A Theory on The Parentage of The Tea Party Movement

 I may be very wrong on this- However, I strongly believe that the parents of the Tea Party Movement are a well- know phrase and a philosophy. The phrase is " Too Big To Fail.".  The philosophy is that banks have social and ethical obligations that must take precedence over intelligent and sound and wisely justifiable financial considerations. One of the most prominent features that enraged and still enrages people today is the idea that you can issue bank loans- in that case to purchase homes- that had virtually NO chance of ever being paid back!

 Risk is a part of the reality of day- in and day -out life. A true and vigorous exercise of freedom entails risk!!! No one can be guaranteed that every thing they do will be successful. Or, Even that anything they are involved in will be successful. The very phrase" Too Big to Fail" antagonizes many people and sets their teeth on edge!!! They  believe that if you fail and cannot continue whether you are a bank, an insurance company,a  Fortune 500 Company a car company or even a lemonade stand that that is regrettable and sad but must be seen as acceptable because life goes on! The same people believe that if the industry or the possibility to sell a good product that will make a profit that another company will,EVENTUALLY come into existence to fill the gap left by your FAILED enterprise!

 Much of the same sentiment also can be connected to issuing worthless loans to buy homes. No one is absolutely guaranteed the right to home ownership.Having a dwelling that belongs to you and only you is simply!!!! not!!! an!!! inalienable!!!! right. Political Leaders and especially elected officials that proclaimed these notions as "political reality that we all simply HAD to accept and live with" became prominent issues for those who recruited and organized  those who would decry and denounce the status-quo political supporters and the politicians they allied themselves to!

 The Tea Party is still new. They do not always support outstanding candidates. I think they have decided to stress running candidates who say what they mean and mean what they say. They'd rather deal with rough edges and awkward statements than polished candidates. They'd rather support somewhat flawed candidates  than give their money and support to polished and bought men and women who stand for little or nothing and are aloof from the electorate. Katie Couric may refer to segments of the electorate as the " Unwashed Masses" but the vote of someone in faded and out of style clothing DOES count as much as the vote of the stylish woman wearing Gucci's!