Tea Party Identity Theft? Redux

The following was posted by Ned Barnett in response to an article republished at IPR by Cody Quirk:


Disclaimer: This represents my personal opinion; I am an officer in the Clark County (Las Vegas) Nevada Republican Party, but I want to make it clear that these comments in no way reflect the views of the party. These are only my opinions and views.

***

Scott Asjian and Barry Levinson, candidate and creator of the Tea Party of Nevada Party (Tea Party Squared) have never been active in any Nevada grass roots tea party event, discussion list, bulletin board, planning session or barbecue (we do a lot of cook-outs to meet candidates and get to know each other a bit better). Not one. And I think I ought to know.

Two weeks ago, I wrote a blog on Tea Party Squared, challenging them to prove that they were, in fact, part of (and therefore entitled to) the tea party movement. All I got was a series of special-pleading emails from an anonymous “fan” of Scott Ashjian’s (I wondered if it was, in fact, Scott – but the email address ‘govgood@aol.com” was otherwise anonymous.

In addition, I posted to all of the lists I’m involved with (about 9) asking if ANYBODY in any grass roots/tea party/Oath Keeper/constitutional conservative group had ever met, or even heard of these folks. The answer? Resounding silence.

And believe me, I looked everywhere, and I’m well-positioned to look everywhere.

In addition to my role with the Grass Roots team that electorally took over the Clark County (Las Vegas) Nevada Republican Party, I have been active in promoting every grass roots tea party event in Clark County, in five different counter-protests aimed at “participating” in MoveOn labor-union-staffed “rallies”, and in no less than nine discussion lists, ning groups, meet-ups and bulletin boards. I’m also a member of Oath Keepers. In short, I’m well-connected in the grass roots tea party movement in Nevada.

And in nearly three weeks of constant searching, nobody in the tea party movement has come forward to admit they knew either one of them (one knew that Barry Levinson was part of Harry Reid’s campaign an election or two ago and that he’d been part of a “Bush lied/People Died” activist group – hardly the profile of a present-day constitutionally-conservative movement. Sure, lots of Tea Party people don’t like Bush (me among them) but not because “Bush lied” – but because Bush allowed spending and government to soar out of control, and because he started the bailout program even before Obama poured high-octane gasoline on that particular fire.

Back to Tea Party Squared. This group is a false flag operation – and when their lack of connection to the real tea party movement becomes known among the tea party members, their “support” will evaporate. The only thing that will give these bozos any (short-term) support is the appearance that both of the two leading Republican candidates for the Senate Nomination, Danny Tarkanian and Sue Lowden, are not real conservatives at all. However, of the two, Sue seems more authentic, and Danny seems to be well on his way to self-destructing – at least, if you believe the polls. As an official of the Republican Party, I cannot and will not offer public support to any candidate; but I do believe this. After the primary, the tea party members will look at Reid, look at the Republican, look at these folks who STOLE our good name and reputation – with no organic claim at all to the “tea party” name – then decide that the Republican candidate is the most likely to deliver conservative governance from Washington DC.

In short, this “Tea Party Squared” group is a false flag operation, tied in the past to Harry Reid and with no connection whatsoever with the authentic grass roots tea party movement in Nevada. They will not hand the election to Harry Reid, no matter how much he hopes they will. It’s the desperate last act of a man who is close enough to read the writing on the wall, the words that say, “it’s time to retire, Harry.”

