NY Times caught my eye with a article headline about Marco Rubio
A wiser course for Republicans, he said, is offering an alternative, not simply being the angry opposition. “The solution isn’t just to paralyze government,”
Um, Tea Partiers are angry and in opposition, but our solution was never to "just paralyze government." Is that Marco's read or the Times?
"(He is) increasingly trying to turn his contest into one built more on ideas than outrage." Yep, it's the Times. The Times thinks Tea Partiers are just angry, no idea why or what they want done about it.
"Mr. Rubio has defied the Democratic-driven caricature of a Tea Party phenomenon." The same caricature you're communicating?
"...he did not agree with flashpoints Republican candidates elsewhere have seized on. Does he support changing the 14th Amendment, ... Mr. Rubio said. “I don’t think that’s where the problem is.”
Mr. Rubio is being entirely consistent with Tea Partiers on this issue. It is not a Tea Party issue. Frankly, Republicans who see it as an issue should be put in the "don't get it, still pandering" category.
"Is the Arizona immigration law a good idea...“I don’t want Arizona to serve as a model for other states,” said Mr. Rubio..."
Again, Mr. Rubio's position is wholly consistent with Tea Partier's. Immigration is a secondary issue to us.
If the Times intends to write a story about a popular GOP candidate breaking with Tea Pary, they really should figure out what the Tea Party is about in the first place. A good place to start might be the Contract from America. Take a look - no immigration position, no 14th amendment position, no gay marriage position, no ground zero mosque position. Those are red herrings. Not Tea Partiers. Get a clue.