpert11 .



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 11:30 PM
link   
There's been a concentrated effort for almost two years now to declare as many people possible as extremists, militant, domestic terrorists, violently inclined, etc. It's all about control. If they can't control you, they will demonize you.

When it comes to the tea parties, both the left and the right are starting to realize that they're no longer in control of what the people are thinking and this scares them. They will do everything within their power to marginalize the tea parties and make them seem like something people should fear. It's all nonsense of course, but what else do you expect from the people who are afraid of losing their power?



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 05:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
There's been a concentrated effort for almost two years now to declare as many people possible as extremists, militant, domestic terrorists, violently inclined, etc. It's all about control. If they can't control you, they will demonize you.

When it comes to the tea parties, both the left and the right are starting to realize that they're no longer in control of what the people are thinking and this scares them. They will do everything within their power to marginalize the tea parties and make them seem like something people should fear. It's all nonsense of course, but what else do you expect from the people who are afraid of losing their power?


Absolutely. Emergence of the tea people is a sign "the mans" MSM propaganda filter is failing.. talking points and MSM ridiculousness are falling on deaf ears... his divided and conquered 2-party loyalists of yesterday have had enough and are unifying. I almost wonder if they anticipated this by passing the patriot act along with other legislative power grabs.

Tea people are 'us', your brothers and sisters in the struggle against 'them'.. the movement is in its infancy, contorting and flailing into shape while being bombarded by establishment propaganda, take over attempts, verbal attacks and tagged with disparaging generalized divisive labels.

Wouldn't it have been nice if 1000s of enlightened 1930s germans split from the prominent political party and rallied with enough strength and fervor to de-rail, or just weaken, hitlers nazi party? the tea party doesn't have to stand for any set of principles / policies or conform with the gop/dnc norms of having plastic metrosexual phonies smile out lies.. let it be just an angry anti 2 party / establishment blend of disgruntled right/left wing activists, hippies, stoners, and other pissed off undefined US citizens who have had enough as they mob together and irritate both DC mafia families.

The gop or dnc will never change as long as their power sharing remains intact.. tea people are threatening them for the first time in generations.. be happy they are there, this is the start of a so far peaceful uprising.. the beginning of us standing up to them with enough numbers to provoke the SPLC, ADL & party elders into being worried enough to start "shooting".. if you're receiving flack, you must be near the target.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 06:21 AM
link   
In a nutshell hes saying his pals are going to stage violent terror attacks and blame it on the tea parties, or any group or person with significant power.

Its so easy to see, None of the tea parties are racist or violent and have shown no capacity for the acts i expect it from cnn, but fox is promoting it too.

Then when they stage there attacks they have the boogie man already planted in your head,Mission accomplished.


The tea party splits, some go repubs some go dem.

Then your back into the same game.Its time to get wise to whats going on.

repubs and dems are trying to coop the tea parties because they are trying to get back in control.

If they cant get control and direct the tea parties they are going to stage violent terror attacks and blame it on a tea party members and effectively control the opposition if they are unable to lead it.

Leo needs to be ready and turn over every rock this time. When you find evidence of inside job get it out immediately.

Google the story of Terry McGhee okc bombing first responder.
He Terry McGhee was a police officer for okc, he was found dead ruled a suicide.
He cut his wrists several times in his car,with rope burns around his wrists,he slit his throat 2 times we know this because of blood evidence in his vehicle. He then dragged his own body 1 mile and shot himself in the head.

That is definitely a suicide! for sure!

Leo be careful ,do the right thing. Get the evidence out in the public quick if you find it and don't trust anyone.
Once you know the truth.You are a target even if you choose to go along with the cover-up. Get evidence out in the public. The only to be safe is to put what you know in the public eye.


