Religious Right is scared of the Tea Partys?

[Martinus]

I don't buy the tea party-libertarian angle.  I think they're perhaps exceptionally loony on economic policy - reaching desperately into Ron Paul territory.  But at that Tea Party Convention, for example, the biggest applause lines were still about abortion and, to a lesser extent, foreign policy.

That's true. Rather than libertarian, I think they are "classically" populist.

[Viking]

A split in the GOP over this in the works? Some of the guys they quoted there seem a bit weird to me. I can't imagine a Republican using the term social-justice in a non-pejorative way, for example. And that Merritt guy wrote a book about how God is Green ( I googled him, it made me suspicious). I wonder how big a slice of the GOP pie is represented by people who would be completely siding with Democrats if it weren't for abortion and gay marriage. I can't imagine it's huge.

It's no secret that libertarian-types and religious-types are not super-compatible ideologically, but I've always looked at that difference as one more of focus and emphasis than one of outright conflict. What I mean by that is, that most evangelicals don't mind cutting taxes. It does seem a bit like the Tea Party faction is making no bones about the fact that they intend to completely ignore issues important to the religious faction though. (The ideological conflict for them seems like it would be stronger--I dunno.)

If the fundies do bail, can the GOP win anything without them? I know they might not be a massive chunk of the party, but they're certainly a loud one. And one big enough to make the party a lot less competitive if they stay home.

Since the Tea Party critics in this piece are well-known left-wing evangelicals who support the Democrats anyway it's pretty much a worthless article.  It's just political spin masquerading as journalism.

Yes, damn those left-wing evangelicals Michelle Malkin and Sarah Palin!!

[Admiral Yi]

I'll bite.  What does classical populist mean?

[Viking]

I'll bite.  What does classical populist mean?

Tiberius Gracchus

[Martinus]

I'll bite.  What does classical populist mean?

From wikipedia:

Populism, defined either as an ideology (more rarely and uncommonly), a political philosophy or a type of discourse, is a type of political-social thought which juxtaposes "the people" against "the elites", and urges social and political system changes. [...]It is defined by the Cambridge dictionary as "political ideas and activities that are intended to represent ordinary people's needs and wishes".

Populism is often marked by a lack of clear ideological profile but rather is an expression of often ideologically (or sometimes even logically) conflicting and contradictory positions and ideas. The central "basis" is "common sense" and "anti-elitism". I guess you could say it's the Western democracy equivalent of a peasant rebellion.

[Viking]

There is no such thing as common sense.

[Sheilbh]

I find the cultural populism of American conservatism deeply weird.  I can understand a cultural conservative being someone like T.S. Eliot, an ultra-elitist snob dismissing parts of the canon and elevating other parts of it, moaning about some aspects of the nature of the modern world (Malcolm Muggeridge is another cultural conservative).  I don't understand what's conservative about a movement vulgar enough to include some American conservatives.  But then there's always been money in appealing to the masses, it's just not terribly conservative.

[Admiral Yi]

I find the cultural populism of American conservatism deeply weird.  I can understand a cultural conservative being someone like T.S. Eliot, an ultra-elitist snob dismissing parts of the canon and elevating other parts of it, moaning about some aspects of the nature of the modern world (Malcolm Muggeridge is another cultural conservative).  I don't understand what's conservative about a movement vulgar enough to include some American conservatives.  But then there's always been money in appealing to the masses, it's just not terribly conservative.

High culture is the preserve of the effeminate, liberal northeasterner.

[Sheilbh]

I find the cultural populism of American conservatism deeply weird.  I can understand a cultural conservative being someone like T.S. Eliot, an ultra-elitist snob dismissing parts of the canon and elevating other parts of it, moaning about some aspects of the nature of the modern world (Malcolm Muggeridge is another cultural conservative).  I don't understand what's conservative about a movement vulgar enough to include some American conservatives.  But then there's always been money in appealing to the masses, it's just not terribly conservative.

High culture is the preserve of the effeminate, liberal northeasterner.

How can you want to conserve a culture you loathe?

[Admiral Yi]

How can you want to conserve a culture you loathe?

American conservatives are not Burkean conservatives.

[Viking]

How can you want to conserve a culture you loathe?

American conservatives are not Burkean conservatives.

QFT

But then again American liberals are not Lockean liberals.

[Sheilbh]

How can you want to conserve a culture you loathe?

American conservatives are not Burkean conservatives.

I thought Kirk and Buckley loved Burke

[Admiral Yi]

I thought Kirk and Buckley loved Burke

That may well be.

[BuddhaRhubarb]

 

well sure,  fear is their bread and butter... this is what both the tea baggers  and the religious right (closet cases all, according to the vast liberal  media conspiracy (more ) have most in common... the need to instill fear into average citizenry. pretty much anything that is unpalatable to either camp seems to be the only requirement for said fear mongering.

Worst "political" movements in history imho. hateful horrible people who apparently have not one nice thing to say about anything progressive.

If Y'all want to ruled by the dregs of humanity, well go ahead listen to the tea baggers and the religi-o-tards.

they have "your" best interests at heart.

[Sheilbh]

I thought Kirk and Buckley loved Burke

That may well be.

And that they are considered the intellectual fathers of modern American conservatism?