The Tea Party Is a Religious Movement

August 17, 2011 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (18)

In the course of reckoning with the Tea Party movement, I experienced a sort of road-to-Damascus moment.

It wasn't a blinding light or an invisible voice.

I saw someone clutching one of these.

Ever since, everything has made perfect sense. [See a collection of political cartoons on the Tea Party.]

Now, David E. Campbell and Robert Putnam have done some sociological spadework that empirically confirms my revelation:

Our analysis casts doubt on the Tea Party’s "origin story." Early on, Tea Partiers were often described as nonpartisan political neophytes. Actually, the Tea Party’s supporters today were highly partisan Republicans long before the Tea Party was born, and were more likely than others to have contacted government officials. In fact, past Republican affiliation is the single strongest predictor of Tea Party support today. ...

More important, they were disproportionately social conservatives in 2006—opposing abortion, for example—and still are today. Next to being a Republican, the strongest predictor of being a Tea Party supporter today was a desire, back in 2006, to see religion play a prominent role in politics. And Tea Partiers continue to hold these views: they seek "deeply religious" elected officials, approve of religious leaders' engaging in politics and want religion brought into political debates. The Tea Party's generals may say their overriding concern is a smaller government, but not their rank and file, who are more concerned about putting God in government.

Unlike Campbell and Putnam, I don’t have a severe allergy for social conservatism per se, and in fact share many of their concerns. But the Tea Partyers aren't being totally honest with the rest of their fellow citizens. They're concerned about runaway debt and credit downgrades not as matters of arithmetic. Such problems are seen rather as symptoms of an underlying disease: America's drift from its biblical-constitutional roots.

In this light, socialism isn't just a ruinous economic system (which of course it is); it's a feature of a greater secular worldview. Barack Obama isn't a conventional center-left Democrat who favors policies (universal healthcare, for instance) that Democrats have sought for decades to enact; he's a closet humanist (or a Muslim) who hates his country. [Vote now: Will Obama be a one-term president?]

Libertarians (of whom I'm no friend), in particular, should beware the Tea Party.

The Tea Party, at its roots, is anti-libertarian.

And, as Campbell and Putnam have demonstrated, it’s far from a collection of disaffected independents.

Make no mistake: The Tea Party is a religious movement.

Tags:
Tea Party,
deficit and national debt,
debt,
Barack Obama

Reader Comments Read all comments (18)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

please enlighten me on specific misnomers. True people pay into the system. The misnomer is the assumption is that system was rigged to be "fair" and that it is somehow not an "entitlement".

It's not fair. Those who pay the FICA tax max get a smaller percentage when they draw compared to those who pay very little into the system and get a much higher percentage when they draw.

A person can work 10 years in their "career" barely earning $1090 per quarter each quarter and satisfy social security's 40 quarter of coverage requirement and essentially entitled to draw a benefit heavily weighted in their favor. Furthermore, the will be entitled to a benefit increase through aged supplemental security income (SSI) when they reach a certain age. FYI ... SSI is funded through general tax revenue and not from FICA taxes. Despite the anemic amount they "paid into it", they are entitled to draw Medicare at age 65. But since their ongoing monthly benefit is perceived as nominal, these folks are entitled to Extra Help with their Medicare Part B and Part D premiums. Of course, in their advancing age, they will have health concerns and, as expected utilize their full Medicare entitlement.

Assuming the combined total of a person's monthly aged SSI and SSA benefits is $672 per month. Begining at age 65 the person lives to age 85 (5 years beyond US male life expectancy). That means that a person who paid $48,000 in the system will draw, through "entitlement", $161,280! That's a $113,280 return on a $48,000 investment! That doesn't factor the thousands spent in Medicare outlays or COLA adjustments. Not a bad entitlement. What a country!?

