LOCAL VOICES: Fight for your right to Tea Party

Sandusky High School graduate attending Ashland University To be a faction a group must be actua
Sandusky Register Staff
May 13, 2010

Sandusky High School graduate attending Ashland University

To be a faction a group must be actuated by an impulse that is contrary "to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community"

James Madison, Federalist 10

This column is in direct response to a comment about my last column.

The topic was about the Tea Party movement being a faction of the kind James Madison warned about in Federalist 10 of the Federalist Papers.

First we have to remember the context which this was written. Madison was arguing for the creation of a centralized government, over a small, more direct, democracy. Obviously history shows us that Madison and the Federalist Party won this debate, and the creation of the government as we know it was the result. Federalist 10 tells us that factions in a democracy are much more dangerous than in a republic, because they have more power to impose their will on the minority.

Now we have to address the issue of whether the Tea Party movement is even a faction to begin with.

As Madison said, a faction has to work against the rights of other citizens. From what I can tell, this is not the Tea Party movement at all. They are making a call for government to return to what they believe are constitutional principles: More representation from elected officials, a smaller more principled government, better management of tax money. These principles seem far from contrary "to the rights of other citizens."

So, if what the Tea Party movement stands for is perfectly acceptable, and if America governed by a republican form of government, then it is laughable to consider the Tea Party as a dangerous faction able to impose its will on the minority. What seems even more interesting is how much resistance there is to this movement from the Democratic Party. It seems to me that what the Tea Party has been preaching is applicable to both parties.

Both parties need to take a look at their heritage and realize that these messages are not so crazy after all. With a government that is spending an unprecedented amount, maybe a message asking for fiscal responsibility is not so bad. With elected officials making decisions on how much money they can get for voting for a bill, maybe a message asking for elected officials to listen to their constituents more is not so bad. With the government looking to control more and more of our lives in ways that have previously been used by Marxist societies, maybe a message asking for a limited principled government is not so bad.

Years ago, people had a vision of a nation where citizens did not have to be concerned with the government interfering with their lives. They fought and died for the liberties we have today. Great men like James Madison fought for the creation of a government where groups could come together in like interest and voice their opinions.

Men like Madison, Hamilton and Washington all believed a republic would allow for groups to voice their concerns about government, but not allow for overwhelming strength in numbers.

Whether you agree with what the Tea Party movement says or not, does not matter. The fact is our Founders set up our government so that they might voice their opinions. The next time you hear about this movement on the news, or read about it in the paper, just be thankful our government was created the way it was, and be thankful that we have the rights we do.


Man of the Republic

Doesn't it seem kind of hypocritical for Brutus to denounce a movement like the Tea Party, and to criticize all those who would support it, and yet support the similar liberal groups that he says exist?


Dr. Omar Al-Talib, sociology professor and former Libertarian Party of Ohio member, is no longer teaching at Ashland University (I heard he was doing some very unlibertarian work for Uncle Sam in his native Iraq), so as a history teacher and Libertarian myself I'll see if I can fill in some gaps in your history of Madison #10.

In the "Coup d'etat Convention at Philadelphia" in 1787, Hamiltonian proponents of a strong central government, who had lamented the establishment of the confederacy since the publication of Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire in 1776, took the opportunity to overthrow the Articles rather than amend them (the meeting was called for "the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation") and replace them with a Roman-style Constitution. To camouflage their actions and intentions to secure a neo-Roman government as their tool to usurp the peoples' liberties in order to privilege themselves, they then stole the term "Federalist" and applied it to their series of Orwellian double-speak propaganda dubbed "The Federalist Papers". The true federalists who stood for the Principles of 1776 and the Articles of Confederation, were given the misnomer "Anti-Federalists". The key players in the anti-federalist "Federalist" movement were three young opportunists: James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Fisher Ames.

Genuine federalists (who received the misnomer "Anti-Federalists" thanks to the Hamiltonians) voiced many penetrating insights into the misuse of governmental power that is inevitable under the U.S. Constitution, which was generated by the so-called Anti-Federalists who were nothing but in favor of federalism and opposed to a strong central government.