Ned Barnett
Las Vegas, Nevada

26 thoughts on “Tea Party Identity Theft? Redux

  1. d.eris

    Tea Party Royalism Redux . . . . as I commented in the original post:

    So Ned, you are a tea party royalist then? If an independent tea party third party group is a “false flag operation”, just what do you represent? You advocate infiltration of and accommodation with the Republican Party, you advocate submission to the ideology of the two-party state and duopoly system of government; you advocate the reproduction of the global warfare and corporate welfare state. No? As I wrote just a few days back, from the link above:

    “Tea party activists who advocate infiltration of the Democratic-Republican Party rather than independent and third party opposition to the Democratic-Republican two-party state and duopoly system of government would do well to re-open their history books. Imagine if, in the aftermath of the Boston Tea Party, colonists had not maintained their determination to achieve political independence, but rather sought accommodation with the British parliament and crown. Imagine if these colonists argued that the best way forward was not opposition to and confrontation with the ruling political establishment, but rather that the best strategy was to join with the Tories and Whigs in the British Parliament under the heel of the King to cement the relations of power that led to the groundswell of political discontent in the first place. Of course, there were such colonists. They sided with the crown against the revolutionaries and were derided as Loyalists by the Patriots of the American revolution. Sadly, in today’s tea party movement, true patriots can be difficult to find while loyalists are a dime a dozen.”

  2. d.eris

    The real “identity theft” here is Republican Party shills stealing yet another symbol of the American revolutionary struggle for political independence and putting it in the service of the ruling political class and the Democratic-Republican Party political status quo.

  3. paulie Post author

    I’m just waiting to see who will be the first to file “Coffee Party” as a political party.

    Should be fun. LOL

  4. paulie Post author

    Barnett writes,

    Sure, lots of Tea Party people don’t like Bush (me among them) but not because “Bush lied” – but because Bush allowed spending and government to soar out of control, and because he started the bailout program even before Obama poured high-octane gasoline on that particular fire.

    I’m a “tea party person” – that is, I’ve attended TEA parties in Alabama and Colorado, joined groups online, and blogged about the phenomenon. I’ll grant that Mr. Barnett is more active in this respect than I am.

    I’ve been organizing and participating in anti-tax protests since the mid-1990s, so I’m no “infiltrator,” although it is true that I came from the Democrats and have been a “third party” guy since then.

    I likewise don’t like Bush because, as Barnett says, “Bush allowed spending and government to soar out of control, and because he started the bailout program even before Obama poured high-octane gasoline on that particular fire.” I also very much dislike him because he lied and lots of people died (got sick, got raped, made homeless, tortured, etc, etc). In fact, I thought he should have been impeached and I still think he, and his gang, deserve war crimes trials.

  5. d.eris

    The most ironic aspect of the infiltrationist strategy put forward by the likes of Mr. Barnett is that they (i.e. opportunistic Republicans of whatever ideological flavor) consciously base their strategy on models they themselves deride as “far left radicalism” and “socialist.” You’d think supposedly conservative Republicans would choose better role models for themselves than failed 60’s “radicals.”

    Beyond that, duping people into becoming petty functionaries of the Republican or Democratic Party and calling it “resistance” is a fairly uninspired con-game.

  6. Pingback: Kristin Davis Party Label in New York Will be “Personal Freedom Party” | Independent Political Report

  7. Belle Liberte

    D. Eris, you certainly gave yourself away, hypenating the two parties. That’s been a long-standing goal of the Liberal Democrats – a one-party system. And thanks to a group of feckless Republicans, it’s becoming a reality. The purpose of the two-party system was to give voice to dissent, to allow debate, and to give a voice to opposition. But the Dems would have us all be one big, happy (Liberal) family. They fire away at Republicans who don’t hop on board the Health Care Reform Express, charging them with “obstruction,” and “bipartisanship” as though there was a last word on this, or any, issue or that having a dissenting voice is contrary to American principles. It’s contrary to Communist principles. If the Tea Parties form a political party at all (which was never intended to be their purpose), it would be a second party. For as far as I can tell, the Democrat and Republican parties are quickly merging into one, much to the delight of the Democrats, whose platform is being adopted. Why can’t we get along? Why can’t everyone agree? Well, because we’re Americans. In America, you don’t have to agree with the other guy. You don’t have to support his agenda. You don’t have to adopt his platform. You don’t have to be like him at all. I see the Liberals have formed their Coffee Party. I didn’t know they needed a “party” like the Tea Party, since they’ve dominated the political scene for something 60 or 70 years. Interesting, that coffee is bitter, while tea is relaxing. Coffee is addictive, where tea is considered healthy. Coffee will rot your guts out and ruin your teeth. It’s a stimulant, where tea is a relaxant, and yet, the Coffee Party can only attempt to emulate the Tea Party’s energy and hope to draw it off. They know they’re losing Democrats to our cause of conservatism, though the Dem people would not like to admit it. The tea party I’m with kicked the “partisan” word out of its mission statement, for good reason. No matter how you use – bi, multi, non – it’s still a noose with which to hang ourselves if we’re not careful. There’s nothing wrong with sticking to your guns – or homemade signs – Tea Partiers. Don’t let the Libs sucker you into some sort of “agreement.” You have a constitutional right to disgree with the Coffee Party or anyone else who comes along, and to assemble in order to voice that opposition.

