Academia, Congress, Constitutional Law, Courts, Criminal law, Environment, Free Speech, International, Justice, Media, Politics, Science, Society, Supreme Court

Tea Party: A Phony Movement Mantled as Legitimate

Submitted by: Mike Spindell, guest blogger

9.12_tea_party_in_DCIn August 2011 I wrote a guest blog titled: Tea Party and the Myth of a Grassroots Movement”.  Using various newspaper and internet sources I showed that the meme created about the “Tea Party” that it was a “grassroots uprising” of ordinary citizens to take back their country from the out of control liberals, was simply not true. The “Tea Party” is a movement fabricated by certain plutocratic corporate interests to maintain themselves as relatively tax free and maintain control over the fiscal state of our country. I’m revisiting it today because of the guest blog I’ve just submitted about CNN and the rest of the news media, in light of a post by Al Gore at Huffington Post, publicizing his new book which deals with the back-story of the creation of the “Tea Party” and its negative influence upon our country. Some of Al Gores’ evidence and that forming the basis of my original guest blog overlap, but the important difference is he’s Al Gore, former Vice President and a centrist. I on the other hand am merely an aging ex-hippy, who remains a political radical. The truth of the “Tea Party’s” inception is not hidden from view and the facts are blatantly out there. What is important though is that the cable news media, press and the Washington punditry continue to describe the “Tea Party” in terms of its meme and myth as a grassroots entity and thus are complacent in a deception of the American people.

Daily we see stories about these “Tea Party” legislators elected to office on all levels of our government. They are falsely portrayed as populists, who are “fed up” and ran for office to “change things” and return to our Constitution. Large percentages of “Tea Party people in polls still believe that Barack Obama was born in Africa and is a Muslim intent on destroying Christianity and America. They see him as a communist, socialist and fascist simultaneously intent on dismantling our capitalist way of life and crushing American exceptionalism. I understand that one can be a reasonable person an oppose Barack Obama’s activity as President. I oppose some of his positions strongly and I voted for him. However, if you believe the “birthers” and those who call him radical names, then I must say in my opinion you are delusional. He is a slightly right of center Democrat, hawkish on foreign policy and deferential to the Corporate Plutocracy. He may be a Constitutional Scholar, but he certainly hasn’t done enough to protect our Constitutional Freedoms. Yet we see this ultra right wing faction of the Republican Party thinking Obama as the anti-Christ and believing they are part of a spontaneous revolution performed in the interests of “protecting” America. Here’s why that isn’t true.

“A new study funded by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health reveals that the Tea Party Movement was planned over a decade ago by groups with ties to the tobacco and fossil fuel industries. The movement was not a spontaneous populist uprising, but rather a long-term strategy to promote the anti-science, anti-government agenda of powerful corporate interests.”

So begins Al Gore’s article in Huffington Post yesterday. The article is titled: “False Spontaneity of the Tea Party”. Mr. Gore goes on to explain that the two organizations mentioned in the report:

“….Americans for Prosperity and Freedomworks, used to be a single organization that was founded by the Koch brothers and heavily financed by the tobacco industry. These organizations began planning the Tea Party Movement over ten years ago to promote a common agenda that advocated market fundamentalism over science and opposed any regulation or taxation of fossil fuels and tobacco products.

The disturbing history of links between market fundamentalists, the tobacco industry and the Tea Party movement is part of an even larger trend that I describe in my new book, The Future: Six Drivers of Global Change. Following the era of Progressive and New Deal reforms that restrained corporate influence in American politics following the infamous Robber Baron Era, market fundamentalists were once again motivated and radicalized by the social turbulence of the 1960s. In 1971, a prominent lawyer for the tobacco industry, Lewis Powell, wrote a memorandum for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that presented a comprehensive plan aimed at shifting the balance of political power in favor of corporations. President Nixon appointed Powell to the Supreme Court just two months later.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-gore/tea-party-koch-brothers-big-tobacco_b_2689380.html

These same two organizations were also dealt with extensively in my guest blog of August 2011, because their establishment and ongoing work directly led to the “Tea Party” movement by the simple fact that they created it.http://jonathanturley.org/2011/08/02/tea-party-and-the-myth-of-a-grassroots-movement/#more-38049 The information missing about these organizations at the time was just how closely they were connected to tobacco and fossil fuel. Gore goes on:

“Guided by the Powell Memo, market fundamentalists have pursued a comprehensive strategy to dramatically increase corporate influence in American politics. Powell himself worked with other pro-corporate justices to interpret laws in ways that were favorable to corporate interests, most importantly expanding the precedent of corporate personhood. As a direct result, corporate lobbying exploded, increasing from $100 million in 1975 to $3.5 billion in 2010. Corporations also used increasingly voluminous campaign contributions to promote the election of pro-corporate politicians at all levels of government. Wealthy donors founded conservative think tanks to influence public opinion in favor of market fundamentalism. The Tea Party is a clear extension of Powell’s strategy to promote corporate profit at the expense of the public good.”