Consider George Mason's prophetic criticisms made in objection to ratification to the newly proposed Constitution:

"No Bill of Rights; only a shadow of representation; the Senate a powerful and dangerous threat to the peoples' liberties; the Federal judiciary will destroy those of several states; lack of a constitutional council for the President; criticism of the President's power to pardon; and of the Presidential-Senatorial power to make treaties; a two-thirds majority for the exercise of the commerce power should have been required; critcism of the necessary and proper clause; criticism of some of the restrictions imposed on the states; the government will begin as a moderate aristocracy, and probably develop into either a monarchy or a corrupt, oppressive aristocracy."

The so-called Anti-Federalists fought against the creation of a strong central government as embodied in the Constitution. Men such as George Mason, Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, and John Taylor opposed the ratification of the unArticles-of-Confederational Constitution, which did create a federal government with the powers to impose taxes at will and to create a standing army that would consume taxes and could be used to create a new tyranny. It also provided for a financial apparatus capable of dispensing privilege, thus creating a new aristocracy; and granted the office of the president such power that the office-holder could in effect become a monarch.

Although the so-called Anti-Federalists (who actually loved federalism but detested strong central government) lost the battle of Constitutional ratification to the Hamiltonians who usurped the label Federalists (although they actually loved strong central government especially of the Roman kind and detested federalism), the Anti-Federalists who loved federalism were successful in creating the Bill of Rights - which materialized from their attempts to undo the gains of the Hamiltonian Romanists and to protect the rights of the individual from the inevitable encroachment by the state.

Richard Bebb

duhast -

He claims to be an investigative reporter who felt like he needed to go in undercover to get straight answers. Do I support what he did, no. Does this mean that ACORN employees didn't promote underage prostitution, NO. So what is your point?? And I have read the affidavit where was wire-tapping mentioned.



Oh my bad, because dressing as telephone repairmen to gain access to a senator’s office is ALWAYS lawful, right? If this was a liberal film maker and a conservative senator, you’d be screaming bloody murder and accuse him of domestic terrorism.

You are correct; he was actually charged with entering federal property under false pretenses with the intent of committing a felony. What felony would you image that could be, hmmm?

In case you’d like to read the affidavit…

Richard Bebb

goofus -
I watched his CPAC speech as well as some of the interviews he has done on talk radio and I have always come away very impressed. Its a shame Crist preferred to jump on the Barry train, he will pay the price in Nov.

duhast -

O'keefe was NOT charged with wire-tapping its another lie that was created by the left wing media to attempt to discredit his efforts against ACORN.

As far as your knee jerk reaction claim, maybe it was because congress didnt want federal dollars going to a group that promotes under age prostitution.........


Why did they vote to cut funding to ACORN? Classic knee jerk reaction. It’s sad that congress can be so influenced by the media. You know the guy that “broke” that story on Fox has been arrested for illegally entering and wire tapping a congressperson’s office??

As for the filibuster: Should have been eliminated years ago. I don’t care which party is in charge. Dump it.


Richard, I've been to a few fundraisers here in Florida, I have met the man, and he is the real deal.

Richard Bebb

On a different topic there was an interesting link on Drudge today regarding the support of the filibuster by the dems who currently are trying to change the rules to ram healthcare down our throats......... truth hurts - I was against it before I was for it



We are in agreement on that as well, duhast.

Richard Bebb

goofus -

Didn't you know Marco Rubio is made up and has been ginned up by Fox News because there are no minorities in the republican party.......

Im not going to go over the details of the criminal front group ACORN again but will say this if they were unfairly attacked by the right and Fox then why did congress vote to cut off their funding at a time when the dems held the super majority ?????


While I agree that CEO’s pay is very outrageous, why do we have such an issue with it but are OK when a sports figure gets paid the same or more to toss a ball around for a few hours a day??


Tea parties are the devil, but take a peek at what passes muster at GM.


Sound liberal economics. Get after 'em lefties.

A thread full of diversion while this goes on. Thank heavens the government can see their way clear to pay this man a 'living wage' on our dime. I await the cries of outrage from both sides of the spectrum.

Have at it.


Have we all looked up cargo cult yet.


The Acorn story was not broken by Fox, it was hyped up by them. Once again, blatant partisan pot stirring on their part. Fair and balanced my #%$#@!

The tea parties were ginned up by Fox.


