The Tea Party's next big decision

  • Article
  • Updated: October 19, 2013 - 2:00 PM

Can it participate as the framers preferred? (We know Obama won’t.)

  • 26
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
comment229Oct. 19, 13 4:13 PM

Wow, I read it twice and still have no idea what point(s) were trying to be made but I think I understand some of it. Framers of the Constitution was the key, and what would they have said about the tea party movement? The framers' idea was for representation of the people in their geographic areas and yet, that is not what is happening. Republican incumbents, right now, have a fear of not being elected, not in a fair election with other candidates, but from within their own party where tea party backers have such influence as to deny them the party's nomination in the primary elections. So, stay in line, vote the way we tell you to vote and if not, pay the price. Is that what the framers had in mind? The telling fact here was the myriad of republicans that came right out and stated that if the recent vote on the budget and debt limit legislation (clean bill) would have been by secret ballot, it would have passed in flying colors. And the head honcho in fear of the tea party? Well, that would be Boehner. The main stream conservative republicans sent the tea party crowd a message, when they gave Boehner a standing ovation at their meeting before the vote, essentially saying hands off the speaker. To implicate Obama in this mess, is laughable. Sorry I don't have any eloquent adjectives and verbage to toss your way. So, how do we get back to politicians in both parties actually representing their constituents instead of money crazy pacs? It's simple really. We need to start campaign reform from the ground up and I am sure I will never see that in my life time.

78
8
mariannebOct. 19, 13 5:40 PM

Ah yes, another unbiased opinion from Mr. Far Right-George Will.

60
8
lesr6214Oct. 19, 13 6:05 PM

I can't wait for AveJoe and Elanore to come in with another irrational arugument to defend the TeaPublicans.

69
8
jurburOct. 19, 13 6:18 PM

Will has proven once again how the Republicans' delusion has become pathological. First he accuses Obama of being "complicit" in the "disintegration of politics in Washington," taking for granted that the American people neither understand nor remember which party was the treasonists who just shut down our government for 16 days as they attempted without success to hold our government hostage to their fluid demands. Next Will says that Obama is not "engaged" and that he wanted to write the health care law without congressional imput which is nothing short of a lie. I remember as if it were yesterday instead of three years ago, Obama having to have members of both the House and Senate come to the White House to discuss the health care bill while being televised so that the public would witness first hand exactly who was obstructing who after months of Congress refusing to debate the merits of the bill. Over the last two years Obama has repeatedly met with Boehner and Co. to discuss the federal budget. He agreed to Republican demands only to have Boehner renege on his end of the deal and then refuse to meet with Obama again. Maybe Will can hire a kid to fact check before his next piece so he can avoid the embrassement from his most outrageous fibs.

64
6
spicebearOct. 19, 13 8:08 PM

comment229... I'm having trouble deciphering Will's point here too. I can't figure out if he is trying to construct some kind of equivalency between the TP and Obama or if he's scolding the TP... Will usually writes from the more cranial conservative perspective.

42
7
kitkat2Oct. 19, 1310:09 PM

Even if Mr. Will is right about Obama being "complicit" at least the president knows what the majority of his constituents want. I'm OK with some ideology driving political actions but I sure wish more of the Teapublicans would go with practicality now and then. Instead they've pushed for ideological purity and will soon find themselves looking for a different job.

44
7
ebenezerOct. 20, 1312:21 AM

The Tea Party's next big decision...? How soon to fold up and go away. And all in the best interest of the country.

42
5
daytonsajokeOct. 20, 13 3:31 AM

What a well thought out and truthful article. kitkat2Oct. 19, 1310:09 PM Even if Mr. Will is right about Obama being "complicit" at least the president knows what the majority of his constituents want. I'm OK with some ideology driving political actions but I sure wish more of the Teapublicans would go with practicality now and then. Instead they've pushed for ideological purity and will soon find themselves looking for a different job.....................and you think the Tea Party doesn't know what their constituents want? You obviously are unaware of who the Tea Party is.

8
42
daytonsajokeOct. 20, 13 3:39 AM

kitkat2Oct. 19, 1310:09 PM Even if Mr. Will is right about Obama being "complicit" at least the president knows what the majority of his constituents want. I'm OK with some ideology driving political actions but I sure wish more of the Teapublicans would go with practicality now and then. Instead they've pushed for ideological purity and will soon find themselves looking for a different job.?????????????????///// if he knows what his constituents want why is the AFL/CIO so against Obamacare? Why were there so many exemptions requested and given to his political allies, why did Obama exempt Congress?

10
40
wdntyouknwOct. 20, 13 7:14 AM

From Will's opinion: "progressivism’s celebration of untrammeled executive power," which he claims the Tea Party is against. However, the Tea Party people never had any objections to the untrammeled executive power when G.W. Bush was in White House trampling on civil liberties and running our country financially into the ground. Only when a Democrat is in the Oval Office and tries to do good for people needing health care do they start crying about it. It is hard for any rational person with a faint knowledge of history (12 years suffices) to believe that the Tea Partiers are genuinely motivated by Framers' intentions. Only when they don't get other base things they want do they roll out the Constitution argument. For them, it's not a principle, it's a tool. One they would just as quickly dispose of the second it goes against something they want. Where I am from that level of inconsistency is not only irreverant but also is called a lack of integrity.

36
9

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT