The lamb stuck to its gun, and the wolf finally relented on its dinner demands and started paddling with its tinny little paws.

It looks like this agreement on raising the debt ceiling passed. Second coming postponed another few months.

It passed the House 269-161. It split the Dem right down the middle: 95-95. Republicans 174-66.

The Senate passed the bill to raise the debt ceiling today, which will be signed into law shortly, staving off America’s default on its debt until 2012, coinciding with the foretold end of the world.

Besides naming buildings after dead soldiers, this is the first piece of bipartisan legislation old Hope-n-Change has presided over. We haven’t seen this in a while. We can thank the Tea Party patriots/racists for pulling this circus back to the middle of the fair ground.

NO YOU CAN’T
NO YOU CAN’T
NO YOU CAN’T

Like I said before – who are you going to replace them with? More partisans that reflect our currently divided society? We need rational, pragmatic, cool-headed leaders. (As opposed to politicians that manage to achieve a slick image) Anyone we kick out now will be replaced by a Tea Party Conservative or an Obama Democrat. We need more Boehners and McCains to bridge the divide between hard-math Tea Partiers and –let’s write a bill and figure in savings from leaving Afghanistan in the future and call it a spending cut– Harry Reid.

Boehner is cool. He’s not a weird ideologue like his Pelosi and Obama counterparts. He’s been trying to put together a deal. His problem is that he needs to pull something together between Obama and the Tea Party. Tea Party won’t move for obvious reasons, they were elected to counter the Obama tide. And Obama is stuck in his ideology.

I see the old problem of poor negotiation skills. It’s like I’ve stated before: The strongest leverage one can have in a negotiation – is the ability to withdraw from the negotiation. The Dems certainly can’t withdraw. They’re in charge, and their ideology relies on wild spending.

The only thing keeping the Republicans in the negotiation, politically, is public opinion. And when it comes to the conservative Republicans, and especially the Tea Partiers – some of whom don’t want the ceiling to rise at all – public opinion prevents them from compromising, so they have the strongest of strong positions. They’re using that position to try and purchase some long-term spending controls — God bless their hearts.

This is why the Dems demagogue. It’s all they have — public opinion. This is why Obama/Dems needs to move to the middle, rather than posting signs on the Left calling it the middle. This is the logical reality. They’ll never get the ardent Tea Partiers, but they can get enough Republicans if they’d only embrace some actual math. Obama’s expectations were odd. It’s as if he expects his charm to cause people to do things against their own interest and against their ideology.

Of course, Obama also has his hard Left breathing down his back. But he shouldn’t let that affect him. I suspect Liberal calls are what caused Obama to retract the deal he and Boehner were working on, the one right before Boehner gave up on direct negotiation with Obama (a task Boehner described as “negotiating with Jello,” which I’m sure we can all understand. Obama never really says anything concrete.) Obama will have the Liberal’s support no matter what, even if they’re butt-hurt and pissy. So it’s not as if he needs to pander to them.

But since no one seems to understand negotiation, now we’re doing this bill-voting show… I don’t know what’s going to happen. Reid’s bill will slip through the Senate no doubt. I bet if they allowed some reasonable amendments they would get enough Republicans to pass the House. I wouldn’t bet on the Dems allowing any reasonable amendments though… If I were to guess, I’d say this thing will crash into the deadline for sure, and the Dems will pull some bullshit to raise the ceiling, something that will get us past the election without any spending cuts.

Regardless, the Tea Party really mucked up some good Republican political strategy. It would have been cool if they took those bullshit “tax increases,” the private jet deduction and whatever the other one(s) were, and agreed to them. The zero tax increase adherence isn’t logical if you can trade some zero-impact bullshit tax deductions for leverage in getting some serious spending controls set in stone.

Eeeehhhwww…. I let a zucchini grow super big in my garden as an experiment. Big zucchini isn’t very good. Tough. I bet it would do well in soup. That was the goal of this particular zucchini, but I already had some zucchini soup made.

If we replace congress to send a message, as some suggest, we’ll replace them with ideologues. And the message they take is the message the loud people make, and the loud people are all ideologues.

It’s been like compounding waves. Bush wasted beloved Bubba’s son Al in a controversial election, ending any hope for the Progressive agenda at the time. Then the Republicans legislated aggressively. The laws they passed came through with bipartisan support, and those laws otherwise would have been palatable by Dems if the President wasn’t a Republican, and weren’t very Conservative. But they still trampled the minority and pissed people off, especially when they cut taxes and talked about ending the filibuster.

The Dems saw their chance to strike back when the post-war strategy failed, and they went after him hard, disregarding troop safety or our actual work in Iraq. Certain politicians road this wave, and in 2008, with the help of a recession, the Dems took the presidency and both houses.

The Dems followed up on none of the war ‘ending’ promises, mostly because the revised Bush strategies worked, and they entered reality once in office. They legislated far more aggressively than the Republicans, passing partisan legislation, spending literally every dollar they could. They talked about ending the filibuster.

So all the anti-war independents, fiscal Conservatives, and ideological Republicans suddenly appeared in a powerful mass called the Tea Party. Within two short years, 8-years’ worth of shift occurred and effectively 2008 happened to the Dems. The Republicans couldn’t take both houses and the presidency — obviously. But they effectively crippled the two branches they couldn’t take by hiring people so seriously dedicated to fiscal discipline and not joining the Washington machine, that won’t raise the precious debt ceiling, and we all think we’re going to die.

So now what? I only see people getting louder. Dems are lashing out at Tea Partiers with the same vitriol they’re now famous for. Regular Republicans are mostly quiet, just trying to survive the Tea Party. Like Boehner. He chose a good time to be elected Speaker didn’t he? Tea Party in his party and Obama leading the other.

It’s like a lamb with a shotgun stranded in a life boat with a wolf. What are they going to settle on through negotiation?  The liberal would say “not drowning”.

The problem isn’t drowning though stupid. They’re in a boat. I was going to use an island, but then I’d have to explain that the island is small and lacking vegetation…

I’d like to see a movement that would dispatch some of these overly dramatic politicians. There was some show on Public Radio where they were playing some clips. The “holding a gun to the county’s head” is popular, as is comparing the Tea Party to Hezbollah and terrorists.

One lady claimed the “Republicans” were ‘fraging’ the American people — frag as in the colloquial term used to describe intentionally killing a fellow soldier. She explained it…

Another said elderly people were calling her office “sobbing” because they were worried they wouldn’t get their checks, and that soldiers in Afghanistan keep asking if they’ll be getting paid. Then she says, “Shame on you Republicans for making that happen!” –Yeah, stupid Republicans! What the hell man? If only the Democrats could get full and total power in Washington. Then all the problems would like, get solved and stuff.

It’s no wonder no one will make decisions in Washington. True, both parties are guilty of demagoguery. In this case though, one side is willing (struggling) to make the tough decisions and the other is struggling to vilify them for it while offering no solutions other than borrowing and spending. Of course, for that one side to suddenly become honest required a crop of consciously and intentionally single term congress people.

We should just confiscate ALL of the income from everyone who makes more than 250k this year. (1.4 Trillion) That will almost pay for the 1.6 Trillion Obama wants the ceiling raised. Budget balanced.

Speaking of demagoguery and fiscal insanity — I saw Barney Frank on C-SPAN yesterday, and again today on FOX. Neither time was he wearing his goofy glasses. He needs those back. Without them he looks like just a regular crazy ranting lunatic old man.

How do you guys like the new press secretary, Jay Carney, the one who looks like a 23-year-old? I think he’s doing a pretty good job — and that’s saying A LOT considering his boss. He’s a lot better than Mr. Smirks-a-lot the pretentious dismisser. Gibbs… Boy was he ever in the wrong position. Isn’t there a dog in the Whitehouse he could be looking after? Don’t let him around people.

Whow… Reid’s bill got shot down hard. 50-49 it got thrown out…. Well short of the current necessary 60 senatorial votes to pass anything. lol Didn’t make it to a vote. Didn’t make it to the House.

I was thinking it might get enough votes from Republicans like Brown. Brown said he’d vote for both bills. I guess not.

Baa, baa…

This is so funny. I can’t help but to laugh. I’m watching the House debates on the Boehner bill for raising the debt ceiling. This is how the debate is going:

A Democrat takes a turn and demagogues the bill based on one or more of the following arguments.
This bill will…
End medicate and social security.
Destroy the economy.
…on the backs of the poor and elderly.
Protects the rich [from our righteous anger].
“Big Oil!”
“Slashing education!”
Something about country clubs…
Political theater.
Why don’t you work with us???
Come to the middle you guys. It’s way over here on the left, btw, you extremists.
“They’re trying to dismantle the government! It’s a freighting time!”
“Literally holds a gun to the head of the American Economy.”
“Worst bill that anyone could imagine in the history of this nation!!!” — D-Texas, Sheila Jackson Lee (How does one qualify such a statement?)
“Bush recession”

Then a Republican says his thing. The bill isn’t doing any of that. We’re just trying apply some rational level of responsibility to our money spending. America would like that to happen. Medicare will die if we don’t so something about our spending.

The funniest thing is when the Dems complain about the Tea Party Republicans, when it was just 1-3 years ago that they were shocking the shit out of us spending unprecedented amounts of money and caused us to hire those crazy folks just to counter the dam President. — Backlash — it’s what got you your President, dumbasses. Now we’ve got a government full of idealistic kids and poets expert in demagoguery. I hope we elect some adults come 2012.

I wish we could turn bogus arguments into energy. C-SPAN would be our national energy source if we could… I really shouldn’t be watching this, but I just finished to do list for the next week.

Boy… The house is having trouble coming to order. The jerks keep chit-chatting while a representative is speaking.

My favorite analogy so far: We’re like a family that earns 50k per year, spends 80k per year, and has a credit card balance of 300k.

Favorite Democratic definition: Balanced Budget Amendment = Republican Dogma. (Beats out “tax saving” = tax increase)

Favorite logical consequence of Dem arguments: A balanced budget amendment is radical.

I have a question. I was thinking about Hillary the other day – can’t remember why, might have been something about female social progress. Anyway, over the past 10-15 years I’ve had a certain amount of admiration for her. In the past four years, my admiration has been markedly stronger.

I like how she’s been able to maintain a certain level of dignity, despite Bubu’s wet-cigar incident, her generally unfair treatment as a female politician, her weirdly unfair treatment by the sudden pro-Obama movement, and her defeat in the 2008 primary. She’s got character – which is rare in politics and utterly missing in the current Whitehouse.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t want her in charge. As much as I appreciate her ideas on improving society, as you know, I think her ideas for getting there are aren’t based in reality, although her version is a damn-sigh more realistic and honest than the regular-Liberal shenanigans we’ve been enjoying for the past three years.  And it would be great having an actual leader up there. Obama is sort of like having a really smart little kid in charge of things, you know. He’s got all these fancy ideas, audacious confidence, a naively optimistic set of assumptions – which is adorable. It just doesn’t work when you’re supposed to be leading adults.

And that’s my question. Are Liberals pissed or what? I mean, if I were a Liberal I’d be pissed, unless I was in some type of denial, which is kind of the Liberal’s regular state. Yeah, yeah… The healthcare bill passed. But did it? Did it really? I don’t think so – I mean – if I were a Liberal I wouldn’t think so.

If I were a Liberal, I’d be looking at Congress right now, I’d be watching them argue and discuss spending cuts. Not whether or not to do some spending cuts – but how much to cut spending. I’d be watching Congress struggle to make a deal in order to raise the debt ceiling. I’d be watching the Democrats give in to all kinds of spending cuts, and the Republicans standing firm on zero tax rate increases. I’d be watching Obama and Dems try like hell to demagogue the issue — balance the budget on the backs of students and seniors, tax private jets, increase tax revenue — and failing miserably to get public support, meanwhile independents worry more about our spending. I’d be watching Obama himselfput SS and Medicare on the table. I’d be watching all this, remembering the audacious hope I had just a little while ago, how we had a super majority for two years, and I’d be looking at what we managed to achieve, and I’d be like – WHAT THE F***********************K!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So there’s my question: How pissed are Liberals? Just imagine what Hillary Rodham Clinton would have done with that super majority, healthcare debate, this debate, and everything else — who knows what else! I might be interested in a Democratic primary next year. And I’d own Hillary a serious heart-felt apology.

If I were a Liberal (Progressives, not necessarily a Democrat), I’d be feeling seriously ripped off. I thought it saw the dawn of our foretold new age. Instead I got a little bit of cash to sprinkle on crippled state governments that lasted all of about 9 months, and a big bloated piss-poor excuse for a healthcare reform bill.

Conservatives like to complain about the Obama administration, and vilify the big scary Hippy President, and act like he’s done grave damage. But the reality is, things couldn’t have gone much better for Conservatives under a hard-Left President with a super majority. Strategy wise, policy wise, legislatively, Obama’s term has been an unmitigated armature-hour disaster. Obama had the whole cake, we were going to have it all to ourselves, but somehow, on the way in it got dropped face-down out in the parking.

They passed the Goody bill (aka Stimulus) first thing – sort of the self-congratulatory appetizer for the new world of Hope and Change. But after that, momentum stopped. That bill is now a 200-pound albatross around the collective Progressive/Keynesian neck. It’s a big, “See, toldja. Government spending don’t do jack-diddly for a floundering economy.”

After that, for reasons difficult to understand, Pelosi burned down congress with the Cap and Trade bill. Why? Who gave her the keys??? Sure, she was elected to head up the House, but why did Obama let her have his car. Who didn’t think she would immediately squeal out of the driveway and start running people down at random?

Then they finally get to our beloved and sacred health care reform. Now seriously – if I were a Progressive, the whole healthcare debate and legislative process would have me feeling physically ill. I know a lot of Leftists try to blame the Republicans for something… But those Leftists aren’t real Leftists. Anyone paying attention knows what happened, and the Republicans didn’t have a spark of power to do a damn thing about it. That first whole year was spent sloppily ‘negotiating’ one massive bill with Democrats. All the while, Republicans were left out in the cold, able to sit back in their minority and leisurely take pot-shots, picking us off here and there, priming for the shellacking of 2010.

Even after that there weren’t enough Dems to pass the pathetic thing, not that it mattered, because it had been stripped down and ruined numerous purchased votes ago. In my Progressive mind, I hear from my fellow Progressives, “This is a starting point.” Bull shit! If anyone were in charge of this circus, anyone with even a vague idea of what’s going on, we would have passed a “Starting point” bill first thing, gently, the way Obama promised. Instead, we wasted all of Obama’s political capital passing a “starting point” bill that isn’t a good starting point. We’ll be lucky in our lifetime to see enough Progressive political capital to take step two.

It’s like I’ve been saying. If Obama or any of his crew had any experience leading a diverse organization, or negotiate with humans, they would have thrown an arm around the Republicans and gave them whatever they wanted in order to get them on board with healthcare reform. Only, include stuff everyone likes! Only, include stuff that will visibly help people immediately. A year later there would have been, if nothing else, plenty of political capital for a Health Care Reform: Step 2. And in that year, the Dems could have carefully negotiated it among themselves.

Instead, they chose the smash-and-grab technique. They had political capital – so they spent it, loudly and proudly. Get it while the getn’s good. Bamboozle. Shock and awe. And what they ended up with was a sickly bill, scaled back by paranoid Democrats worried about their next election, labeled Obamacare, the distraction that busied Washington while our economy sunk.

As a Progressive, I’d be upset.

Netanyahu addressed the US congress today, reminding me what a real leader sounds and looks like. He nailed his speech out of the building. The capitol building breathed a sigh of relief, finally having a real grown up executive speech echoed off its walls after a complete absence of such over the last couple of years.

I really like the election results. The Republicans have the house, so that puts a stop to the angry onslaught of crazy Liberal haphazard legislation. I feel safe now. But they don’t have the Senate, so that gives Obama one less thing upon which to blame his problems and failures.

Strategically, long term, this was the best result. A HUGE sweep wasn’t possible because only a few conservative Democratic districts were up for election. Had the Republicans taken both houses, it wouldn’t have been to their advantage because of the Presidential veto. They wouldn’t have been able to pass anything, or repeal anything. Now a sanity filter in on the legislative branch, which will due until 2012, when more gains might be made, specifically the Presidency, and likewise 2014, gathering back many of the star-struck Yes We Can conservative districts. And the House can pass some good-sounding stuff and let the Democrats be the opposition. All-in-all, this sets up the Republicans best for 2012.

My biggest disappointments were that Frank, Boxer, and Reid all got away. It was unlikely, but I was hoping for a joyous surprise. And California – well – good luck California, Brown will certainly lead you to victory in your war on business.

You guys watch. US business is breathing a collective sight of relief, and over the next few months we’ll see more investment. Someone essentially called Mr. Business on the phone and informed him that he can adjust his outlook more optimistically, Obama can’t whip out any big new ideas – like taxing good ideas or math – which means figures will show more money for expansion.

I’m excited to hear from Obama later today. Hopefully he doesn’t hit us over the head with an irrational perspective and an arrogant condescending attitude, which is his habit under pressure. It would be cool if he would concede that the fanciful idea that we can borrow and spend our way out of this type of recession is no longer a feasible idea – this type of recession being one of permanent change; e.g. manufacturing leaving, over-inflated housing market popping, developing countries taking over technology, and mainly the US has no new economic driver, unless you count Green Energy, but you guys don’t, because you guys aren’t stupid.

It would be cool if he were to concede that a different path must now be taken, and super cool if he would grasp the economic reality that the only possible way out of this recession is economic growth, which means we need to offer real relief to business in the only way government can: Cutting taxes. There’s no other way.

Spending cuts would be great, but there simply aren’t enough reasonable cuts to make a numeric difference in the budget, except for raising the retirement age, which needs to happen, incrementally. And raising taxes, or not continuing the Bush tax cuts, is a miserable idea for two really big reasons. 1. We’re in a recession and increasing those taxes will slow the economy! 2. Taxes are already so high, increasing them, or letting the Bush tax cuts expire, will not increase tax revenue by any helpful amount, and could very well decrease tax revenue by shrinking the economy, or driving business out of the country.

Maybe now Obama will have to act like the guy he campaigned as. You know, like how he said we have more upon which we agree than disagree. And how he said that when he disagrees with you, that’s when he’ll listen most closely to you. LOL People bought that.

Wow!!! Michigan went for some RED! Snyder took 59%! How did that happen? And we elected two Republican Congressmen.

I really like these results. The Republicans have the house, so that puts a stop to the angry onslaught of crazy Liberal haphazard legislation. I feel safe now. But they don’t have the Senate, so that gives Obama one less thing upon which to blame his problems and failures.

Strategically, long term, this was the best result. A HUGE sweep wasn’t possible because only a few conservative Democratic districts were up for election. Had the Republicans taken both houses, it wouldn’t have been to their advantage because of the Presidential veto. They wouldn’t have been able to pass anything, or repeal anything. Now a sanity filter is on the legislative branch, which will due until 2012, when more gains might be made, specifically the Presidency, and likewise 2014, gathering back many of the star-struck “Yes We Can!” conservative districts. And the House can pass some good-sounding stuff and let the Democrats be the opposition. All-in-all, this sets up the Republicans best for 2012.

My biggest disappointments were that Frank, Boxer, and Reid all got away. It was unlikely, but I was hoping for a joyous surprise. And California – well – good luck California, Brown will certainly lead you to victory in your war on business.

You guys watch. US business is breathing a collective sigh of relief, and over the next few months we’ll see more investment. Someone essentially called Mr. Business on the phone and informed him that he can adjust his outlook more optimistically, Obama can’t whip out any big new ideas – like taxing good ideas or math – which means figures will show more money for expansion.