  8. d.eris

    “The purpose of the two-party system was to give voice to dissent, to allow debate, and to give a voice to opposition.”

    There is little to no basis for this assertion, Belle. It is nothing more than the fairy tale demagogues of the two-party state tell voters to make sure they stay asleep. The two-party system exists to provide the illusion of choice and difference in order to more effectively stamp out all dissent, productive debate and real political opposition.

    The two-party system is the one party state. You appear to fall prey to the illusion that the Republican Party represents something different from the Democrats, when in fact both are nothing more than the representatives of the ruling political class and their corporate pay-masters. It is the bipoligarchy.

  9. paulie Post author

    Speaking of bipolar, I usually don’t read paragraphs that long (paragraph breaks are your friend!) but this time I did.

    Later in the very same paragraph…”For as far as I can tell, the Democrat and Republican parties are quickly merging into one,” ….

    But then, this is the same person that thinks tea is a relaxant, not a stimulant.

  10. Cody Quirk

    d.eris,

    You also should remember that the people starting up these tea parties are just as harmful as the ones that want to merge it with the GOP; it will take away votes and hurt the existing third parties that have a chance to break through the two-party system.

  11. d.eris

    As you might imagine, Cody, I strongly disagree. The infiltrationists believe that the solution to the problem that is the Democratic-Republican two-party state and duopoly system of government is to become part of the problem. Third party tea party groups at least recognize that the two-party system is a problem. If tea party activists continue to support the duopoly charade or form their own party organizations, existing third parties will only have themselves to blame. It seems more are beginning to realize this, as the Independence Party and the Green Party have begun more visible outreach to these activists over the last few weeks.

  12. Lowden is a FAKE

    Ted Barnet is correct that Sue Lowden is not a real conservative. I vote fake tea party before I vote fake conservatives like Sue Lowden.

  13. Thomas L. Knapp

    Cody,

    You write:

    “You also should remember that the people starting up these tea parties are just as harmful as the ones that want to merge it with the GOP; it will take away votes and hurt the existing third parties that have a chance to break through the two-party system.”

    Duopoly types are always complaining about third parties “taking away their votes.” It’s bullshit when they do it, and it’s bullshit when we do it too.

    No party “takes away” votes from other parties.

    Votes don’t belong to parties, they belong to people.

  14. Belle Liberte

    Paulie,

    Well, I thought I put the paragraph breaks in there. Tea is a relaxant, or so my doctor tells me. I didn’t invent the Tea Party, so I can’t vouch for its name one way or the other. It is what it is.

    In the TP in which I was involved, we debated whether to change the name, as it could cause confusion, but it was already far too late.

    Everyone can try to predict the future of the Tea Parties, but unless you have a time machine, we’re just going to have to wait and see.

    According to Cody, we’re “harmful” no matter what we do. If the Republicans keep on merging with the Democrats – which is not what they were sent to Washington to do – my crystal ball predicts the Tea Party will become a political party.

