New Study Finds Koch Bros. Tried to Start Tea Party Movement in 2002

[Capt Bringdown]

Study Confirms Tea Party Was Created by Big Tobacco and Billionaires (http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/02/11/study-confirms-tea-party-was-created-big-tobacco-and-billionaires)

A new academic study confirms that front groups with longstanding ties to the tobacco industry and the billionaire Koch brothers planned the formation of the Tea Party movement more than a decade before it exploded onto the U.S. political scene.

The study, funded by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institute of Health, traces the roots of the Tea Party's anti-tax movement back to the early 1980s when tobacco companies began to invest in third party groups to fight excise taxes on cigarettes, as well as health studies finding a link between cancer and secondhand cigarette smoke.

Published in the peer-reviewed academic journal, Tobacco Control, the study titled, 'To quarterback behind the scenes, third party efforts': the tobacco industry and the Tea Party, is not just an historical account of activities in a bygone era. As senior author, Stanton Glantz, a University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) professor of medicine, writes:

'Nonprofit organizations associated with the Tea Party have longstanding ties to tobacco companies, and continue to advocate on behalf of the tobacco industry's anti-tax, anti-regulation agenda.'

Screenshot of the archived U.S. Tea Party site, as it appeared online on Sept. 13, 2002:
http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/tea%20party%20and%20ceed%202.jpg

The common public understanding of the origins of the Tea Party is that it is a popular grassroots uprising that began with anti-tax protests in 2009. This report might serve as a wake-up call to some people in the Tea Party itself, who would find it a little disturbing that the "grassroots" movement they are so emotionally attached to, is in fact a pawn created by billionaires and large corporations with little interest in fighting for the rights of the common person, but instead using the common person to fight for their own unfettered profits.

The implications of the UCSF Quarterback report are widespread. The main concern expressed by the authors lies in what they see happening overseas as the Tea Party movement expands internationally, training activists in 30 countries including Israel, Georgia, Japan and Serbia.

As the authors explain:

'This international expansion makes it likely that Tea Party organizations will be mounting opposition to tobacco control (and other health) policies as they have done in the USA.'

more -->> (http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/02/11/study-confirms-tea-party-was-created-big-tobacco-and-billionaires)

[boutons_deux]

tea baggers have always been nothing but frauds, fakes. Some of them may have felt "authentic", but the overall movement, the leadership was a fraud, with VRWC/1% $$$ making it go.

[Wild Cobra]

That's funny.

I went to a Tea Part rally in 2001.

[Winehole23]

anecdotal confirmation from WC.

[DarrinS]

I'm just relieved that our tax dollars that fund the National Cancer Institute are used for "academic studies" about the origins of the fucking Tea Party instead of doing cancer research.

[Winehole23]

the grant went to a worthy applicant, no doubt.

[Clipper Nation]

anecdotal confirmation from WC.
IIRC, while they weren't under the Tea Party umbrella, I remember Boston Tea Party-themed tax protests being a thing in the '90s, tbh...

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=esYcAAAAIBAJ&sjid=51kEAAAAIBAJ&pg=7010,4383884&hl=en

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=MH&s_site=miami&p_multi=MH&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB344E5F94DCCDC&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM

The current Tea Party movement has its roots in a 2007 Ron Paul moneybomb... of course, it was quickly co-opted by neoconservatives and their lobbying groups/think tanks, leading to the actual grassroots being pushed out and the current "base" of ignorant racist rednecks being welcomed in, tbh...

[Winehole23]

as for the institution, it's free to do whatever it wants with its own money.

would you prevent it from conducting oppo for Dems under color of research, for example?

[Winehole23]

me, I wouldn't. let em show their ass . . .

[Winehole23]

The current Tea Party movement has its roots in a 2007 Ron Paul moneybomb... of course, it was quickly co-opted by neoconservatives and their lobbying groups/think tanks, leading to the actual grassroots being pushed out and the current "base" of ignorant racist rednecks being welcomed in, tbh...the virtuous core was hollowed out and watered down by mass participation, only the virtuous remnant, remains.

(please, please don't say RP.)





(crosses fingers, closes eyes)

[Winehole23]

http://www.nietzschefamilycircus.com/perm.php?c=62&q=77

[admiralsnackbar]

I'm just relieved that our tax dollars that fund the National Cancer Institute are used for "academic studies" about the origins of the fucking Tea Party instead of doing cancer research.

I'm just relieved they have the sense and means to defend their research viability instead of bending over for rich shit-wads that don't have any interest in the public good.

State institutions and nonprofits don't just get to spend their monies as they like. They either applied for a grant to fund their study, were given a donation restricted to use for the study, or used unrestricted donation monies as a defensive measure following a simple calculation that fewer taxes would equal less revenue for research.

