The Tea Fragger Party

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
The Tea Fragger Party
Sat, 07-30-2011 - 8:19am

What do these TP's hope to accomplish?

Fragging: “To intentionally kill or wound (one’s superior officer, etc.), esp. with a hand grenade.”

Take names. Remember them. The behavior of certain Republicans who call themselves Tea Party conservatives makes them the most destructive posse of misguided “patriots” we’ve seen in recent memory.

If the nation defaults on its financial obligations, the blame belongs to the Tea Party Republicans who fragged their own leader, John Boehner. They had victory in their hands and couldn’t bring themselves to support his debt-ceiling plan, which, if not perfect, was more than anyone could have imagined just a few months ago. No new taxes, significant spending cuts, a temporary debt-ceiling solution with the possibility of more spending cuts down the line as well as action on their beloved balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution.

These people wouldn’t recognize a hot fudge sundae if the cherry started talking to them.

The tick-tock of the debt-ceiling debate is too long for this space, but the bottom line is that the Tea Party got too full of itself with help from certain characters whose names you’ll want to remember when things go south. They include, among others, media personalities who need no further recognition; a handful of media-created “leaders,” including Tea Party Nation founder Judson Phillips and Tea Party Patriots co-founders Jenny Beth Martin and Mark Meckler (both Phillips and Martin declared bankruptcy, yet they’re advising Tea Party Republicans on debt?); a handful of outside groups that love to hurl ad hominems such as “elite” and “inside the Beltway” when talking about people like Boehner when they are, in fact, the elite (FreedomWorks, Heritage Action, Club for Growth, National Taxpayers Union, Americans for Prosperity); and elected leaders such as Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, head of the Republican Study Committee, and South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, who grandstand and make political assertions and promises that are sheer fantasy.

Meanwhile, freshman House members were targeted and pressured by some of the aforementioned groups to vote against Boehner’s plan. South Carolina’s contingent was so troubled that members repaired to the chapel Thursday to pray and emerged promising to vote no. Why? Not because Jesus told them to but because they’re scared to death that DeMint will “primary” them — find someone in their own party to challenge them.

Where did they get an idea like that? Look no further than Sarah Palin’s Facebook page, where she warned freshmen about contested primaries and urged them to “remember us ‘little people’ who believed in them, donated to their campaigns, spent hours tirelessly volunteering for them, and trusted them with our votes.” Her close: “P.S. Everyone I talk to still believes in contested primaries.” While they’re at it, they also should remember that Palin came to the Tea Party long after the invitations went out. The woman knows where to hitch a wagon.

Unfortunately for the country, which is poised to lose its place as the world’s most-trusted treasury and suffer economic repercussions we can ill afford, the stakes in this political game are too high to be in the hands of Tea Partyers who mistakenly think they have a mandate. Their sweep in the 2010 election was the exclusive result of anti-Obama sentiment and the sense that the president, in creating a health-care plan instead of focusing on jobs, had overplayed his hand. Invariably, as political pendulums swing, the victors become the very thing they sought to defeat.

Who’s overplaying their hand now?

It must be said that the Tea Party has not been monolithic — and the true grass-roots shouldn’t be conflated with leaders who disastrously signed on to the so-called “Cut, Cap and Balance” pledge. What is it with Republicans and their silly pledges? Didn’t they get enough Scouting? This pledge now has them hog-tied to a promise they can’t keep — the balanced-budget amendment. As many as a third desperately want a pardon from that commitment, according to sources close to the action.

Hubris is no one’s friend, and irony is a nag. The Tea Partyers who wanted to oust Barack Obama have greatly enhanced his chances for reelection by undermining their own leader and damaging the country in the process. The debt ceiling may have been raised and the crisis averted by the time this column appears, but that event should not erase the memory of what transpired. The Tea Party was a movement that changed the conversation in Washington, but it has steeped too long and has become toxic.

It’s time to toss it out.


In both debt plans, the wealthy win.....




iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
Sat, 07-30-2011 - 11:41am
McCain called the TPers "hobbits"! And said that their actions were "bizarro"...LOL! It's really not funny but it's one of the few times I've agreed with him. The TPers, like Palin, will do anything, say anything. They only care about their limited agenda & not about a compromise that could give us more time!

But I will say that I find it interesting...the politicians go on about how the wealthy 'create jobs' for our country, so they should be allowed to keep their tax breaks. I haven't seen many jobs created by 'the wealthy' lately, have you? ;)


iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
Sat, 07-30-2011 - 12:16pm
Is there anything you cannot see yourself compromising on?
I do think that the tea party caucus may have pushed a bit too much, but if it wasn't for them digging their heals in this debate would not have come to the point where we are. The problem I see is that the debt ceiling is one issue, it covers money already spent. Spending and budget another, which the Democrats have failed miserably on; 800+ days and still no budget, the Presidents plan couldn't even get one Democrat Senate vote failing 97-0.
On the debt ceiling. It reasonable to ask why we would need the debt ceiling increased to pay past bills if as the President has suggested, Congress and the White House just do their job. He does not think a balanced budget amendment is necessary, clearly if the debt ceiling needs to be raised to pay past bills, there is a budget problem, and a big one.
This looming 'crisis' has been known for a while, I have no doubt in my mind the President and his advisers thought they could use this for the upcoming election. Heck, most of his speeches on the issue have sounded like campaign speeches and nothing else. Even his own party has determined he has not led on this issue.
Both parties have kept in mind that the outcome of this debate will mold the issues for the next election cycle, and have allowed that to get into the way of serious debt and serious consideration of the real problem: Spending.
It's been glossed over, and the sound bites have completely ignored it, but S&P and Moodys' both have said the bigger problem regarding our credit rating is spending and not raising the debt limit.

I'd love to see the rhetoric get out of this and everyone act like grown ups, because very few are, and the President isn't one of them.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-30-2007
Sat, 07-30-2011 - 2:16pm

IMO the only thing the Tea Party

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
Sat, 07-30-2011 - 4:10pm
The House Republicans have voted on 2 measures recently. They are now in the process of setting up for a vote on the Reid's plan. What has the Democrat run senate accomplished? Blocked both house bills, and Harry chose not to bring his bill up for vote last night when the request to vote on it was made.

What is it that the Republicans are doing that has you so upset? Is it because you don't like their politics? Or is it because of the sentiment the media has put out that the Republicans are the ones unwilling to compromise at all?
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-07-2011
Sat, 07-30-2011 - 4:56pm
((I'd love to see the rhetoric get out of this and everyone act like grown ups, because very few are, and the President isn't one of them.))

I could not agree more. Where is the leadership? Then again, has there been ANY leadership out of this President yet?
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
Sat, 07-30-2011 - 6:01pm
When there is reports that Democrats are complaining about a lack of leadership you know that there are problems.

What has bothered me so much is how the White House and Dem's have attempted to portray the Republicans, the only ones actually attempting to get anything passed, of playing politics.
Just look at these recent comments:
"In a speech on the House floor earlier, Minority Leader Pelosi accused Speaker Boehner of going to the "Dark Side." This, of course, is a reference to Darth Vader in the "Star Wars" franchise.

"The Speaker chose when he didn't have the votes instead of to reach out in a bipartisan way to see how we could work together, he chose to go to the Dark Side. Let's bring -- let me repeat. And I repeat, he chose to go to the Dark Side," she said."
Pelosi has been nothing but political and a scare-monger in this debate.
And good ole Jan Schakowsky from Illinois. What a tool. I listen to her frequently when she is a guest on talk radio here.
"Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL): "In battle, when you accidentally shoot your own, it's called friendly fire. When you deliberately shoot your own it's called fragging. Republicans, stop fragging the American economy and the American people!" "
and then there's Obama, Mr. All talk, no plan. He does nothing but come out criticizing everything Republicans have done and offers nothing. He calls for bipartisanship and then attacks. Does he have a clue how to work with people?

"President Obama delivers his weekly address on the debt ceiling fight.

He says House Republicans "spent precious days" passing a bill that can't pass the Senate and "would hold our economy captive to Washington politics once again."

"Any solution to avoid default must be bipartisan," he argues.

The president concludes by saying that "the time for putting party first is over. The time for compromise on behalf of the American people is now." "

Obama wants this debate over so he can focus on the election. He and Dems have complained that a limited extension would come right during the election cycle. I honestly don't see a problem. This IS the debate. Big Government or Limited Government. Constrained spending or a spending spree. I know what Obama wan'ts, he said it in one of his earlier speeches when the Aug. 2nd deadline was set. He doesn't think the American people are really paying attention to the nuts and bolts of this debate, we are too worried about our own little lives, that they need to get back to creating new programs. (finding a link to these comments during a post speech Q&A has not resulted in anything yet)
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
Sat, 07-30-2011 - 6:16pm
Found it. This Q&A was full of doozies uttered by the Pres.
"Obama said today he would not accept a smaller, short-term deal. "We might as well do it now," he said. "Pull off the band aid. Eat our peas."

And this:

And this is not something that I am making up. This is not something that Tim Geithner is making up. We're not out here trying to use this as a means of doing all these really tough political things. I'd rather be talking about stuff that everybody welcomes -- like new programs or the NFL season getting resolved. Unfortunately, this is what's on our plate. It's before us right now. And we've got to deal with it."
(the video of these comments is the second one)
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sat, 07-30-2011 - 6:54pm

I must be missing something.


iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sat, 07-30-2011 - 7:04pm
I am wondering why the query about compromise. No government which is democratic can rule by fiat. Compromise, though it may be anathema to ideologues and party purists, is essential in avoiding the kind of deadlock we now see in Congress.

It's pretty damn clear that the Tea Party isn't particularly concerned about the nation as a whole. We're being subjected to their extortion. I don't care for it, for their congressional creatures, or their intransigence. They want Obama to fail, as opposed to working for the nation to succeed. Foul stuff...those TP'ers but they were from the get-go too. They were NEVER interested in civil debate or reasoned discussion.


iVillage Member
Registered: 06-07-2011
Sat, 07-30-2011 - 7:20pm

(They were NEVER interested in civil debate or reasoned discussion.)

You act as if Democrats are.