It’s time for the MSM to stop equating the Tea Party movement with an anti-government movement. There is a difference between anti-government and limited government. Now I’ll try to explain this in the simplest of terms and use small words so even the MSM will understand. Many years ago in the year 1787 our Founders crafted a document that placed limitations on government. This document is called the Constitution of the United States. Yes that’s right, the Constitution was designed to limit the powers of government because our Founding Fathers knew all too well the destructive force on liberty and freedoms an all powerful government could have on its citizens.
Now some of the Founders like James Madison believed that the Articles of Confederation, which was the document the colonies used prior to the Constitution, was too weak to keep the union together. Virginia delegate Edmund Randolph introduced to the convention James Madison’s Virginia Plan. This plan was a radical departure from the Articles of Confederation where as it created a stronger more central government. Many at the convention were staunchly against such a move because they believed that they were invited to Philadelphia to modify not abolish the Articles of Confederation. Some even walked out because they felt their charter was to protect the sovereignty of their individual states. After a series of long heated debates the Virginia Plan, along with the New Jersey Plan became the foundation of our Constitution. The point of this history check is to display that our Founders were deeply concerned about the power of government and the intrusions on liberty if left uncheck it could levy on the people. They were not anti-government, they were for limited government.
Anarchist claim that they believe any form of government is oppressive and should be removed. Now the reason I say claim is because there is an undercurrent within the anarchist movement that does support communistic forms of governments and socialistic economic controls. They just wear the label of an anarchist to affect change, any change from the status quo. If they can topple or bring down the current forms of Western Governments, their hopes are to take advantage of the chaos that follows and institute these communistic forms of governments. They are using the real anarchists as useful idiots in their plan.
From every source document I have read about the Tea Partiers, they are not anti-government. They are for limited government, like the Founders. They are anti-governmental policies when the policies appear to overstep the Constitutional limits that have been placed on government. They also appear to be anti-incumbent, but their methods for replacing the incumbents does not encompass the overthrow of the federal government to get rid of them. They believe in the election process and the power of the vote. They also believe in a government that acts in a fiscally responsible manner. Now to compare and link these folks with an anti-government movement is like saying zebras and donkeys are one in the same.
The truth is the MSM either doesn’t know the difference between an anti-government and limited government movement or they are intentionally misleading the public to equate any type of anti-government act with the Tea Party movement. I believe it’s the latter of the two. The MSM for the most part embraces the radical left wing agenda. They quit the business of reporting the news and took on the task of being a propaganda machine for the left years ago. You can see this with CNN, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, and ABC. No longer does reporting the truth matter to them. Their goal is to advance the progressive agenda and in order to do this they will misinform the public whenever they have the opportunity. They will attack those who try to set the record straight, because if you’re not with them, you’re against them. Fox News, Glenn Beck, and Sean Hannity are attacked on a daily basis not only from the far left, but from the MSM. They have even gone after us bloggers.
So the next time you hear of a tragic event that was perpetrated by some unbalanced individual, and the MSM depicts the person as an anti-government right-wing extremist, take it with a grain of salt. You see the MSM and the agenda of the radical left is one in the same. When they tell you that the sky is purple, don’t just believe their word, take a walk outside and look for yourself.
Liberty forever, freedom for ALL!
Visit Conservative Hideout RapidFire for all of your Conservative news, opinion, and blogging needs.
This is an important point to make. It affirms what we believe, and takes the MSM to task, which is always a good thing.
It’s time for us to keep an eye on the MSM because let’s face it, they are really no longer objective. Thanks for the comments.
Well said sir. I’m proud to be even remotely associated with such intelligent, articulate folk.
I apologize MNR, I need to add you to the blogroll. I’ll see to that tonight.
I also believe the media is doing this intentionally. They are trying to tie the Tea Party movement to radical, anti-government people in order to try to pull people away from the movemnet while at the same time trying to discredit it. It will not work, we will be heard loud and clear in November!
Thanks for the comments. By attacking the Tea Party movement, I believe that are actually doing more harm to their cause than good. We shall see who wins the arguement this November.
hey there Matt and the gang..time to replace all the bufoons in Congress and the WH with real leaders who respect our Constitution eh!:)
Heck, I wear it as a badge of honor!
I support our original form of government, but if we’re talking about our current form, count me among the anti-government types! (Where’s Homeland Security?
)
You know CL, I guess with as big as government is today, I suppose wanting limited government could be viewed as anti-government. Looks like you’ll make the list
I agree with PinkEyes that this indeed is deliberate from the media. Any spin they can put on the conservative movement they will do – because they have an ideological interest in keeping this present administration in power.
But, I am also convinced that the conservatives should pay less attention to the MSM than they do. We will never win over the alphabet broadcasters – nor their cable counterparts. But, we do not have to as more and more people from all sides of the aisle are watching Fox – or listening to the radio – or going online. We need to get our message out in the ways that work for us – and not worry about the media.
I agree that we probably pay too much attention to the MSM. My fear is that when they fold, and they will, our taxpayer dollars will be used to bail them out. And if we can show with every opportunity how bias they really are, we might stand a better chance in making the case as to why we should let them fail.
Excellent explication of limited government, and your conclusion regarding the MSM’s true intent with respect to disseminating false information is spot on.
Thanks for the comments Liberty. I think we all need to be aware fo what the MSM is up to.
You mean people still pay attention to the MSM?
Nice rant. Snarkily good. Does a wiseass like me proud.
Thanks for the kind word Snarky…I think. LOL.
Coming from Snarky, that is high praise.
John your point of drawing the line between the Tea Partiers and the Anarchists/Communists/Marxists is a very valid, important point. The MSM will not make the distinction and it is up to us, the New Media to tow the line and report what we see as egregious affronts to the liberty of all Americns.
Thanks for the comments Don.
It is up to us. The MSM has an agenda and when you know the nature of the beast, a sound conclusion can be reached.
Everytime a classical conservative tells me I’d be happier as a libertarian, it is clear to me they fail to understand how they are not conservative in the classical liberal sense. I don’t think most of the MSM is doing it deliberately; too many conservatives (classical conservatives) think they are following the Founders, that they are conserving the traditions of our country. If they are confused, how can outsiders (with a bias at a minimum) distinguish classical conservative from classical liberal/conservative.
Thanks for the comments Tracy.
I must disagree with you on the issue of whether the MSM is deliberately distorting the facts. There is clearly a double standard when it pertains to political ideology. For the last 30 years they have been drifting to the left and promoting the left’s agenda. My point in the article is that we have a responsibility as citizens to call them out when we see this. This is a big difference between anti-government proponents and limited government proponents.
There is a strong connection between the all three political ideologies you mentioned where common ground can be found. However there is a monumental difference in terms of government’s role between the above three mention ideologies as compared to a liberal/progressive ideology. There is no confusing the difference. The classical conservative, libertarian, and classical liberal do believe in limited government and basics rights that cannot be granted by a governmental entity. We do differ on minor issues, but in the end we all end up at the destination that a limited government that promotes individual liberties and freedoms is the answer.