Don't even get me started on SSA disability where a 30 year old "meth head" is "entitled" to $1,200 per month for the

rest of his life and each of his 4 illegitimate children will draw $500 per month till they graduate highschool. Sure he has to be found "disabled". But is he truely disabled after you consider the agency is filled with liberal administrative law judges that, as a matter of ideology, make it a point to error on the side of caution and overturn DDS denial decisions. The classic, rationale, "self medicating as a result of mental ilness". Is that the reason he hit the pipe . . . to medicate?! Yes, that must be it. The rationale that anyone who does meth is sick in the head would be more appropriate. At least that's understandable.

You can certainly maintain a meth habit on $1200.00 per month. All you have to do is invest all of your $1200.00 to purchase a supply, then re-sell the meth at a 100% mark-up. Presto . . . you stay in meth AND your making money on the side tax free. After all, you'll get another $1200 next month, the month after that, and so on. You don't have anything going on during the day, so why not? What a deal?!

David of ID 4:09PM August 18, 2011

Senator barry’s involvement:

“The 2005 Energy Policy Act was one of the friendliest ever with over $10 billion in handouts. It lets oil giants pay federal royalties in barrels of oil and grants exemptions on some wells, subsidizes a new R & D program for ultra deep water drilling and unconventional oil and gas development, creates hundreds of millions of dollars in new tax breaks, increases what oil and gas companies can deduct on pipeline expenses, provides more liability protection besides the $75 million cap (established by the 1990 Oil Pollution Act after the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster, an amount too small to matter)."

“As an Illinois senator, six months into his term, Obama supported it, an early clue to where he stood, and how he hoped to gain - the usual "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" payoff.”

“It worked hugely with BP, the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) reporting that its employees and political action committees gave more to him than to any other federal candidate in the past 20 years.”

“During his 2008 campaign, CRP reported that the oil and gas industry overall gave him $884,000, more than any to other lawmaker except John McCain, and no wonder. His Senate voting record showed what they bought:"

“the right of mining companies to strip mine everywhere, including on government lands;vast new powers and handouts to the nuclear industry; harmful biofuels production; lax regulation; and other pro-business, anti-populist measures - besides supporting the 2005 Energy Policy Act."

“Obama promised change, and delivered betrayal - evident now in the Gulf, America's greatest ever environmental disaster, fast becoming the most catastrophic in history, a shameless addition to his resume, already revealing a world class rogue and failed president less than a year and half into office. No wonder calls for his impeachment have begun, including by James Petras on May 27, on the Progressive Radio News Hour, hosted by this writer who wholeheartedly agrees.”

http://warisacrime.org/node/52692

Bill Hedges of MO 9:40AM August 18, 2011

"The Tea Party, at its roots, is anti-libertarian." Absolutely the tea party has turned out to be the corporatists, the new tea party analogous to looking out for the East India Companies interests against the rights of the Sons of the Liberty in the current scenario.

Obstructionism and the anti-government agenda has become a religion to the loons on the right. Norquist has become the high priest of the anti-tax saboteur party out to gut our government, drown it in a bathtub in his words ( we can only guess what he intends to replace it with but i'd bet he's just another greedy fascist looking to install a neo-feudalism). The plan is to kill Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, which are not entitlements but insurances paid into. Yes, the reactionary conservatives plan is to kill Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to pay for the real problem entitlements the freeloader millionaires who don't pay any taxes at all and the corporations like GE who not only don't pay taxes but get a 'negative tax' - corporate welfare at its worst. This is what the new fangled Tea party is defending.

Larry of CT 2:57AM August 18, 2011

Scott Galupo

Scott Galupo

Scott Galupo is a Washington-based freelance writer. He formerly worked for House Republican Leader John Boehner, and was a staff writer for The Washington Times.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

JFK's Virtuoso Turn at the Bully Pulpit

Kennedy presented a radical idea: Peaceful coexistence.

Mary Kate Cary

Calling Terrorism What It Is

Refusing to call terrorism by its name helps no one.

Latest Videos

advertisement