EDIT: nice find, OP.

[DarrinS]

I'm just relieved they have the sense and means to defend their research viability instead of bending over for rich shit-wads that don't have any interest in the public good.

State institutions and nonprofits don't just get to spend their monies as they like. They either applied for a grant to fund their study, were given a donation restricted to use for the study, or used unrestricted donation monies as a defensive measure following a simple calculation that fewer taxes would equal less revenue for research.

EDIT: nice find, OP.


These "academics" know how to use Wayback Machine and Google. That's some hardcore research.

[admiralsnackbar]

These "academics" know how to use Wayback Machine and Google. That's some hardcore research.

So now you're complaining they did it too expeditiously? Pick a lane, dude.

[TeyshaBlue]

Everytime I see or hear the word Expeditious, I hear "Powder Milk Biscuits". Thanks Garrison Keillor!:ihit

[spursncowboys]

So what this is saying is the Koch bro (the evil people that they are) were trying to find something to brand as Tea Party? So they secretly forced Obama to campaign on increasing the Federal debt?
Next you are going to say that because the Koch bro give to Cato, that Cato is doing their bidding

[Capt Bringdown]

That's funny.

I went to a Tea Part rally in 2001.


IIRC, while they weren't under the Tea Party umbrella, I remember Boston Tea Party-themed tax protests being a thing in the '90s, tbh...



In 1993, a Philip Morris PR flack wrote a memo outlining a strategy of fighting any new taxes by joining up with other anti-tax groups to create a “New Boston Tea Party.”

The memo reads, “Grounded in the theme of ‘The New American Tax Revolution’ or ‘The New Boston Tea Party,’ the campaign activity should take the form of citizens representing the widest constituency base mobilized with signage and other attention-drawing accoutrements such as lapel buttons, handouts, petitions and even costumes.”
more ->> (http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/14516-not-our-founders-tea-party)



In 1990, Tim Hyde, RJR director of national field operations, outlined a strategy for RJR to create ‘a movement’ resembling what would later emerge as the Tea Party by

'build[ing] broad coalitions around the issue-cluster of freedom, choice and privacy…'

Another RJR field coordinator later described the company’s motivation for involving and organising third-party organisations:

'...—anti-tax groups were a natural. You didn’t have to defend your position on tobacco because a tax is a tax is a tax to these guys.'"
- more ->> (http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/02/11/tea-party-tobacco-everywhere-always)

[Capt Bringdown]

These "academics" know how to use Wayback Machine and Google. That's some hardcore research.

According to a comment on this page (http://tobacco.ucsf.edu/tea-party’s-ties-tobacco-industry-date-back-1980s-nonprofit-tea-party-groups-promote-pro-tobacco-age) (link>> (http://tobacco.ucsf.edu/tea-party’s-ties-tobacco-industry-date-back-1980s-nonprofit-tea-party-groups-promote-pro-tobacco-age)), the study features: "extensive documentation (184 footnotes in the article, 161 in the Supplementary Material)."

[DarrinS]

According to a comment on this page (http://tobacco.ucsf.edu/tea-party’s-ties-tobacco-industry-date-back-1980s-nonprofit-tea-party-groups-promote-pro-tobacco-age) (link>> (http://tobacco.ucsf.edu/tea-party’s-ties-tobacco-industry-date-back-1980s-nonprofit-tea-party-groups-promote-pro-tobacco-age)), the study features: "extensive documentation (184 footnotes in the article, 161 in the Supplementary Material)."

Oooh

[DarrinS]

And it was back in 2002 during the first Bush term. All this time, I thought it was just a cover for racist birthers.

[admiralsnackbar]

Oooh It's clear you're mad about this article... you just can't seem to articulate why :lol


And it was back in 2002 during the first Bush term. All this time, I thought it was just a cover for racist birthers.

It just confirms what any impartial news watcher already knew about the Tea Party, namely that it was more astroturf than movemen.

[spursncowboys]

It's clear you're mad about this article... you just can't seem to articulate why :lol



It just confirms what any impartial news watcher already knew about the Tea Party, namely that it was more astroturf than movemen.
I don't see how that proves anything. The name may have been a gimmick But the people in the town halls and protests weren't paid. But I will agree with alot of people that say they are Tea Party members to get elected(Cruz) or popularity(Trump).

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Darrin dismissing without basis.

WH semicoherent drunken rambling

WC inserting his personal anecdotes as the full scope of reality.

snackster with the goods

teysha with the biscuits

Ahh the ST politico

[admiralsnackbar]

I don't see how that proves anything. The name may have been a gimmick But the people in the town halls and protests weren't paid. But I will agree with alot of people that say they are Tea Party members to get elected(Cruz) or popularity(Trump).
Sigh. Those people weren't paid, they were just manipulated into supporting something the founders and financiers of the movement left purposefully vague.