[edit on 24-4-2010 by TaxpayersUnleashed]

[edit on 24-4-2010 by TaxpayersUnleashed]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 06:35 AM
link   
I totally agree with Gingrich. If you listen to interviews with tea party members, you get to hear a lot of totally insane and crazy ideas. They also seem to just parrot whatever slogan they've been told by their heroes (Palin), but if you dig deeper and ask them follow-up questions about the slogan they brainlessly repeat, they are unable to back it up. A lot of them seem like mindless drones...

Yes, FREEDOM is a great thing, and they repeat it over and over again which is fine. But their ideas are just not feasible. I mean, no taxes? Birther ideas (still)?

In the end, their hero seems to be Palin...and that woman is a sell-out, liar, and just plain stupid. Anyone who believes she's good is at the direct opposite of my political spectrum.

Just watch this video...99% of the answers are just plain slogans not based on facts, or stupid rants that are useless.



Also, the whole "omgomgomg constitution" talk is bull#. Newsflash: THE CONSTITUTION HASN'T BEEN BROKEN! Else there would already be a giant court case. The politicians are using it as a mere means to push on your emotional fears. They do the same with "communism", "socialism" and "terrorism".

You constantly hear them rant against the "progressives". It's beyond me where progression became something bad. If you are progressive, you ADAPT to social/political/environmental/commercial changes. You look into the future and change if necessary to cope with outside changes. Conservatives by definition focus on the status quo, and they look into the past and try to CONSERVE it. You can't be a modern civilization by focusing on the past. Adaption, and change is necessary for a population to progress and move forward into the future. I'm sorry, but most of us probably don't want to live like we do now in 200 years.

I always have to laugh when they interview some lower middle class (or poor) tea party member and ask them what he wants. He then goes on saying he wants less government control, also when it comes to banks. Guess what, less control and regulations lead to our financial mess!! And guess who suffered the most during this crisis...yes, the lower middle class and poor people. So basically, he's repeating some slogan "less regulation" brainlessly, even if it's 100% against what's good for him. It DOESN'T MAKE SENSE!

You're against the HCB because the "government then runs HC"??? Guess what, that's just plain wrong. It's private companies that still provide you with HC services. You don't want people being forced to buy HC? Well, guess what caused a lot of people to lose their home therefore worsening the housing crisis...yes, not being able to pay their healthcare bills because they were uninsured. Those idiots should be forced to get insured if it affects the rest of us if they get sick!!

Either way, the biggest gripe I have with TP guys is that most of them just repeat slogans, but they can't back it up with facts, or just plain scream slogans that are plainly against their own interest. I just can't take them seriously...

[edit on 24-4-2010 by MrXYZ]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ
If you listen to interviews with tea party members, you get to hear a lot of totally insane and crazy ideas.


So basically what you're saying is that you get all your information about the tea parties from things you see on CNN and MSNBC. Have you ever gone to an actual tea party and asked people there any questions? Have you ever gone to a meeting? Have you done any research into the tea parties on your own without relying on MSM to tell you what they're about and what they think? I suspect not.

You do realize that the media cherry picks the things they show you right? For every person they interview and make look like a fool, there are more interviews they'll never let see the light of day because they couldn't twist the persons words. Do yourself a favor and research the topic on your own without relying on youtube, CNN and MSNBC for your "facts".

[edit on 24-4-2010 by Jenna]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 



I know the question wasn't directed at me but...

I have covered all our local TPM gatherings as a producer/director/camera for our local cable access channel. I think it would be a huge stretch to call me and my crew "MSM" and these are my purely personal observations.

Our local TPM folks are by and large very conservative, older, white, males.
They openly show their hate for Obama. I hesitate to call them racists but they called my young black soundman a n****r and showed open hostility at one TPM meeting, And not one TPM attendee stepped up to say "hey man, that's wrong"

I don't think this is the common feeling at all TPM events but it is a component of the movement in general; If Obama was a white man I don't feel the emotional content would be near as strong. The people I encountered seem to be focused on Obama as a man; not his policies.

