Thoughts on the Tea Party Movement

I have mixed feelings about the Tea Party movement. It is based in a valid dissatisfaction with the corruption and partisan gridlock in Washington. I agree that both parties seem too beholden to special-interest lobbyists and too busy scoring political points to act in the best interests of the country.

However, the movement veers off into nuttiness when it comes to the specifics of policy. Its two most visible leaders, Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck, are prime examples. According to the fact-check websites, both Palin and Beck regularly mangle the facts with their public statements on a number of issues. Until they start speaking more intelligently it is impossible to take them at all seriously.

The movement's members frequently refer to President Obama as both a "socialist" and a "fascist." Since these are positions on opposite ends of the political spectrum, this is logically incoherent name-calling. Palin, Beck and the rank and file of the movement also frequently accuse Obama of "talking down" to them in a condescending manner. However, as Leonard Pitts points out in The Miami Herald, this accusation says far more about them than it does about Obama. If these people don't like feeling stupid listening to the President discuss the issues, they might try doing some homework and educating themselves.

Apparently, this is not a new feature of populist movements in our country. George Will traced the history of such movements in a recent column in The Washington Post including leaders such as Andrew Jackson, William Jennings Bryan, George Wallace and Ross Perot.

Populism has had as many incarnations as it has had provocations, but its constant ingredient has been resentment, and hence whininess. Populism does not wax in tranquil times; it is a cathartic response to serious problems. But it always wanes because it never seems serious as a solution.

--Ballard Burgher