Look up "astroturf teaparty 2009" (throw in "Dick Armey" if that doesn't work) and make the effort to entertain the possible veracity of news that may contradict your preferred news sources.

[spursncowboys]

Sigh. Those people weren't paid, they were just manipulated into supporting something the founders and financiers of the movement left purposefully vague.

Look up "astroturf teaparty 2009" (throw in "Dick Armey" if that doesn't work) and make the effort to entertain the possible veracity of news that may contradict your preferred news sources.
No one manipulated them thinking that we are spending too much money! Did Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan manipulate people too?

[boutons_deux]

"No one manipulated them thinking that we are spending too much money!"

sucker!

The "deficit" occurred because the VRWC got the taxes cut on the 1% and corps, while the Repugs SPENT on 2 botched, bogus wars, Medicare Part D/Advantage, etc. Now the VRWC/Repugs are saying the deficit, which THEY caused (St Ronnie doubled it, dubya tripled it, their financial deregulation cratered the economy+revenue), is the problem when REVENUE is the problem.

[Capt Bringdown]

No one manipulated them thinking that we are spending too much money! Did Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan manipulate people too?
What is the correct amount of spending?

[spursncowboys]

What is the correct amount of spending?
Annually?

[Winehole23]

I'm just relieved they have the sense and means to defend their research viability instead of bending over for rich shit-wads that don't have any interest in the public good.

State institutions and nonprofits don't just get to spend their monies as they like. They either applied for a grant to fund their study, were given a donation restricted to use for the study, or used unrestricted donation monies as a defensive measure following a simple calculation that fewer taxes would equal less revenue for research.

EDIT: nice find, OP.not private? sounds like you and DarrinS know a little more than me.

I yield.

[Wild Cobra]

anecdotal confirmation from WC.
The whole idea of the "tea party" never died. To say that one or two groups is responsible is so laughable...

[Winehole23]

zombification? I believe it.

[ElNono]

No one manipulated them thinking that we are spending too much money! Did Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan manipulate people too?

Is that the same Reagan that was talking up 'starving the beast' while he was paying with the national credit card?

[Winehole23]

Grover Norquist more like, but I know what you mean.

Did Reagan actually say that?

[Winehole23]

he backed it up rhetorically, of course, but what I would be interested to know is, did he ever use those exact words: starve the beast?

[ElNono]

he backed it up rhetorically, of course, but what I would be interested to know is, did he ever use those exact words: starve the beast?

Apparently it's attributed to one of his staffers...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast

[admiralsnackbar]

not private? sounds like you and DarrinS know a little more than me.

I yield.

NIH is a division of the Dept. of Health. Is that what you were referring to? I may have missed your drift.

[ElNono]

I don't know how I went from that Wiki entry to this article, but looks like a good read, so I figured I'll pass it along:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/revenge-of-the-reality-based-community/

[Winehole23]

no no, my powers of reading obviously failed.

[boutons_deux]

I don't know how I went from that Wiki entry to this article, but looks like a good read, so I figured I'll pass it along:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/revenge-of-the-reality-based-community/

"There appears to be no recognition that their defects are far, far deeper and will require serious introspection and rethinking of how Republicans can win going forward."

Repug "introspection" ? :lol

Repug "re-thinking" ? :lol

Repug is the fantasy-based community :lol

Rubio is gonna SAVE THE GOP? :lol

Rubio is gonna BRING THE LATINO VOTE? :lol

Just like King Canute commanded the tide to stop! :lol

[sjacquemotte]

I don't know how I went from that Wiki entry to this article, but looks like a good read, so I figured I'll pass it along:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/revenge-of-the-reality-based-community/

Read it. One Thing I noticed about the bout the guy is his terrible timing. A dems against blacks book while Obama is being nominated. An economic book in the crisis. A bush book in 06. I almost feel bad for the guy. The other thing I noticed is his hatred for bush. I guess being blacklisted will do that. But that is probably when it happened. Not while researching. But kudos to his overall honesty. But Stating supply side is dead and being a supply side guy, then becoming a pure complete Keynesian? Come on... Krugman was right? In what?

[Clipper Nation]

No one manipulated them thinking that we are spending too much money! Did Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan manipulate people too?
Reagan certainly did... Iran Contra, for example...

[spursncowboys]

Reagan certainly did... Iran Contra, for example...
Reagan had no personal advantage or benefit in the Iran/Contra scandal.

[Clipper Nation]

Reagan had no personal advantage or benefit in the Iran/Contra scandal.
You asked if he manipulated people, and he didPERIOD

[spursncowboys]

You asked if he manipulated people, and he didPERIOD

You don't know what manipulate means. Also that is not the same context that is being used for the subject at hand. Maybe you should just go back to licking windows.