I’m excited to hear from Obama later today. Hopefully he doesn’t hit us over the head with an irrational perspective and an arrogant condescending attitude, which is his habit under pressure. It would be cool if he would concede that the fanciful idea that we can borrow and spend our way out of this type of recession is no longer a feasible idea – this type of recession being one of permanent change; e.g. manufacturing leaving, over-inflated housing market popping, developing countries taking over technology, and mainly the US has no new economic driver, unless you count Green Energy, but you guys don’t, because you guys aren’t stupid.

***Update***
Did everyone catch Obama’s press conference today. He’s sounding like campaign Obama. I swear, that man has two personalities. Just last week he was selling some nonsense on The Daily Show – that ending the filibuster would encourage compromise. Then today he’s talking about listening. Maybe now that Dad’s home Obama will actually behave in the way he was advocating during him masterful campaign and in his book? I’m tempted to have optimism. Maybe someone will write some rational legislation?

It would be cool if he were to concede that a different path must now be taken, and super cool if he would grasp the economic reality that the only possible way out of this recession is economic growth, which means we need to offer real relief to business in the only way government can: Cutting taxes. There’s no other way.

Spending cuts would be great, but there simply aren’t enough reasonable cuts to make a numeric difference in the budget, except for raising the retirement age, which needs to happen, incrementally. And raising taxes, or not continuing the Bush tax cuts, is a miserable idea for two really big reasons. 1. We’re in a recession and increasing those taxes will slow the economy! 2. Taxes are already so high, increasing them, or letting the Bush tax cuts expire, will not increase tax revenue by any helpful amount, and could very well decrease tax revenue by shrinking the economy, or driving business out of the country.

Maybe now Obama will have to act like the guy he campaigned as. You know, like how he said we have more upon which we agree than disagree. And how he said that when he disagrees with you, that’s when he’ll listen most closely to you. LOL People bought that. LOL.

Bush II’s book is almost out. I wonder how soon a paper copy will show up at Meijer? I’ve heard a few things about it. Bush apparently became sick to his stomach when it became apparent no WMDs were to be found.

The trouble is competing ideology. Either side has a totally different approach to constructing the solution for certain problems.

But yes, indeed, we are talking about negotiation when we talk about compromise. Obama seems to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what negotiation means. Think of the whole opening dialogue with Iran campaign point. He doesn’t seem to grasp that negotiation is an adjustment of wills according to leverage. And the goal is to have both sides leave happy. He seems to think negotiation is charming someone into doing something that they otherwise wouldn’t have, without you enlightening charm.

The two sides should come together and discuss each others priorities – and make trade, like two kids trading lunch items. The more leverage you have, the more you can demand. That’s negotiation. That’s how business deals work.

Taking Obama’s legislation as an example. He made one of the biggest mistakes you can make in a negotiation, and gave the Reps one of the biggest forms of leverage: Ability to withdraw. At first he though he had ALL the leverage, so they went after the Pelosi Special. But this scared off many conservative Dems, let everyone know the Obama administration was being belligerent, didn’t include any Republican priorities, giving the Republicans that one big stick: Ability to withdraw and form a bipartisan opposition.

There was nothing keeping the Reps in the negotiation – actually – they were kicked right the fuck out. Remember? The closed door?

Ending the filibuster will just shift more leverage to the majority side. It won’t increase compromise in any way. It will only make one side able to demand more – or kick the other side out all together. This would be in the Democrat’s overall interest, because they’re “Progressives” and have a long list of big changes.

That was the fundamental failure of this presidency. He can try blaming others, but what really happened was he thought he could dictate change and ruined his position, in all of two months. Good work Pelosi. Obama could have pulled the other side in and ONLY passed solutions both sides agreed upon, and strengthened his position – validated his Obama mystique.

Think about that. Think about if he had immediately passed a short and easily implementable healthcare reform bill that first fall. A bill both sides had a stake in and showed some pleasant results that year. He would have earned credibility, and significantly increased his leverage for Phase 2. And Phase 3 might happen in year 6 of the Obama administration and look like a public option.

And yes, there would have been butt-hurt Reps over there holding out on anything. But he could have grabbed half or a third with an honest healthcare reform bill. They wouldn’t have had a choice. They wouldn’t have had the Ability to Withdraw.

