GLENN BECK: TEA PARTY NEEDS NAME CHANGE

[mystery-ak]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/05/glenn-beck-tea-party-needs-name-change/

by TONY LEE5 Feb 2015

On Thursday, Glenn Beck said the Tea Party movement must adopt left-wing tactics and change its name.

“We’ve got to find new language,” Beck reportedly said, according to The Blaze. “[On the left], they’re shape-shifters. You have to constantly shift with them.”

Beck reportedly “made it clear that he is not saying the Tea Party should change their values or principles, only the ‘language and names and labels,'” because the Tea Party label, according to Beck, is “so maligned that people stop hearing you now.”

The Blaze noted that “Beck has frequently discussed how progressives first identified themselves as progressives, then became liberals and Democrats before coming back to progressives,” and he said that since the left will “continually shift their shape… so will I.”

[Relic]

He's correct. Tea Party is so damaged, it's worse that Bush, as a brand.

What the movement needs just as much, (if there is to be a movement), is less connection to the Palin/Beck/Santorums of the right. Sober, steady leadership is what's needed.

[jmyrlefuller]

Bullpucky.

When you “shift with them,” you let them dictate the definitions of words. Instead, fight back.

Worse than Bush? Only among the Tea Party's most ardent enemies is that the case. The fact is, they can't define it. They've tried tying it to the Koch brothers to make it look like their favorite strawman of all, “the rich,” are at the heart of it. They've tried tying it to sacrificial lamb candidates like Christine O'Donnell. They've tried everything, but the fact is: the Tea Party is nothing more than working-class, common Americans who are fed up with the direction of government. Is “rebranding” to please the left going to fix that? Heck no! It will only encourage people to use Tea Party as an epithet even more. (Take a look at Canada, where the phrase “social credit,” an old conservative movement that hasn't been relevant since the 1950s, is still being used as an anti-conservative epithet to this day.)

[EdinVA]

He's correct. Tea Party is so damaged, it's worse that Bush, as a brand.

What the movement needs just as much, (if there is to be a movement), is less connection to the Palin/Beck/Santorums of the right. Sober, steady leadership is what's needed.

What the movement needs is less connection to the GOPe who are the ones slinging the most arrows.
What the movement needs is less McCain and Graham...

[Relic]

What the movement needs is less connection to the GOPe who are the ones slinging the most arrows.
What the movement needs is less McCain and Graham...

They got less of those, when the GOPe decided it was time to attack.

You have to win and keep the base, but if you don't make inroads in the squishy middle, you'll be trying to figure out how to win elections.

[truth_seeker]

I agree with Glenn Beck on this, but I doubt it is possible to do so.

The phrase "tea Party" is not trademarked, copyrighted, or protected in any way.

The democrats can use it in various derogatory ways, and will do so.

In the US House, the Tea Party Caucus is essentially dormant, since opportunistic political professionals coopted the original movement.

Those opportunistic political professionals control the message, post on Facebook and send emails using the identity.

The lack of organization created a void to be filled, without the least amount of "message discipline."

[PzLdr]

They got less of those, when the GOPe decided it was time to attack.

You have to win and keep the base, but if you don't make inroads in the squishy middle, you'll be trying to figure out how to win elections.

Keep going for the squishy middle, lose the base. See: 2008, 2012.

[Bigun]

What the movement needs is less connection to the GOPe who are the ones slinging the most arrows.
What the movement needs is less McCain and Graham...

And More Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton!

[libertybele]

Keep going for the squishy middle, lose the base. See: 2008, 2012.

Absolutely.  We need to adhere to conservative principles and values and not compromise those values and principles to meet in the middle or veer to the left to get votes...it hasn't work and it won't work.  What will work is conservatism and a well thought out plan as to how to move this country forward in a positive way.  The voters spoke very loudly in the mid-terms rejecting Obama policy and wanting an end to this  liberal politically correct insanity.

[Carling]

The voters spoke very loudly in the mid-terms rejecting Obama policy and wanting an end to this  liberal politically correct insanity.

GOP primary voters also rejected the Tea Party's policy, even in some of the most conservative states.

Why is that?

[DCPatriot]

Drop 'tea' for "Expresso"!

[Lando Lincoln]

Drop 'tea' for "Expresso"!

Dude... there is no "x" in espresso.

[jmyrlefuller]

GOP primary voters also rejected the Tea Party's policy, even in some of the most conservative states.

Why is that?

Ignorant, easily corruptible voters.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Bullpucky.

When you “shift with them,” you let them dictate the definitions of words. Instead, fight back.

Worse than Bush? Only among the Tea Party's most ardent enemies is that the case. The fact is, they can't define it. They've tried tying it to the Koch brothers to make it look like their favorite strawman of all, “the rich,” are at the heart of it. They've tried tying it to sacrificial lamb candidates like Christine O'Donnell. They've tried everything, but the fact is: the Tea Party is nothing more than working-class, common Americans who are fed up with the direction of government. Is “rebranding” to please the left going to fix that? Heck no! It will only encourage people to use Tea Party as an epithet even more. (Take a look at Canada, where the phrase “social credit,” an old conservative movement that hasn't been relevant since the 1950s, is still being used as an anti-conservative epithet to this day.)

The fact is that the party doesn't define itself either, and as a result, it allows anyone to define it, including those who want to hurt it.

If no one defines then party or sets up any kind of structure to it, then anyone can define the party, point to any real or imagined structure and say "that's the party structure".

[DCPatriot]

Dude... there is no "x" in espresso.

LOL!   Goes to show you.....I never ventured beyond Medium Roast.

PS:  Espresso Party would be racist.   

[Lando Lincoln]

LOL!   Goes to show you.....I never ventured beyond Medium Roast.

PS:  Espresso Party would be racist.   

 

[Lando Lincoln]

The fact is that the party doesn't define itself either, and as a result, it allows anyone to define it, including those who want to hurt it.

If no one defines then party or sets up any kind of structure to it, then anyone can define the party, point to any real or imagined structure and say "that's the party structure".

That is the sum-total of the issue. They have allowed anyone who has an opinion define the brand. We can see in this little corner of the web how well that has worked out.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Ignorant, easily corruptible voters.

Those voters will still be voting in 2016.

[olde north church]

Keep the name.  Drop the guys with the dopey "tea bag" hats and the Revolutionary War reenactors.

[EdinVA]

LOL!   Goes to show you.....I never ventured beyond Medium Roast.

PS:  Espresso Party would be racist.   

I would have speiled it the same way.. 

[jmyrlefuller]

Those voters will still be voting in 2016.

And 2018, and 2020, and 2022—plus, their numbers are growing. Can you see why I don't have an optimistic view of our country's future?

[Lando Lincoln]

I would have speiled it the same way..