Less than a month after national polling showed a hypothetical “Tea party” overtaking Republicans on a generic ballot, former Christian Coalition muckety muck Drew McKissick – a longtime stooge of South Carolina’s RINO kingpin J. Warren Tompkins – took to his poorly-read (until now) blog to pour buckets of cold water on the notion.
From his column “Third party talk among conservatives is a waste,” here’s McKissick’s message to all you would-be Tea partiers out there …
The energy, enthusiasm and commitment to core principles is great. It’s beyond great. It’s exactly what this country (and more specifically the GOP) needs. But what we don’t need is for that energy and enthusiasm to be wasted where it will do absolutely no good whatsoever to the principles it represents.
What we need is not the creation of another political party, (which would soon become subject to the same problems of the current parties), but rather an organized force that can bring accountability to the Republican Party by generating pressure from without and change from within.
Let’s face it, actually “building” a political party is an incredibly steep uphill climb, to say nothing of the fact that it will likely split conservative votes and elect more liberals.
Mmmm-hmmm.
McKissick – who has been known to tool around Bibleland in a white Mazda Miata with a “Who Would Osama Vote For?” bumper sticker – first stumbled onto our radar screens back in early 2007 when he sold his soul (and the utterly insignificant amount of influence that came with it) to the presidential campaign of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
Anyway, while we can appreciate his perspective on these matters, McKissick clearly doesn’t understand what we’re trying to do here.
Our goal is to protect the freedoms and the pocketbooks of American citizens and taxpayers – as well as the American free market and limited government that was created to protect them.
Any politician who’s with us on those things, we will praise. Any politician who’s not? Well, don’t be surprised to watch us bend them over (rhetorically, at least) and make them squeal like the pigs they are.
In other words, we could give two sh*ts about the Republican party, or any other party for that matter.
It’s about “ayes” and “nays,” to us, dollars and cents … as well as the seldom-published procedural votes or backroom meetings where the real decisions regarding the future of our state and our nation are made.
Oh, and while we obviously aren’t affiliated with any tea partiers (a few teabaggers, maybe), we get the impression they don’t particularly care about party labels either.
Of course, we would be remiss if we didn’t point out that McKissick was fired from the Republican party years ago after he was caught faxing confidential documents to the Christian Coalition.
So by all means, take his “Big Tent” rhetoric with an ocean of salt …
By PasserBy January 6, 2010 at 12:20 pm
FITS:
The only thing I’ve seen the two big parties agree on over the years on a regular basis is that there shouldn’t be a legitimate, viable third party (conservative or liberal). I’m thinking they don’t want the pie split three (or more) ways, instead of two. This repub statement only re-enforces that belief for me.
By Billy Bob January 6, 2010 at 12:38 pm
As I’ve said, you can hold the Republican Party Annual Meeting on top of an ice cube if you run the RINO’s off. But more to the point, they’ve got the $$$. Principles, a few loud mouths and a bunch of red necks will get you back in 50th place behind Mississippi in everything. What we need to do is learn to get along,Mo.
By darth January 6, 2010 at 1:03 pm
Is he Tompkins’ bitch or Roberta’s bitch? Inquiring kennels want to know.
OTOH, we thought Lindsey would be the first to jump ship and shore up the loss of Chris Dodd and Toady Kennedy.
By southernmapart January 6, 2010 at 1:15 pm
Head’s up folks on the Tea Party business: any grassroots group having meetings for political change are being infiltrated by “Tea Party” agents who swoop in and start promoting ultra-right-revolution type ideas. I wouldn’t make any bets on a third party Tea Party just yet. These infiltrators appear to be experienced agents for group control.
May be my imagination, but the effort at group control appears evident in the Upstate.
By Barney January 6, 2010 at 2:34 pm
Our two party system has just one more party than the Soviet Union.
It doesn’t take a gay senator from South Carolina to see the two party system does not work. How else can you explain the fiscal clusterfu*8k the Dems and Repubs have left our children?
The main difference between Lindsey Graham and Nancy Pelosi is their hair style.
This bozo McKissick, who wants to maintain status quo, is just another monkey for the machine.
By Designated Driver January 6, 2010 at 5:03 pm
Barney, McKissick would argue he’s not a monkey and can’t be a monkey because there is no such thing as evolution, hence no possibility of de-evolution, so he cannot be a less evolved form of life.
So I’m not sure how you explain him then.
By WorkingTommyC January 6, 2010 at 8:10 pm
We need at least four or five powerful parties to break up the cooperative electoral hegemony the two major symbiotic parties now have.
Until we make them fight each other to the point that all any of them have to fall back on when opposing the others is the law (Constitution) we’ll never have real reform.
By Clay Barham January 6, 2010 at 10:22 pm
Most people who argue politics get angry because they really do not have a handle on their subject, though a strong feeling. It is easier to gain confidence than you think. Just look at the roots to understand the whole tree. Answers or, better, questions, flow easily when the roots are clear. There are only two sides to a political argument. One side says community interests are more important than are individual interests, and the reverse is the other side, as cited on claysamerica.com. Look at this site and take the ten simple steps to have a clear and confidant vision from which all issues are easily grasped and discussed. Claysamerica.com