We see that there has been an obvious, ongoing strategy on the part of Corporate interests to expand their power through the funding of “front movements” disguising themselves as protectors of the rights of the American people. Gore concludes:

“Our democracy has been hacked by this expansion of corporate power, preventing meaningful action on several crucial issues. The climate crisis is an instructive example. The strategic goal of the market fundamentalists to “reposition global warming as theory not fact” has created enough false doubt around the issue to hinder progress. The potential consequences of climate change have never been clearer than they are today. Consider what we saw in America just last year. 2012 was the hottest year in American history and 60% of America experienced drought. Extreme weather events, like Superstorm Sandy, caused over $110 billion of damages. Yet Congress remains paralyzed, with many lawmakers even refusing to acknowledge the validity of climate science. The future of our planet demands that we put the sustainability of our planet before corporate profit.”

I must admit that I have been somewhat disappointed by Al Gore since the 2000 election where I thought he didn’t fight hard enough to win the Presidency in light of the Bush team’s shenanigans of cutting off a recount in Florida. His reluctance to take the battle to Congress did great harm to our Constitution. When he came out with his book on climate change and its’ movie, I began to warm to him again. However, since I’m not a fan of the policies of the Clinton Administration, of which Gore was such a prominent role-player, I see him as the kind of Centrist Democrat that has been too easy a “mark” for the forces of Corporate Plutocracy. I must say though that I will look forward to this book he is  publicizing, simply because perhaps even the Centrists are finally beginning to see the threat that this Corporate Plutocracy has upon our Constitution and upon this country’s values.

To get back to where I began this piece the corporate media and its’ pundits have empowered the “Tea Party” by ignoring its roots. While given the fact that so much of the real causes of this country’s current dysfunction comes from the lack of honest journalism, this is not much of a surprise. I can remember a time when I looked to the media to provide an understanding of national and international issues, that time is long past. The only hope that we have as citizens to oppose the complete control of Corporate Plutocracy, known historically as feudalism, is from information derived from the currently independent sources on the internet. If those are blocked, as we’ve seen in places like China, then what hope will we have?

Submitted by: Mike Spindell, guest blogger

This link will take to to the article used by Al Gore: http://bit.ly/WrwSzA

93 thoughts on “Tea Party: A Phony Movement Mantled as Legitimate”

  2. Smom:

    the anti-abortion issue is problematic. I wish they would just let it go. Morality should not be legislated.

  4. Steve Fleischer, Welcome. There is not a lot of tolerance for your philosophy[I’m libertarian and so we agree on much]. I hope you stay here and give this blog the diversity it needs. I see you just received your first lecture. There will be many more if you decide to stay. Make sure you take notes!

  5. I am not 100% sure but I think this is the origin of the Tea Party although Ron Paul had some Tea Party events it seems to me this was the catalyst that brought national attention and made it a multi-party organization rather than just a libertarian one:

  7. Mike Spindell:

    I dont think the TParty is over quite yet. We will see in 2014.

    However if you take the religious aspect away, I think limited government, a balanced budget and reduced regulation isnt a bad idea for prosperity.

    The United States could have been a very wealthy country with a very high standard of living for all people. And with enough surplus to help those truly in need of help. But alas we are not and we are fast becoming just another country with a socialist economy. OK but nothing to write home about.

    I dont know if you are aware of this fact but free markets had significantly reduced poverty since the early 20th century to when Johnson declared war on it. In the mid 60’s about 15% of the people were in poverty today it is about 15%. In 1959 the rate was about 22.4%. So we were going in the right direction from 1959 to 1965 and then Johnson created the war on poverty and we are still at 15%. Even after trillions and trillions of dollars spent by government to eradicate poverty.

    How do you account for that?

    Looking at social welfare programs in general, only a small percentage of GDP actually gets to the poor. Much goes to the elderly, the middle class and corporations. We truly need to reform government spending on social welfare programs if we really are concerned about helping the poor.

    Our welfare state is a fu*king mess.

  8. I was first introduced to the Tea Party back in 2000 by my neighbor who was an avid Ron Paul supporter and would constantly refer to himself as a Teabagger (he knew the double entendre and considered it an apt turn of the phrase) for Ron Paul. He had officially produced Ron Paul yard signs that touted his membership in Paul’s Tea Party and took great pleasure in informing anyone who showed the slightest interest that he was neither Republican or Democrat but belonged to the Tea Party which was the organization that supported Paul’s candidacy.

    In 2010 I asked him about his early Tea Party affiliation. He had some choice words for the Republicans who co-opted the name but none of the values.

  10. “While the Tea Party movement may or may not be a grass roots movement, I applaud their efforts.”

    Anon,

    I am not surprised that you applaud their efforts.

  11. “I am a “Tea Party” adherent. I was shocked to learn from you that I am being manipulated and a dupe; I thought that I came by my beliefs through thinking and reasoning.”

    Mr. Fleisher,

    Your rebuttal isn’t a rebuttal. It is a statement and perhaps therein lies your problem. In Gore’s article and in the old one I linked I didn’t make mere assertions but backed up my statements by what I believe to be evidence of the background of the “Tea Party” movement. Included in that was the factual history of both Americans for Prosperity and Freedomworks, which were the organizations behind what you call the “Tea Party”. In your rebuttal you ignored this proffer of information, when you had the opportunity to rebut it if you could. The normal understanding of discussion, debate if you will, is to use evidence to support ones position. I have noticed that too often those in movements such as conflate assertion with evidence. If you disagree with my positions than it would be incumbent upon you to rebut them with evidence of your own. You haven’t done so and your only rebuttal was questioning my hold on reality: “It seems that you hear voices that I cannot hear, so I can only comment on a couple of points.”

    This for instance is another assertion: “Pres. Obama is a mix of beliefs (like all of us). His attitude towards civil rights is essentially the same as Pres. Bush’s” with no supporting evidence.

    This too is an assertion that frankly is not historical and which is easily disproved by knowledge of history and political theory. : “Your comment that VP Gore is “a centrist” didn’t even pass the laugh test.” The “Tea Party” movement represents a radical Right Wing movement that is populist in nature.
    Yet their “populism” is a thin veneer for what is essentially a corporate backed move to destroy the Constitutional Rights of all but the wealthiest of Americans. That is the premise of my article and yes by that premise you have been brainwashed into believing that you are mainstream and that Gore and Obama are radicals If you disagree, rebut me with evidence countering mine, rather than mere assertions and we might have a discussion.

  12. The tea party is a fabrication and anyone who considers themselves a Tea Party supporter is being used by the corporate powers discussed in this article. If the Tea Party was so concerned about protecting the Constitution and the values supported by the Founding Fathers, why aren’t they, as a group or entity, fighting against Citizens United and other corporate and attempts by the wealthy to take control of the government?
    Great article Mike!

  13. Dear Ex-Hippie (if there is such a thing), While the Tea Party movement may or may not be a grass roots movement, I applaud their efforts. If something isn’t done about this overgrown government, moral decline, and gimmie, gimmie, gimmie mentality of the populace – we as a country will soon be done for. Sincerely, Tea Party Supporter

  14. Dear Mr. Spindell:

    It seems that you hear voices that I cannot hear, so I can only comment on a couple of points.

    I am a “Tea Party” adherent. I was shocked to learn from you that I am being manipulated and a dupe; I thought that I came by my beliefs through thinking and reasoning.

    Pres. Obama is a mix of beliefs (like all of us). His attitude towards civil rights is essentially the same as Pres. Bush’s – I would guess that both of them regard the Bill of Rights as a weak recommendation rather than a document detailing our basic rights.

    Your comment that VP Gore is “a centrist” didn’t even pass the laugh test. Perhaps in San Francisco, but not in flyover country.

    Thanks for writing; obviously I didn’t agree with much that you said, but I learned a lot about your mindset.

  15. ” … perhaps even the Centrists are finally beginning to see the threat that this Corporate Plutocracy has upon our Constitution and upon this country’s values.”

    Keen observation but I’m a bit too cynical to think they’re concerned about the threat to our Constitution or values … I believe they are only concerned about the threat of the 99% and winning elections. In other words, the worm has turned.

  16. Well said, sir! Stewart and Colbert, and ironically Fox’s adult cartoon shows, do a fine job of satirizing the current ZOMG!!!!! demeanor of the news. I just don’t have any patience for the histrionics, the melodrama, and the moronic gabbling to fill air time. I gave up on cable and most local news a few years back. I’ve gone over to the Internet, and can usually find just as much of any story I want, just as fast, and with less of the drivel. It’s much easier to filter, to dig up background, and to dodge commercials. Hope it stays that way…

  17. Dredd,

    I goofed up in the publishing of both. The CNN piece was to precede the Tea Party piece. I’m working to correct it…….oopsie.

  18. “I’m revisiting it today because of the guest blog I’ve just submitted about CNN and the rest of the news media …”

    Maybe I should not have thrown away that bottle of beer.

    It appears that you did post one about CNN … but for some reason the comment I made on the CNN post (you said CNN was covering the Cruise Liner like it was big news) was posted to this second (?) post of yours.

  19. Mike S,

    Don’t know what happened but your post was about CNN … after I posted the comment above, it changed.

    Mysto.

    Just threw away that bottle of beer.

    I will now comment on this post of yours.
    ——————————————————
    “In August 2011 I wrote a guest blog titled: Tea Party and the Myth of a Grassroots Movement”. Using various newspaper and internet sources I showed that the meme created about the “Tea Party” that it was a “grassroots uprising” of ordinary citizens to take back their country from the out of control liberals, was simply not true.”

    In other words, you experienced prescience.

    Good for you.

    Nal could refer to this post in his one today on The Evangelical Right, since there are substantial shared roots it would seem.

    Sorry about the post mix-up.

  20. Mike,

    I read a story with a video indicating that a CNN anchor asked Bill Nye if the Asteroid that just missed us was caused by global warming.

    I wonder if they would have allowed the following ad, which Oil-Qaeda bullied another network from running (Huffington Post)

Comments are closed.