“The new debate in the Republican party needs to be between conservatives and libertarians,” says Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.). “A lot of the libertarian ideas that Ron Paul is talking about…should not be alien to any Republican.”

Yet right after the 2010 midterm elections, the influential Tea Party favorite proclaimed that “you can’t be a fiscal conservative and not be a social conservative,” a comment that was widely viewed as a slap at libertarians. And South Carolina’s junior senator is also a staunch pro-lifer, has favored a constitutional ban on flag burning, and is on the record saying that gays shouldn’t be allowed to teach at public schools.

More recently, DeMint has been leaning libertarian. His new book, Now or Never: Saving America from Economic Collapse, is a warning to the nation that we need radical spending cuts (including putting defense spending on the table) or else face economic oblivion. And he was instrumental in getting Tea Party Republicans elected in 2010, including the most libertarian member of the caucus, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who also wrote the foreword to DeMint’s book.

Reason’s Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch sat down with DeMint for a wide-ranging discussion about fiscal vs. social conservatism, cutting spending, the GOP presidential nomination, whether the Tea Party still matters, and much more.

Approximately 29 minutes.

Shot by Meredith Bragg and Jim Epstein; edited by Epstein.

Go to Reason.tv for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv’s YouTube Channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

The protesters in Manhattan and the tea party are 180 degrees apart. This rag-tag group of unwashed, middle-class socialists protesting against corporations and the rich don’t really know why they’re protesting. They just know they want something for free.  Lots of free stuff to everyone, except to the wealthy who produce the free stuff, is what the protesters want.

The Occupy Wall Street protesters represent perfectly what liberals, such as Nancy Pelosi, initially labeled the tea party movement in 2009. Pelosi tried to halt the rapid spread of the grass-roots tea party by suggesting it was controlled by the Republican Party and calling it “astro-turf.” That failed as people recognized that the Republican Party is not capable of creating anything with the brilliance of the tea party movement. The Occupy Wall Street protesters are another matter. The strings controlling it run directly to the labor unions and the White House. Obama political advisor Patrick Gaspard, who has worked closely with the ACORN-controlled Working Families Party and the largest local within the Service Employees International Union, has actually advertised on Craigslist to pay protesters to join in the fun taking place in Manhattan. Don’t expect any reporting of this from the mainstream media! They are too busy trying to compare the incomparable Occupy Wall Street to American patriots in the tea party movement.

The differences between the two groups — aside from true grass-roots of the tea party movement vs. the astro-turf, socialists of the Occupy Wall Street protesters — is the political masters of the OWS protesters want to control the money of the wealthy. They call on limiting income, massively taxing the rich and sanctioning corporations to extract more taxes. The laughable demands of Occupy Wall Street consist of a $20 minimum hourly wage, whether one is employed or not, ObamaCare, free college educations for everyone, ending the use of fossil fuels and depending solely on “green” energy, outlawing of national borders, and the forgiveness of any debt held by citizens. No word if the forgiving of debt includes the rich. In essence, the Occupy Wall Street protesters have the same platform as the modern Democrat Party! No surprise, then, that the movement is getting such praise from Democrats and the mainstream media!

The tea party movement wants Americans to be free to spend more of their money how they see fit. Tea party patriots understand that wealth must be created. Contrary to the beliefs of liberals, money does not just suddenly appear to be redistributed by politicians. Tea party patriots see the dangerous threats to our country from years of out-of-control spending in Washington. The Tea Party honors and seeks to return America to the principles that made us the wealthiest and strongest country in history: Constitutionally limited government, free-market capitalism, the rule of law, fiscal and personal responsibility, and national sovereignty.

The left is desperate to stop the massive growth and power of the tea party movement. Every tactic they have used to slow or destroy the tea party movement has failed. Every group liberals have created to counter the tea party has failed. The Occupy Wall Street movement will fail also. Unwashed, socialist kids being manipulated by liberal labor unions and Democrats are no match for American patriots who have spent their lives contributing to the building of this country. The tea party movement is truly the American movement. It was created by American patriots who love their country, believe in its traditions and values, and have an unbending faith in the U.S. Constitution and free-market principles.

There is one other major difference between the Occupy Wall Street protesters and the tea party: Tea party patriots don’t attract flies at their events.

As a college student and journalist, I can totally relate to their concerns; however, I totally disagree that forcing the “rich” (for this movement, that seems to be anyone making more than I am at a given moment) to pay higher taxes than they already do will somehow create jobs. I wanted to see what the rest of their members were thinking, so I decided to go to the meeting that night with them.