I believe that Gingrich is correct in that the TPM is operating as the "militant wing" of the GOP and I think this is setting a dangerous, devisive tone for the future.

This is strictly my impression from my experiences.



[edit on 24-4-2010 by whaaa]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by whaaa
 


There will always be bad apples. Where one group may be full of idiots, another one may not have any. If this one group was behaving as badly as you say they were, then I'd say it's likely the people who disapproved of that behavior left that group for a different one. Are their racists within the tea parties? Sure there are. Are there some who actually are extremists? Sure there are. Any time you get a large group of people together there will be some who are one or both of those things. That doesn't mean the entirety of the tea parties are.

The cherry-picking that the MSM does when it comes to tea parties is really undeniable. Your group may not have, but when CNN and MSNBC show clips of tea parties they make it a point to never show anyone who actually knows what they're talking about. They intentionally find the most outrageous people there and the ones they can most easily make fun of. Not once have I ever seen either of them show any interviews or videos from tea parties that showed people who could voice their complaints intelligently without getting nervous and stumbling over their words or that didn't have anti-tea party commentary voiced over it.

Obviously you have no issues with them, but I hate cameras. I can't talk if a video camera is pointed at me because they make me nervous and I start to ramble nonsensically. (Yes, my rambling really does get worse.
) I like to think I'm able to intelligently voice my opinion here on ATS, and part of that is because I can take my time and make sure the words I type are what I mean to say. You get me in front of a camera and ask me to answer a question on video and I'm going to freeze up and be unable to form coherent sentences.

To see me on video, you'd think me a bumbling fool who doesn't know why I believe the things I do. The assumption would be completely false, but that wouldn't matter to people who knew nothing else about me. They would see me making a fool of myself on tape and it wouldn't matter how well I can voice my opinion in print or that I know exactly why I have the beliefs and opinions I do. All that would matter is their impression from that video. I wouldn't be the least surprised if a lot of the people they've interviewed have the same problem with speaking in front of a camera. Not all of them, but I'd bet at least some of them do.

This is why I've been asking people if they've gone and spoken to people in person when it comes to the tea parties. It's easier to clarify what you mean in person than it is in a video shot and edited by someone else who has an agenda to prove, which the MSM obviously do. Actually going and talking to people at tea parties will give people a better idea of what they're actually thinking and what their opinions actually are. They'd see it for themselves instead of through the filter CNN and MSNBC want you to see it through.



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Hmmmm... Newt is just mad because he was rejected by the tea party,I remember his early efforts to co-opt the movement,he was in Atlanta speaking at a tea party and I thought then, whats this clown doing here, nobody wants him at the helm.

The tea party began under BUSH, over tarp, and its time members here realized this,Obama and McCain were both supporters of the bailouts so the tea party was/is against both of them.

It does seem, as others here have pointed out, that since the tea party people refuse to pledge alliegence to either party exclusively that they'll be deamonized by both sides. Well so be it,we dont care, we dont seek their endorsement anyway and come November most incumbents up for re-election will reap the rewards of their decisions to vote against the will of the people.

Every attempt by the left and the right to deamonize the tea party only strengthens it and makes it stronger,see you come November.

[edit on 4/24/10 by nickoli]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


Where did I say I get all my info from the MSM? Sry to disappoint you, I've had the pleasure of talking to some myself. Also, the signs they show are always the same as seen in this video:



People are angry, they lost their jobs and the economy's still not done recovering. But what do they do instead of trying to find solutions that are realistic and effective? Look for a fall guy...such as Obama. At the same time, their slogans are contraproductive to what they really want. Less regulation? Sure, but that'll just allow the financial institutions to repeat their last mistakes...it's what got us into this mess in the first place. No taxes? Sure, but who's gonna pay for public stuff like roads?

In simple terms, their demands are unrealistic and mostly just plain stupid. I don't like how the government (that includes all past government) handled all things, but that doesn't mean calls for a "revolution" or people marching to DC with guns to "scare" to government is going to improve things.

