Now that Barack Obama has been elected to another four years in the White House, some people around me are in denial. Mitt Romney has gone down in flames, much like John McCain did four years ago. (Remember him?) And standing on the sideline are various libertarians saying, “If you had only nominated Ron Paul, we would have beaten Obama.”
Four years ago, a lot of people were upset with the election of Obama. Some didn’t like him because he’s black. But most who opposed him did so because they deeply disagreed with him about the direction for the country. A group of people loosely calling themselves the Tea Party emerged to say that the direction had to change. They were going to organize and march and demand lower taxes and smaller government.
Four years later, how’s that working out? That conservative backlash has helped the Republicans to hold onto the U.S. House, but that’s about the extent of it. Democrats hold the Senate and the White House.
What’s more, the Tea Party is a weird mix held together only by a hatred of the progressive left. Although the Tea Party had libertarian roots, it’s more of a mainstream social conservative group now. Yes, they still talk about economically conservative ideas, but social conservative ideas have taken more and more prominence in places where the Tea Party groups have been successful in gaining influence.

Wishful thinking: Why Ron Paul can’t (and won’t) be elected president
Anonymous ‘Santas’ secretly paying for families’ Christmas layaways
Would you have avoided mistakes if a psychic could’ve warned you?
Liberal NPR, PBS? Why should tax money pay to influence culture?
Keep your euphemisms straight: It’s ‘patriotism,’ not ‘nationalism’
I’m terribly sorry to break it to you, but straw polls mean nothing
I wasn’t ready for another dog, but Lucy needed a ‘forever home’
Worshiping the ‘lesser evil’ will always allow evil to rule over you
Young New Yorkers say they’re fleeing the city — Why? High taxes, low opportunities