[tvtimeout]

The Tea Party is not a party at all. The name is representative of a grass roots movement comprised of American voters who are tired of watching liberal Democrats redefine the basic tenets of the US Constitution. These voters are usually gainfully employed, tax paying folks who have their pants pulled up where they should be and have had enough of paying the bills for people who don't want to work. The liberal Democrat knows only too well he can depend on the non-working people in the US to continue to vote democratic because they have openly promised to keep the checks going out as long as their adoring public keeps voting them back into office. Vote buying is all it amounts to.

The coalition of minority/special interest groups that comprise the Democratic voting base is a strange mix of folks with their hands out. A super-pack of money and favor seekers. The gays want special laws passed; they want the institution of marriage redefined from a life long union between one man and one woman, to a union between two anythings. And, the family is to be redefined as any combination of humans and or wildlife that may choose to live together. Folks that think they're too good to work for a living have been made to believe entitlements are human rights, so they vote Democrat. Earth worshippers want to revert civilization back to the days prior to the industrial revolution and are therefore trying to regulate industry out of existence through pollution standards which, thanks to an ever acutely increasing angle of ascent, will never be met. Organized labor to me is the faction of the party that doesn't make sense. If one works for a living and is trying to attain as good an existence for self and family as possible through hard work, why the dedication to a party sworn to met the needs of those who won't work to support themselves? Ne'er the twain shall meet, the two concepts are infinite poles apart.

What's hilarious about tvtimeout's line of thought, whatever that may be, is the failure to recognize 220 plus years of American history. We are what we have been from 1776 to date. Free enterprise, checks and balances, the concept of being governed of the people, for the people, by the people. etc. There are enough level headed folks around to get things staightened out. Debate and process have always been part of our success as a nation. We know what works, we have our own glorious and successful history to guide us. Trying something new is how we got ourselves into the mess we're in. The "Great Society" experiment didn't work. Now the question is, how do we stop the runaway entitlement train, and who has the courage to budget us back onto the right track? Folks like Paul Ryan will make it happen if they get the needed support at the voting booth. To me it is really a question of character rather than politics or parties. Man is to earn his living by the "sweat of his brow", not laying around in front of a big screen TV demanding others pay for his needs and wants. To succeed we just need to adhere to the values of the past, and vote for candidates of moral fiber.

Voting for a non-viable candidate is cutting one's nose off to spite his face. Ron Paul has NO chance. He is a far cry short of Ross Perot and only somewhat better than Ralph Nader. Which, admittedly still puts him out in front of Obama. When you go in and vote for Paul in November, you will be helping Obama.

I would think they would fall under the line of the libertarian party.