About Those Tea Party Candidates

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

Frank Rich is no fan of the tea party (or of liberty), but he understands better than the tea partiers do that their candidates are going to sell out any principles they have as soon as they get to Washington.

Will the tea partiers learn their lesson about supporting Republican politicians? History strongly suggests they won’t. Then again, historically there was no one like Ron Paul on the scene to offer a genuine alternative.

The whole Rich article is worth reading, but here’s a sample:

What the Tea Party ostensibly wants most — less government spending and smaller federal deficits — is not remotely happening on the country club G.O.P.’s watch. The elites have no serious plans to cut anything except taxes and regulation of their favored industries. The party’s principal 2010 campaign document, its “Pledge to America,” doesn’t vow to cut even earmarks — which barely amount to a rounding error in the federal budget anyway. Boehner has also proposed a return to pre-crash 2008 levels in “nonsecurity” discretionary spending — another mere bagatelle ($105 billion) next to the current $1.3 trillion deficit. And that won’t be happening either, once the actual cuts in departments like Education, Transportation and Interior are specified to their constituencies.

Perhaps the campaign’s most telling exchange took place on Fox News two weeks ago, when the Tea Party-embracing Senate candidate in California, Carly Fiorina, was asked seven times by Chris Wallace to name “one single entitlement expenditure you’re willing to cut” in order “to extend all the Bush tax cuts, which would add 4 trillion to the deficit.” She never did. At least Angle and Paul have been honest about what they’d slash if in power — respectively Social Security and defense, where the big government spending actually resides.

That’s not happening either….

7:04 pm on October 30, 2010
  • LRC Blog

  • LRC Podcasts