Brutus you nitwit the escapade has nothing to do with Acorn being out of money and the acorn people already in jail for voter fraud. Richard Bebb; you know that Duhast or doofus brutus never heard of Marco Rubio yet. I see where some leftists are already attacking him. The left always attack what they fear.

Richard Bebb

C'mon now duahst use my whole statement -

"I look forward to the support of the tea partiers in November to push true conservative republican candidates. Because I think we can all agree lower taxes and limited government have NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY"

I was just pointing out that the movement is more aligned with the republican party and you knew that. Yet again you attempt to discredit the movement by claiming that the tea parties that have sprung up were ginned up by Fox and that there is nothing but white racist people who attend. So again I welcome your arrogance and bias towards the movement and Ill see you in November.

brutus smith

goofus, once again you need to get updated on the phony Acorn thing, the little weasel and his gal pal fessed up. Of course when you only read right wingnut blogs, you miss the real news. Bwahahahaaaha.


I would think that someone with a great knowledge and sky high IQ would fathom what is meant by state run media. Any news item that would bring discredit to the annoited ones agenda is not aired. One only has to look to the Acorn scam. Two weeks after Fox news broke the story, the state run media chimed in. Fox news and the New York Times are the only news sources that covered the global warming hoaxes. Your elitism continues to shine. You have no confidence in the American people's ability to distinguish between good and bad. The liberal intelligencia like yourself have contempt for the American people and whom they decide to vote for. You being the liberal elite with your mensa membership should be the only voice as to who gets nominated. Americans can't be trusted to make the correct choice.


Right, so CBS,ABC,NBC,CNN,MSNBC are state run, but Fox is not?? Your logic never ceases to amaze me.

No, there is no requirement for a college degree. But the framers intentionally set different requirements for Senators and Representatives. If you read through federalist #63 as well as others, the reason for the Senate to have greater qualifications (age and residency) is stated. This was to get a more knowledgeable and qualified candidate. Representatives on the other hand were obviously intended to represent their constituents. But they were also expected to be knowledgeable of varying state laws and foreign affairs. It can be assumed that were looking for well rounded people that knew at least a little bit about what they were legislating.

So, it drives me insane to see candidates elected based on one hot button issue when they are complete idiots about every thing else. It would be like voting for a blithering idiot because he said he was anti-abortion. Know anybody like that?


Obama’s rules of engagement: Calling lawyers for permission to kill terroristsposted at 10:43 am on February 23, 2010 by Patterico
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly When we have the terrorists in our crosshairs, we are still calling the lawyers to ask permission to fire.
Quite literally.
An excellent Wall Street Journal article highlights the infuriating rules of engagement that we are operating under in Afghanistan:
When Capt. Zinni spotted the four men planting the booby trap on the afternoon of Feb. 17, the first thing he did was call his lawyer.
“Judge!” he yelled.
Capt. Matthew Andrew, judge advocate for 1st Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, advises the battalion about when it is legal to order the airstrikes. He examined the figures on the video feed closely. “I think you got it,” Capt. Andrew said, giving the OK for the strike.
But, the story reports, Zinni (son of Anthony Zinni) ended up spotting kids nearby — so the strike was called off. The terrorists ended up getting away.
Is it just an accident that some kids were wandering near insurgents planting a booby trap? Almost certainly not:
Capt. Zinni had seen this scenario before in Marjah. Insurgents using women and children for cover as they moved weapons or crossed open spaces into fighting positions in buildings. In this case, the captain was certain that the children were acting—either by their own volition or under coercion—as shields for the men planting the bomb.
The way the Taliban see it, he thought, they’d win either way: The Americans might hold their fire and allow them to plant a bomb unmolested. Or the Americans might kill a few civilians, a propaganda victory for an insurgent force increasingly adept at using the media to spread its message.
Leftist critics will point to another Journal article that shows what might happen when the rules of engagement are not followed. In an airstrike far from Marjah, 27 civilians were killed. The attack appears to have been a mistake — an attack on a purely civilian target.
My view is that, like friendly fire casualties (which are shockingly commonplace, far more than most people realize), casualties like this are a tragic but unavoidable result of war. War is not clean and it is not perfect. But that doesn’t mean that we should hold our fire when children are being used as human shields, as apparently occurred in the initial example above. Those insurgents may have successfully set another bomb that might kill our soldiers elsewhere. We shouldn’t be putting soldiers’ lives at stake for the sake of a propaganda victory.
There are no easy answers. But I fear that our enemy’s lack of morality, coupled with Obama’s hyper-concern for the good opinion of Afghanis, may be costing us the blood of our young men in uniform.
If so, that is not acceptable.
We should change the rules of engagement, so that the next time we have some killers in our crosshairs, we kill them before they kill us.
Pull the trigger . . . and leave the lawyers out of it.


