Before Voting on Tuesday, Please Read This Editorial Concerning Some Serious Problems With the Tea Party Movement

The following text was written by my friend, Chad Brown. 

"Okay Tea Partyers: Stop claiming that you want to return the Federal Government to what our founding fathers envisioned. It is a nonsensical argument that displays sheer ingnorance.
First, it ignores the fact that our founding fathers could not agree on how much power should be invested in the Federal Government. (Federalist and anti-Federalist papers, anyone? And how about those pesky Adams-Jefferson letters from the early 19th century?) It took Congress 11 years to draft a Constitution that was passably agreeable and the Bill of Rights (limiting the power of the Federal Government) is the direct result of concessions granted by the Federalists in order to secure anti-Federalist votes; proof that our founding fathers were skilled at compromise and willing to keep the issue open for further debate. Establishing a claim that our government today does not somehow match the expectations of the founding fathers can only be accomplished by cherry picking the specific founding fathers that agree with your particular position and then conveniently ignoring all the others.  Second, it ignores our country’s 234 year history of growth and maturation. When our founding fathers wrote that all men were created equal, they really did mean “men“. Women were excluded. So were the non-white variety of men. And, while we’re at it, men without land were often less equal than men with land. I also recall that we fought a pretty big war that ultimately decided some very important issues regarding the Federal Governments ability to regulate the states (Civil War for those of you who are having a hard time keeping up). It also ignores important Judicial rulings such as the “Incorporation of the Bill of Rights”. Our founding fathers, through the Constitution, established a sturdy framework for government that is still relevant today precisely because it did not try to specifically define exact roles or boundaries. It was a stroke of genius that the founding fathers left the specific details of governance to be defined by later generations based on the needs of the times in question rather than attempting the hubris of creating an all encompassing document that would only have proved inflexible and that would have quickly lost relevance. If you feel that the current Federal Government is too large, exceeds it's power, or performs functions that belong to the states, then make your arguments current by backing them up with reason and evidence from this century that is relevant to our day and age and takes into account our entire political history instead of leaning on some sad and misinformed premise that our founding fathers would all unanimously agree that we all have it wrong today and that we need to “return“. If you cry easily, then do not bother posting a contrary position as I intend to thoroughly and verbally abuse you."