Tuesday, June 28, 2011
If the Tea Party Movement and that's what it is right now a Political Movement not a Political Party. Is truly about Limited Government not just about expanding Economic Freedom and Fiscal Conservatism. As well as protecting Individual Liberty, not just Economic Liberty but Individual Liberty in general which includes Social Freedom. The ability for people to live their own lives as they see fit as long as they are not hurting anyone else with their freedom. And not about discriminating and punishing people because they are gay or are Single Parents or divorced or are interested in pornography and want more limitations to the First Amendment. And want to make the adultery illegal, all things that the Theocratic Right Christian Conservatives in America want to do. Then the Tea Party has a big future in American Politics as either the Libertarian or Conservative Libertarian Faction of the Republican Party. Or perhaps merging with the Libertarian Party in the future or or creating their own Political Party. Thats about Individual Liberty and protecting Constitutional Rights and Limited Government. Things that the Republican Party was truly about up until twenty years ago or so. And not about Corporate Welfare, then the Tea Party Movement could have a bright future in American Politics. But if the Tea Party is not about Conservative Libertarianism and instead is in bed with the Christian Right but with an Economic Message. Like the Michelle Bachman's, Sarah Palin's, Jim DiMints's of the World, then they will just be seen as another Fringe Movement by voters outside of the GOP.
But if the Tea Party is truly about Limited Government and Conservative Libertarianism and just Anti Regulation and Fiscal Conservatism. Then the Tea Party Movement could do what the Libertarian Party has never been able to do in American Politics. Which is be taken seriously by Independent Voters and by republicans and democrats. Because independents tend to be somewhat liberal to libertarian on Social Issues and don't like to be told by government how to live. And want their Low Taxes and want government to be Fiscally Responsible and not waste Tax Payer money. Things that the Libertarian Party have always been in favor or but never been able to get across to Independent Voters up until Ron Paul of the last few years.
Click on the link of the blog to see Thom Hartmann interview Mark Williams formerly of the Tea Party Express
How Chief Justice John Roberts makes the argument that a State matching Campaign Contributions of Political Candidates as unconstitutional, because it limits what Third Party Groups can do is beyond me. And sounds like more of an ideological argument to me then anything else. Saying look we really don't have a credible justification for our case and this is the best we can come up with. We are really making this argument because this is how we want things to be but we don't want to say that at least in public. Its sort of a because I said so argument, (no offense mom and dad) that you make when you can't think of anything else to say. I'm really sick in tired of hearing the States Rights argument, especially from conservatives who don't believe a damn thing that they are saying. And only make the argument to prevent the Federal Government from making them do something that they don't want them to do. Whether its constitutional or not and they use it purely as a convenience and nothing else. But when States pass a law that they don't like, like with the Arizona Campaign Law. They throw the States Rights argument in the trash and come up with whatever argument they need that they feel will suit their needs and interests at the time. Especially as a liberal myself who believes in States Rights but actually understands what States Rights is. That the States essentially have the authority to pass any law that they want as long as it complies with the US Constitution. As a liberal I'm not a big fan of centralization and the establishment and prefer to see more diversity with power and lean towards more personal liberty.
Every time a court strikes down a Campaign Reform Law its just more evidence to me that the only Campaign Reform that could ever be passed and stand up to Constitutional Scrutiny. Is Full Disclosure, meaning that Political Candidates and Incumbents as well as Third Party Groups. Would have to disclose where they are getting the financing for their activities. Because every other reform that restricts Campaign Financing, generally gets struck down by some court. Whether the argument is credible or bogus.
Click on the link of the blog to see a video about the Supreme Court decision on Campaign Financing