Everyone in the movement was extremely nice to me and genuinely cared about the direction our country was heading. Some of the members did make some, in my humble opinion, absurd comments. One of the older women there tried to recruit us to help the union members protest American Crystal Sugar. She told us about the importance of unions:  “Labor has made this country great. Many people are telling us that unions aren’t important anymore, but unions have got the middle class where we are today and are just as relevant as ever.”

Many of the people there didn’t identify themselves with either political party. They all talked about corporate greed and how both sides were maintaining the status quo, acting as puppets of the wealthy. One man said, “As long as both sides get paid by the same people, nothing will change. We aren’t a democracy by the people anymore; it is controlled by the corporations. Take the money out of the system or you are just spinning your tires. I don’t think the liberal model of trying to make them feel guilty is working; we need a group of protestors like in New York to scare the shit out of people — legally of course. It scares the hell out of the right wing media who is trying to turn us into an angry mob with no purpose.”

Another man built upon the previous statement, “Egypt showed the world you can show up and change things. We will be worse off and the corporations will be better off unless we are engaged like the protestors in New York. They got arrested, but they keep coming back. That’s the type of determination we need.”

Although the group was full of well-meaning, concerned citizens, some of these phrases were quite alarming to me. The Tea Party movement has been accused of racism, bigotry, violence, and every other name in the book, but looking through videos of their demonstrations, there is no evidence of these characterizations. There aren’t videos of radical Tea Party members with racist signs or reports of hundreds of Tea Partiers getting arrested.  These people are outright saying they want to push the limits of public decorum, get arrested, and come back even harder. Their anger, misguided as it may be, is real, and they are not waiting on the sidelines to fix our country. This is a very real movement, and we need to keep an eye on it.

As a soon-to-be graduate, it worries me how many people in my generation cannot find jobs, but I understand that it is not the responsibility of government to create jobs, nor does it have the ability. What is holding back employers from hiring more and growing their businesses are the regulations and the unknown factors of taxes and the soon-to-drop shoe we know as ObamaCare. Businesses cannot invest in the future when their operating costs are unpredictable. It is not a decision they make out of malice; it is simply an economic choice to ensure their survival.

Looking at the OWS perspective, the protestors are mad at Wall Street and banks for trying to make profits. Well, why would anybody risk their assets NOT to make a profit? Isn’t that their responsibility to stock holders, to make them a return on their investment?  A company can only sell a product for a price people are willing to pay. Supply and demand regulate prices better than government. Big government is not what we need; we need more personal accountability for our country to succeed. No more bailouts, no more BIG government and no more nanny state regulations.

So as we continue to keep our eye on this growing anger against capitalism, make sure to keep on informing these angry people they should be mad at themselves for wanting the government to take care of them. They should remember our country was founded on the personal liberty granted by God and the economic opportunities given by free markets.

I am not mad at the rich and successful; I want to be one of them too. I have worked for successful, profitable companies; if they weren’t profitable, I couldn’t have had a job. I hope that the members of the “Occupy Together” movement can learn this simple fact and correct the target of their frustrations; otherwise, they could cause further damage to the economy they want so much to turn around.

In light of a recent poll showing America’s distrust of the national media, I thought I would pick a topic for a case study. What better topical study is there when exploring the media’s methods and concerns than with the Tea Party?

My approach was simple. I took data from 2010 and up to this point in 2011 based off key word searches in Google. For example, In 2010 I searched “Tea Party and racists” and pulled the number given from its search engine. On a positive side, as you can see from the chart, spending was a major keyword associated with the Tea Party in 2010. My, though, how the change a year makes.

In 2011, the tea party/racists word association climbed to over one million results, an increase from the year before.

The tea party/terrorists word association increased by over 10 million results from the year before.

As one would expect, tea party/spending word association dropped from over 17 million hits in 2010 to just over 300,00 heading into the tenth month of the year.

Some limitations to my approach

As I searched through the fist couple of pages of results, it became apparent that not every headline used “racism” or “terrorists” negatively. For example a writer at National Review Online or Big Government may use those two words in a headline, but it would be so to point out some ridiculous claim made by a blogger or media personality, etc. However, the fact that it must be done, that the words “racism” and “terrorists” are so commonly associated with the Tea Party around the web, and that point become moot. Because instead of laughing the assortment of yahoos who make these claims off the planet, conservatives and civic minded people busy themselves with defending the accusations.

The Tea Party has become victim to extreme media bias. A hostile media, though unpopular, can still help shape its public image. Throw in the fact that liberal members of Congress carefully select word usage for maximum effect, which guarantees a long shelf life in the news cycle, and the Tea Party’s detractors get free media to vent their disapproval.

Some of the Tea Party’s recent disapproval can almost certainly be attributed to those facts.

At a town hall meeting in Miami, Florida, on August 22, 2011 Rep. Andre Carson, also a Congressional Black Caucus member, charged that there are members of congress, who are Tea Party members, that have nefarious intentions towards Americans of African descent. Among his accusations:

•The Tea Party is stopping change in Congress
•“This is the effort that we are seeing of Jim Crow”
•“Some of these folks would love to see us as second class citizens”
•“Some of them in Congress right now of this Tea Party movement would love to see you and me hanging on a tree”

Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-FL), another member of the Congressional Black Caucus, at the same “jobs fair” in Miami, Florida, stated: “Let us all remember who the real enemy is,” she said. “The real enemy is the Tea Party. The Tea Party holds the Congress hostage. They have one goal in mind, and that’s to make President Obama a one-term president.”

The hate rhetoric of the Congressional Black Caucus members, who took an oath in Congress to represent all Americans, without prejudice or preference, is a clear indictment of their own lack of discretion and integrity. It is irresponsible. Most of all, it is simply not true.

At a time when they were supposed to be discussing job opportunities and the U.S. economy, Black Caucus members were desperate to hide the truth from their constituents. The truth is that they have betrayed their trusted supporters. They have, in fact, been adversarial to the civil rights of their constituents and to the economic stability of their communities.

Black Caucus members know what they have been hoping Americans of African descent would not come to realize: The Tea Party is the 21st Century Civil Rights Movement in America. Furthermore, Tea Party leaders such as Rep. Allen West, Danna Loesch, Herman Cain, Matthew Kenney, and numerous others, are indeed the true Civil Rights leaders of our time.

Civil Rights are best defined as constitutional rights which protect individual freedom from the over reach of both government and the private sector. These rights are solely determined by the principles outlined in the U.S. Constitution and, subsequently, guarantee the privilege of all Americans to exercise full citizenship against any and all forms of discrimination and oppression.

Absalom Jones, Frederick Douglass, Martin L. King, Jr. and countless civil rights leaders and activists of the 18th and 19th Century all fought for the same principles that the Tea Party of the 21st century fight for today: Limited government, individual freedom, and free market.

The desegregation of schools via the landmark Brown vs. Board of Education decision in 1954 was based upon the concept of “choices in education”. Civil Rights leaders argued that children of African descent deserved access to quality schools with equal opportunity to compete towards American exceptionalism.

Here in the 21st Century, children of every ethnicity are discriminated against and forced to remain in failing schools that are often plagued with violence. Their parents are not afforded the same choices as those who are economically advantaged, such as Representatives Carson, Wilson, and Waters.

Black Caucus members have sought to undermine the Brown vs. Board of Education decision, motivated by crony capitalism. They have been heavily funded by powerful teachers unions, compelling them to vote in opposition to schools of choice. Contrary, therefore, to the accusation that the Tea Party is the enemy, the voting record of the accusers indicts them as the enemy of the civil rights of poor people.

Tea Party leaders such as Rep. Allen West, have been a relentless voice on behalf of poor families who do not have a voice in the Congressional Black Caucus, nor in the Democrat Party, whose Representatives voted 100 percent against the D.C. Voucher Program. Tea Party leaders across the nation continue to lift their voice for schools choice. The media does not show this side of the equation.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 served to help end discrimination in employment against Americans of African descent. Its purpose was to protect the aforementioned Americans from being excluded from competing in a free market society. “Big Labor” was mostly responsible for this discrimination.

Forty seven years after the Civil Rights Act was passed, Representatives Waters, Carson, and Wilson, along with every Congressional Black Caucus member, voted against a bill which would have helped to create jobs for all Americans in general, but especially in urban communities (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll144.xml). This bill was intended to repeal “The Davis Bacon Act of 1931”, which is the only remaining Jim Crow Law in the nation.

Tea Party Leaders, Rep. Allen West and Rep. Michelle Bachman, voted for freedom. They voted on the side of those who are poor and need an opportunity to compete for jobs. They voted against the Davis Bacon Act. Tea party activists across the nation are mobilizing against this harsh discrimination which disproportionately impacts communities whose residents are predominately of African descent. They are, in fact, fighting for the civil rights of these Americans.

Tea party leaders are fighting to help hold government accountable to being true to the Constitution of the United States of America. No one stands to benefit from the success of Tea party activism more than Americans of African descent, which are the most vulnerable of the workforce. Who are disproportionately impacted by draconian regulations on businesses that force large corporations to send jobs overseas and that prevent small businesses from being able to expand and increase employment in urban communities.

The struggle of Americans of African descent during the civil rights era of the 19th and 20th century is an inspiration to Tea Party leaders, who today fight for the civil rights of all Americans, regardless of ethnicity.

In his speech “Our God is Marching On”, Dr. Martin L. King, Jr. stated:

“I know you are asking today, “How long will it take?” Somebody’s asking, “How long will prejudice blind the visions of men, darken their understanding, and drive bright-eyed wisdom from her sacred throne?” Somebody’s asking, “When will wounded justice, lying prostrate on the streets of Selma and Birmingham and communities all over the South, be lifted from this dust of shame to reign supreme among the children of men?” Somebody’s asking, “When will the radiant star of hope be plunged against the nocturnal bosom of this lonely night, plucked from weary souls with chains of fear and the manacles of death? How long will justice be crucified, and truth bear it?” I come to say to you this afternoon, however difficult the moment, however frustrating the hour, it will not be long, because “truth crushed to earth will rise again.” How long? Not long, because “no lie can live forever.” How long? Not long, because “you shall reap what you sow!”

Tea Party Leaders, America’s 21st Century Civil Rights leaders are certainly frustrated at being falsely accused of racism by liberal media and deceitful Black Congressional Caucus members. How long will it take before this injustice stops? Not long, dear readers, for, as the Late Dr. King so eloquently preached: “No lie can live forever” and those who tell the lie, shall reap what they sow.

The day before his declaration of war on the Tea Party movement, Teamsters President James Hoffa appeared on CNN and deemed American companies as “unpatriotic,” according to the Political Ticker.

“I think the president should challenge the patriotism of these American corporations that are sitting on the sidelines,” Hoffa said. “The problem in America isn’t that we don’t have enough money. We’ve got more money than any other country in the world. The problem is American businesses not spending it and not getting it in the game.”

Is Hoffa willing to have his own patriotism challenged?  Because some inconvenient truths emerge from the financial report his Teamsters union filed with the federal government.

According to an LM-2 report filed earlier this year, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, which represents truck drivers and some school employees, ended 2010 with $108,608,477 in the bank.  That’s a whopping 24.9% increase in net assets over 2009, when the union reported $86,942,076 in assets.

In contrast, the Teamsters reported $88,371,439 in liabilities.  So if the union could afford to go without any new revenue and still meet its obligations for well over 12 months.

There is a trend in the union’s growing net assets.  The Teamsters ended 2009 with $86,942,076 in the bank, according to that year’s LM-2 report.  That’s an even more impressive 33.4% increase in net assets over 2008, when the union reported $65,148,734 in assets.

From 2008 to 2010, the Teamsters net assets grew an impressive 66.7% – a rate that would make any corporate board of directors smitten with its CEO.

So, James, where is your American spirit?  You’re hoarding cash, just like you accuse the corporations of doing. Why doesn’t the union do its part and hire some unemployed Americans to do whatever the Teamsters actually do?

Or is that just the responsibility of the fat cat, jet-owning, unpatriotic CEOs?

And while we’re at it, let’s talk about your $368,000 annual compensation package. Where’s your solidarity with the unemployed workers of Detroit?  Can’t you give up your “fair share” of your salary and perks so they can have a little? Or do you enjoy living like a corporate CEO?

The reason corporations – and apparently unions – are hoarding investment dollars is because President Obama and his administration have cultivated an unstable environment in which to do business. Companies don’t know what their tax, regulatory and health care liabilities are going to be under this anti-business administration, so they’re sitting on the sidelines.  They’re being responsible to their investors and existing employees.

The best thing to do is to drop the strong-arm rhetoric and convince the president to create a stable environment to allow business to do what it does best – create job opportunities for Americans.  But that would run contrary to the leftist, Hoffa-type gasbag narrative of evil, unpatriotic corporations, and we just can’t have that in an election season.

His exact words:

“But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized – at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do – it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.”

Now, fast forward to Monday when AFL-CIO President Jimmy Hoffa spoke to a mostly-union crowd at a Labor Day rally in Detroit before introducing President Obama. The video below captures the first “lowlight” of the event:

Hoffa used the following inflammatory rhetoric:

“We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers. And you see it everywhere, it is the Tea Party. And you know, there is only one way to beat and win that war. The one thing about working people is we like a good fight. And you know what? They’ve got a war, they got a war with us and there’s only going to be one winner. It’s going to be the workers of Michigan, and America. We’re going to win that war.

“President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. Let’s take these son of bitches out and give America back to an America where we belong.”

Being his usual self, President Obama responded by introducing the usual labor union suspects — including Hoffa — and saying he was proud of them. The video below captures the lack of leadership and class:

If this doesn’t seal the deal, what’s it gonna take? Vote wisely in 2012, folks!