    Whether or not anyone wants it to or expected it to.

  15. Nate

    Belle,

    you write: “[The Deomcrats] fire away at Republicans who don’t hop on board the Health Care Reform Express, charging them with “obstruction,” and “bipartisanship” as though there was a last word on this, or any, issue”

    I seriously doubt they are accused of “bipartisanship.” That would mean willingness to work across party lines. (More exact it would mean willingness to work within the boundaries of two parties.)

    “or that having a dissenting voice is contrary to American principles. It’s contrary to Communist principles.”

    The Republicans have been doing this for years. To quote our last president: “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.”

    Also, it’s interesting you brought up dissenting voices and communism. The House Un-American Activities Committee felt in the 1940s and 50s that being communist and dissenting was very un-American. Now, while I would certainly agree with Harry S Truman that the HUAC was the most un-American thing in America at that time, I wonder if you would equally defend the communists’ rights to dissent, or is that somehow only guaranteed to Republican lawmakers?

  16. Cody Quirk

    Yet at the same time, if you’re constantly breaking off and starting another third party, or decide to invent one of your own, then you’re only going to keep on splintering and ‘watering down’ the efforts to end the two-party system.

    Another thing, from the behavior of the Tea Party people in Nevada, they cannot be considered true Patriots, nor can I consider their intentions good. They would’ve been better off to have gone with the IAP, which is the largest third party in the state, has elected office-holders, and has a powerful citizen lobby in the state legislature.
    Starting another constitutionalist political party here is a completely simpleton and will only strengthen the two-party system, in fact I somewhat wonder if that is their real goal indeed.

  17. Cody Quirk

    Off the subject, so far the IAP will be running 44 candidates for different offices, we expect to get more people to run and we may pass the 50 candidate mark from 2002.

  18. Straight ..........

    from the NLP and Deform Party central!

    Cody Quirk // Mar 5, 2010:
    ” …… if you’re constantly breaking off and starting another third party …. then you’re only going to keep on splintering and ‘watering down’ the efforts to end the two-party [one establishment —- Lake] system.

    You’d think the sad sad case of the Deformers would be enuf warning to reasonable people!

    It is bad enuf that we have the monopoly money Federal Reserve System instead of a real central bank; that we use out dated, unscientific British Imperial measurements [which even England has abandoned!]; and have an elitists congress instead of a more open Parliament!

    We Loyal Oppositionists have met the enemy and they are us!

  19. d.eris

    “if you’re constantly breaking off and starting another third party, or decide to invent one of your own,”

    That’s a good point Cody. It always bothers me reading a commentary in which someone finally realizes that the two-party system is a sham and they argue that “someone should start a third party,” when, obviously, there are already dozens of third parties. This speaks to the ignorance of the electorate, the result of over 100 years of propaganda from the two-party statists. It’s therefore up to us third party advocates and activists then to raise consciousness of third party and independent alternatives.

    I would definitely agree that tea party activists should consider already existing third party alternatives before starting up yet another.

    I just posted at TPID on the IAP slate in Nevada a few days back. Which races/campaigns do you think are most promising?

  20. Cody Quirk

    I definally agree with you.

    But most likely would be a few of the local races around the state.

  21. Straight ..........

    from Icon central!

    The Dems have the Donkey, the GOP has the pachyderm, and [after the dumb, dumb frightful days of ‘Free Lunch’] the new and improved LP now has the Liberty Bell/ Statue of Liberty.

    The motley crew of Loyal Opposition is primarily the ubiquitous, over used Eagle and Eagle Head. Nothing like ‘standing out by blending in ……….’

    Appropriate Symbols will not solve every thing, but they are a step in the correct direction.

  22. Beno

    Recently the TEA Party agreed that thier name does not reflect thier roots enough. They would like people to know where they are coming from and who they are. So I have proposed a name change from Taxed Enough Already to

    White American Christians Killing Taxes

    Or just plain wackt for short

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *