Let's briefly look at these. In the quest for liberty and minimal government, since when did the Tea Party stand for government intervening against businesses hiring the workers they choose, acting not only as a government tax collector for their employees but as a government tracking mechanism for State-based eligibility verification? When did it decide for a broken-down immigration system which excludes temporary worker visa program due to anti-competitive (e.g., union) reasons, i.e., treats symptoms vs. disease? When did it stand against the natural right to migrate, for family reunification?
When did Sarah Palin, whose gubernatorial experience included getting as much money she could from DC, increasing taxes on energy companies in the state, and
Palin didn't cut the size of government as mayor of Wasilla, and she hasn't done so as Alaska's governor, city and state budget records show. Spending in fast-growing Wasilla increased by 55% during her tenure from 1996-2002, records show. In nearly two years as governor, she has presided over a 31% spending hike by a state government that sought earmarks from Washington even as it reaped billions from higher oil prices and Palin-backed tax increases on oil companies.Now let's look at Donald Trump: how does an organization which claims to hate corporate welfare, taxpayer bailouts, and government corruption embrace a multi-billionaire who openly admits that he has bought political favors, has declared bankruptcies for his businesses 4 times, has openly admired nationalized health care systems and heavily contributed to Democratic politicians in the state of New York, has threatened tariffs on imported Ford vehicles (which is not even legal), and is threatening property rights in other nations (e.g., Iraqi oil) and to start trade wars all over the world? This is not a man who understands or accepts the constitutionally limited authority of the Presidency.
I do understand that the populist pitches are a challenge to the status quo, and I myself do enjoy a challenge to the status quo, but we don't want a repeat of how the Roman republic was replaced with dictatorships, sustained by bread and circuses....Populism can lead to the tyranny of mobs or to misplaced trust in authoritarians who trump individual liberties.
The Tea Party has a gigantic task in terms of reducing the size and scope of government. Nearly one in 6 employed Americans is employed at some level of government. Every dollar spent has vested interests behind it. Many anti-competitive rules and regulations have crony capitalists or unionists behind them. We have seen the Greeks vote socialists into office to fend off grossly exaggerated "austerity" games. Now granted, a veto-threatening super spending President can make budgetary, tax and regulatory reform all but impossible, but we need to see the Tea Party to set policy preferences.
The Tea Party must not let itself by co-opted by phony politicians or divisive anti-liberty causes like the Know Nothing anti-immigrants who have been a long dark ugly blot in American history. We have a bold pro-liberty candidate, Rand Paul, who has real budget and tax plans, has fought against the imperial Presidency, has had filibusters trying to protect due process rights of Americans as well as their Fourth Amendment rights. Until the faux-conservative, flip-flopping, right-fascist Trump circus came to town, Paul was regularly among the top contenders, reaching into the mid-teens. Trump's support has grown in part from former Paul supporters. No wonder why Rand Paul is frustrated that the Tea Party is being infiltrated and destroyed by an unprincipled demagogue, part and parcel of the corrupt cronyism, who thinks he can buy the Presidency!