[ElNono]

Read it. One Thing I noticed about the bout the guy is his terrible timing. A dems against blacks book while Obama is being nominated. An economic book in the crisis. A bush book in 06. I almost feel bad for the guy. The other thing I noticed is his hatred for bush. I guess being blacklisted will do that. But that is probably when it happened. Not while researching. But kudos to his overall honesty. But Stating supply side is dead and being a supply side guy, then becoming a pure complete Keynesian? Come on... Krugman was right? In what?

He wrote the race book thinking Hillary would get the nomination and it would actually help the GOP. As far as supply-side, he says most of the "good" about it has been absorbed into mainstream economics, and it just isn't the novelty it was in the 80's. I actually think he's very honest in saying that when circumstances change, the 'solutions' need to change too (ie: supply side isn't the answer on a recession, it was a novel way to get out of stagflation back in the day). Eventually supply-side will become relevant again when we're in that situation, IMO.

[spursncowboys]

ElNono:
So I wrote Wrong on Race: The Democratic Party’s Buried Past. Unfortunately, it was published the day Barack Obama won the Iowa caucuses. But I still held out hope that Hillary Clinton, who was pandering to the white working class in unsubtle racial terms, would capture the Democratic nomination. The anger among blacks at having the nomination effectively stolen from Obama would make them highly receptive to GOP outreach, I believed. I even met with John McCain’s staff about this.

The book was already written.


I concluded that the anti-immigrant attitude among the Republican base was too severe for the party to reach out meaningfully to the fast-growing Latino community. I know the Republicans were against the illegal immigration, but never knew they were against immigration. That was something the left and media used, not republican insiders. You think a Republican would have gotten that one right, like D. Brooks.

[ElNono]

The book was already written.

thanks, somehow I misread that.

[Wild Cobra]

In other news, New Study shows that Al Gore will be featured in the next edition of Rolling Stone.

[DarrinS]

Damn -- Al Gore drops this same article on Huffing Paint and it barely gets any responses. Perhaps no one cares about this "study".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-gore/tea-party-koch-brothers-big-tobacco_b_2689380.html

[Stringer_Bell]

I don't have to read a sham study on the origins of "The Tea Party." I know for a fact that it started to take shape during GW's 2nd term, before Obama was ever named the Democratic nominee. It was all about speaking out against the Fed Reserve and Patriot Act - but the movement eventually got hijacked by the GOP and old white people. 'Tis a shame, really. In fact, I recall the Tea Party having at least as many coloreds as whites. *smh*

[boutons_deux]

"I recall the Tea Party having at least as many coloreds as whites."

link? pics? proof?

"coloreds" are pretty much obsessed with their own immediate economic micro-plight than remote, theoretical macro shit like FISA, NDAA, Fed, etc.

[Wild Cobra]

"I recall the Tea Party having at least as many coloreds as whites."

link? pics? proof?

"coloreds" are pretty much obsessed with their own immediate economic micro-plight than remote, theoretical macro shit like FISA, NDAA, Fed, etc.




What's wrong? Does that shatter your ideal view of racism?

[boutons_deux]

Right wing extremist fringe, 1%ers forming the VWRC, goes back a long way.

"The John Birch Society is an American political advocacy group that supports anti-communism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-communism), limited government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_government), a constitutional republic[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#cite_note-1)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#cite_note-2) and personal freedom.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#cite_note-3)[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#cite_note-4)[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#cite_note-5) It has been described as radical right-wing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_right-wing).[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#cite_note-6)[7]
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#cite_note-7)Founder Robert W. Welch Jr. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._Welch_Jr.) (1899–1985) developed an elaborate organizational infrastructure in 1958 that enabled him to keep a very tight rein on the chapters.[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#cite_note-Schoenwald1-8) Its main activity in the 1960s, says Rick Perlstein, comprised monthly meetings to watch a video by Welch, followed by writing postcards or letters to government officials linking specific policies to the Communist menace.[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#cite_note-9) After an early rise in membership and influence, efforts by people like conservative William F. Buckley, Jr. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_F._Buckley,_Jr.)and the National Review (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Review) led the JBS to be identified as a fringe element of the conservative movement.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#cite_note-Regnery2008-10)[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#cite_note-Chapman2010-11)

The organization identifies with Christian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity) principles, seeks to limit governmental powers, and opposes wealth redistribution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_redistribution), and economic interventionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_interventionism). It not only opposes the practices it terms collectivism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivism), totalitarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism), and communism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism), but socialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism) and fascism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism) as well, which it asserts is infiltrating US governmental administration.

Fred Koch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Koch), founder of Koch Industries (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_Industries), was one of the founding members."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society

[Galileo]

in other words, you want to escalate the Drug War. No thanx.