Instead he now has the record of passing, or attempting to pass, three bills, all with purely partisan support, and all with bipartisan opposition:

1. Spent $800 billion that didn’t seem to do one good-damn thing.
2. Half passed a cap’n trade bill that scared – and is scaring – the shit out of business during a recession.
3. Passed a healthcare bill against the will of the people and through the use of parliamentary tricks.

Bad economy or not, the reason Obama’s support has dwindled is this: He didn’t do enough for the Left, and the moderates feel like they got scammed.

In the recent primaries and elections, the Tea Party has proven itself a political force. I still don’t know what to make of them, though. They’s stated they don’t want to create another political party, but reform the ones we’ve got. I like that. Yet there’s something about their decked out patriot costumes and slogans that shouts Obama Birthers and 9/11 Truthers. What do you think? Is the Tea Party something to support?

Movements can be powerful. A powerful movement is good or dangerous – depending on your politics.

The Tea Party is a unique type of movement for the United States. It’s large and quiet. Most US movements are small and loud, representing specific minority issues, and are often organized and financed by unions and other organizations.

The Tea Party movement represents the general ideas of efficiently small government and personal responsibility, which are ideas held by the majority of working Americans, regardless of past voting habits. And the movement is ‘grass roots,’ meaning it simply sprang up comprising numerous like-minded people throughout society. That’s why Tea Party rallies are held on the weekend, so the whole group doesn’t have to get the day off, unlike the common Hippy-Liberal rallies that appear on weekdays intentionally to be disruptive.

You can tell the Tea Party movement is powerful just by how nervous it makes outspoken Liberals. And the Liberal criticism of the movement is weak at best. Liberals, including Obama, describe the Tea Party like they’re Anarchists, wanting no government – but the Tea Party just wants government to stop growing wildly. They agree government is a good thing.

Liberals describe the Tea Party as hateful and dangerous – but the Tea Party has harmed no one, committed no property damage (unheard of at Liberal rallies), don’t cause disruption, and even pick up after themselves. The favorite Liberalcriticism of the Tea Party, of course, is that Tea Party activists are anti-Obama racists – but the only examples of racist behavior has been by Liberals planting themselves at Tea Party rallies. There’s even a $100,000 reward for evidence of a Tea Partier using a racial slur – unclaimed!

The Tea Party has proven a strong force in the few special elections held since its appearance. And if you believe in its basic principles – not further growing/financing more government bureaucracies – then supporting it is natural. The few goofballs wearing the 1700s gear, birthers, and 9/11 truthers are few at most. As far as political rallies go, you’d expect to see more weirdos. But the average Tea Partier is the average working American. Don’t be fooled by the press and its tendency to show only the most eccentric or dangerous looking members of a protest in its news reports. Yeah, the Tea Party is mostly white, but so is America.

The real question is strategic: What will this movement mean for the direction of the country? Movements like this can be extremely productive in promoting their ideas – but can be equally as destructive to them.

Electing Brown in Massachusetts was an example of a productive direction of power. It stuck a republican into one of the most traditionally Democratic seats in Congress. An example of a possibly destructive direction was the Tea Party induced victory of Rand Paul over Trey Grayson in Kentucky’s Republican primary election for the mid-term Senate race. Grayson was the more electable candidate, the one establishment Republicans were backing. And Rand Paul, somewhat a radical, has since already said a few ‘unelectable’ things…

So we’ll see. If this were a Democrat upsergence I’d predict that the eventual result would be repetition of history: Dems splitting the vote and handing victory to the minority, how Lincoln got elected. But the Tea Party is mostly Republican and Libertarian. The Libertarians worry me, but Republicans are generally a big-picture type of people who will recognize the necessity of electing electable people, rather than ideal people.

And by ‘electable’ I don’t mean moderate. Indeed, America wants a moderate government, one that will provide expert non-ideological solutions. But that would require expert non-ideological people. And those kinds of people rarely run for political office and even more rarely are elected (they’re usually ugly and/or awkward). So we have to settle for electing the most reasonable seeming ideologs in even numbers on each side of the spectrum. Right now we’re dealing with a swinging pendulum in that respect.