Atm, Obama's trying to put the thumb screw on the financial institutions to prevent a financial crisis like we had now in the future. He's not doing it by turning all banks into government institutions or turning our economy into communism like the TBs and the GOP claim. Yes, the government increases regulation...but it's good for the middle class and poor people, which ironically are a majority of the TP members. They ask for the very thing that could help them in the future, "less regulation no matter what".

The majority of the TP members I spoke to were white, and from the political right. And yes, I did witness racism during conventions. I also noticed that when you named the MSM, you only mentioned CNN/MSNBC, and didn't lose a word about FOX. Is for FOX ok in your eyes? Are they the "voice of the people"?



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Wrong. What we were against was the bailouts,initially. Were against big companys who in times of profit privitize the gains and in times of losses socialize the losses. A free market is like poker if you loose you loose, you dont make the house cover your loses and keep the profits thats just wrong.

[edit on 4/24/10 by nickoli]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by nickoli
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Wrong. What we were against was the bailouts,initially. Were against big companys who in times of profit privitize the gains and in times of losses socialize the losses. A free market is like poker if you loose you loose, you dont make the house cover your loses and keep the profits thats just wrong.

[edit on 4/24/10 by nickoli]


And I agree with this 100%. If they hadn't bailed out the companies, the whole system would have likely collapsed and millions more would have lost their jobs, which would have been bad. However, it would have allowed us to rebuild the economy in a more sustainable way. As it is now, we've just delayed another crisis UNLESS we allow for more regulation of the banking sector. Reality is, a 100% free market is a theoretical concept that will never apply in the real world.

Anyway, if the TBs would have stuck with their initial complain, instead of coming up with all sorts of stupid ideas (no taxes for example), they'd now have more credibility. There's no too many people on board the movement who use it as a platform for racism, and all sorts of self-interest motives.

Also, where were those TB members when Bush took away basic civil liberties? Where were they when Bush allowed wiretaps without warrants? Where were they when Bush allowed banks to go crazy risking the savings of millions of people?

They didn't speak up!! They didn't speak up because most of them are more on the political right than the left. So it's only natural they accept more bad stuff from "their" political spectrum. It's the same with the political left.

If push comes to shove, the TP has lost all credibility the second they allowed Palin to become a spokes person for them. Anyone cheering that woman on is just plain stupid.

[edit on 24-4-2010 by MrXYZ]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Well I cant speak for them and they certainly cant speak for me. There are fringe elements in any group and there are certainly some fools amongst the tea party people I'll agree to that whole heartedly.

Personally I'm a member of the Sons of Liberty Riders americanlibertyriders.ning.com... were certainly a non violent group nor will I support violence,this pseudo revolution must be orchestrated with reason and intellegence violence will only kill it.

I havent even been to a tea party event yet, simply because I'm always working and dont have time but their core beliefs I do support to an extent. I dont blindly follow and will vote according to my beliefs not theirs neccasarily.

[edit on 4/24/10 by nickoli]



posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
The Tea Party is merely an exercise in re-branding by the GOP.

Many companies re-brand products after old brands get a bad reputation. For example, Exxon started calling some of its gas stations "Valero" after it got negative publicity from the Valdez oil spill. Although the sign outside the gas station reads "Valero" instead of "Exxon," the gas station is still an Exxon gas station to the core. The "Valero" station gets its fuel from Exxon and receives the same direction and support from Exxon as any station that has an "Exxon" sign out front.

The George W. Bush presidency dragged the GOP into the gutter. America would not allow the "Republicans" to get out of the gutter for a very long time, but it might allow "the Tea Party" to emerge. Although the "Tea Party" goes by a different name, it is still the GOP. The "Tea Party" advocates the same policies as the GOP. It receives direction and support from the GOP. In short, any differences between the "Tea Party" and "GOP" are merely cosmetic.




top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join