Finished the job? The left complain daily we were there in the first place oh grossly ignorant one. Since when is the fear of the Tea Party a strictly progressive fear.


Excuse me, I'm still trying to find where it is required to have a college degree to become a representative. Heck, Obama has one and he is a flaming idiot, our first Cargo Cult president.

brutus smith

If Bush would have finished the job in Afghanistan instead of lying about Iraq, we wouldn't have casualties in Afghanistan. To think Carville and Clinton are major players with Progressive Democrats is ignorant. But look who we are talking with.


Gee, what college has an undergraduate program for aspiring representatives. Do you think before you right, a representative has to go to school to become a congressman? I really thought this country was built on the backs of the working man. Your elitism is showing. I can also give you a thousand websites that refute yours, point being? I'm glad you finally realized that George Bush was a brain surgeon. Sacrifice must be the result of fact, not fiction.


Look for these headlines on the state run media [CBS,ABC,NBC,CNN,MSNBC] tonight. 1/4 of mortgages in US are upside down, new home sales lowest on record,GM is paying ex CEO 3,000 dollars an hour to consult,gas prices are approaching 3 dollars per gallon, Obama wants 1 billion to build a new embassy in London,and 1/3 of the casualties in the 8 year afghanistan war have come since Obama's ordered escalation.


BTW Your lame attempt at discrediting my source does not dispute the facts I have posted. I simply picked the first one I saw as an example. Thousands more where that came from. Are you saying Fox news had no part in promoting the tea party movement with blatant political bias?


Goofus, please explain to me which outlets are “State Run”. Or is that only the sources you don’t like? Do you even know what that means?

Also, please stop with the average Joe and political poll garbage. If I were having brain surgery, I wouldn’t take a poll on how to do it or find an average Joe to do the surgery, would I? No. I’d hire a professional that went to school to be a brain surgeon. Our elected officials are supposed to be brain surgeons, not plumbers.

If a company in Sandusky is pumping cyanide into lake, would you be opposed to stopping them because it might cost jobs? Haven’t you ever heard “sacrifice the few to save the many”?


It's been said we have taxation with representation, yeah right. The latest Rasmussen Poll stated that only 21% of Americans believe the democratic controlled government has the consent of the governed. 71% of Americans believe government is doing a poor job with 9% approving congress. The disconnect is obvious. Ask a coal miner in W.Va. Ohio, or Virginia who voted democratic who know sees an administration bent on destroying their jobs. The left has been so long the party of entitlements, they have lost sight of the hard working industrious citizens in this country. When an average Joe's income is cut by some means, he has no choice but to tighten his belt and cut his budget. He now is represented by an administration that continues to spend what they don't have, and openly laugh at the average Joe. Ordinary people can't print money when they run low. Now the big agenda by the left is to say that American's are too dumb to understand the nuances of the Obama agenda. Time, Newsweek, and the New York Times all have editorials to the same. The tea party is a natural occurence to the average american's frustration. Those on the left that only get their news from the state run media have no idea of the disconnect. The average Joe knows global warming is a hoax and it ranks the lowest of any governmental concern even though the state run media has not announced one of the fallacies coming from the IPCC. The papers in Europe run daily features on the global warming fraud, but yet Obama continues cap and trade. With the advent of the internet, people are no longer relying on the daily pablum of the state run media. We, the people, have awoke. If the tea partys are such a non entity why is Bill Clinton and James Carville uniting to smear it. To duhast: oh please,media matters is as much as a reputable news source as WorldNetDaily.com and NewsBuster.org.

brutus smith

The Liberal groups were there. That's why we elected Barack Obama. Hope and Change are a lot better than Dope and Cheney.