First, credit where it’s due; Jeff Kolb is a guy who walked the walk; in a city full of political activists with big ideas, he settled for big accomplishments, running for and winning a seat on the city council in last fall’s GOP sweep in Crystal. Now, it’d be inaccurate to call Kolb a conservative ideologue; he’s a Republican.
And he wants you to be absolutely clear about one more thing:
Let’s get this out of the way right away. I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of a Tea Party. I’ve never been to a Tea Party meeting. I don’t even drink tea. I know many people who have been involved with the Tea Party in one way or another, and many of them are fine people who care about their country, but choose to show it in a different way than I do.
And let’s be clear; I am a Tea Partier. I don’t think that there’s any rational doubt that the Tea Party brought the GOP back – to the extent that it is back – from its 2008 nadir, and brought the party a relevance among the limited-government conservatives that had largely deserted the party.
But Kolb’s focus is here in Minnesota – and he gets some things right…:
Here in Minnesota, two opportunists in particular have done a great job of establishing themselves as self-appointed “leaders” of the Tea Party movement, they being Jack Rogers and Jake Duesenberg of the Minnesota Tea Party Alliance. They have a sweet URL that makes them seem extra legit, teaparty.mn and they operate the MN Tea Party PAC.
…and a few things wrong…:
Jack and Jake haven’t been as successful as the guys from FreedomWorks, only raising $8,200 in 2014. They spent $8,900. The irony of the deficit spending is probably lost on them. A total of $0 was spent to support the election of any candidates.
…but then that’s true of most Tea Party groups; very few endorsed, much less spent money on, candidates at all.
And he gets a few things that are worth talking about:
Credit where credit is due, Jack and Jake may not raise a lot of money, but they have perfected the art of over the top symbolic gestures as a way to generate media coverage.
We’ll come back to that.
A quick search of the Star Tribune archives shows Jack has been mentioned in 12 recent stories, Jake, sadly, only 6. In most of these stories you can find Jack and Jake bad mouthing Republicans. About the only candidate they seemed to like in 2014 was Jeff Johnson. Take from that what you will.
I sure will; I liked and supported Jeff Johnson. Kolb, if memory (and a quick Google search) serves, supported the Scott Honour for Governor juggernnaut, and has joined in with the avalanche of second-guessing that followed Johnson’s loss.
But I came here not to slag on Kolb.
Jack and Jake’s most recent stunt was an over-the-top tantrum aimed at notorious RINO Tom Emmer. Emmer, you see, chose to attend an event commemorating the 50th anniversary of the historic civil rights march in Selma. Or as Jack put it: “a parade in Alabama.” You see, Jack and Jake would have preferred that Congressman Emmer instead attended a small gathering of local Republican activists, so those activists could yell at him about how he is a sell-out who hates the constitution or something because Emmer didn’t commit career suicide in his first vote in Congress by voting against John Boehner for Speaker of the House and/or didn’t think gambling with the safety of the nation was a good strategic move.
I saw Jack and Jake’s attack on Emmer for skipping the BPOU conventions to go to Selma, and thought it was extremely ill-advised; anyone who thinks freshman Congresscritters have a lot of freedom in their votes is either not paying attention, or is demigogueing like mad.
During the 2014 US Senate campaign Jack and Jake infamously told US Senate candidate Mike McFadden to “Go to Hell” during a meeting. I think it’s high time Republicans say the same thing to Jack and Jake. No serious candidate for office or elected official should attend any event sponsored by the MN Tea Party Alliance. The group seems to exist for the sole purpose of promoting Jack and Jake. It’s time other Republicans stop playing along.
Well, no. That’d be a horrible idea.
Think Jack and Jake are hucksters? What? Hucksters in politics? The hell you say.
But the worst mistake the GOP can make is to try to position itself as “above and better than” the Tea Party. It’s bad PR, and its just not true.
Engage? Call on BS? By all means.
Boycott?
Bad idea.
Reagan’s 11th Commandment comes to mind. I really don’t think that calling people “RINO” does any good when “moderate Republican” says and means the same thing. Same thing with the Tea Party people–hey, let’s disagree, argue vehemently, but let’s mind our manners as we do.
Kolb, if memory (and a quick Google search) serves, supported the Scott Honour for Governor juggernnaut, and has joined in with the avalanche of second-guessing that followed Johnson’s loss.
I know Jeff and consider him a friend, and I know for a fact he was anti-Johnson since the day he announced his candidacy for gov. I won’t say who Jeff voted for in the primary, but I know it was *not* Honour.
BTW, Jeff has already agreed to come on the NARN this Sunday at 1:15 to discuss his post further. Should be fun!
Hi Mitch, thanks for reading and for your comments.
Two things. 1) as mentioned above, I wasn’t really on any “team” for Governor in 2014. I didn’t make my mind up until I was literally in the voting booth. I thought all of the major candidates (except Johnson) were viable general election candidates. My opinion on Johnson’s lack of viability was based on his poor messaging and poor execution of his campaign. We all know how that election turned out.
2) While, again, I am not a Tea Party person, I don’t believe the GOP should walk away from any significant group that is in the mainstream of society. I’m a proverbial big tent guy. My comments were aimed directly at two individuals who appointed themselves as “leaders” of the Tea Party in MN. And I will say some of the most positive feedback I have received on the post was from other tea party groups in MN who are tired of Jack & Jake being the de facto spokesmen for the whole movement.
My intention wasn’t to implicate a while group based on the behavior of two individuals.
Don’t get me wrong; Jeff’s a great guy, and good acquaintance, and certainly put his money where his mouth was in winning his election.
Part of the reason for this post was the whole “Reagan’s 11th Commandment” thing.
The other part? The need to use the phrase “In Kolb Blood” in a post title.
D’oh – didn’t see Jeff’s comment in moderation until I wrote my previous comment.
Fair enough, Jeff. I may have misread your tone.
I’m all for the big tent.
And the future of the Tea Party is a subject near to my heart.
Does anyone think anyone noticed Emmer went to Selma, let alone gave him any credit for it?
It is really a great title.
Might have forgiven Tom his vote, but opening his pie hole against the people that put him in office is a deal breaker.
I saw he announced on Facebook, his brave denouncement of the proposed M855 ammo ban…after it had been pulled.
I’d keep an eye on Mr. Emmer in tall grass if I was y’all.
”Does anyone think anyone noticed Emmer went to Selma, let alone gave him any credit for it?”
I saw it on my FB feed and shared it with others. Was it newsworthy enough to bump other stories like Secretary Clinton’s email issues off the front page? No, but it did generate some positive feedback in local social media. Little things like that done over a period of time are kind of important when you’re running for reelection so I’m glad he went and I’m glad I was able to do my small part to share it with others.
”Reagan’s 11th Commandment comes to mind. I really don’t think that calling people “RINO” does any good when “moderate Republican” says and means the same thing.”
I thought the approved term now was “establishment.” Anyone know where I can get a copy of the updated approved political lexicon? 😉
In all seriousness though, I think the term “RINO” should be reserved for people who call themselves Republicans publicly but actively work against the Republican candidate in the general election, usually by publicly endorsing their Democratic opponent and using their “Republican” credentials to give their endorsement or support more weight.
People who disagree with some or even the majority of activists on an issue or set of issues shouldn’t be ostracized when they’re doing their part to support our candidates while at the same time trying to persuade other activists to their position or bring in new people of like mind? That’s how a party grows and remains vibrant.
” Same thing with the Tea Party people–hey, let’s disagree, argue vehemently, but let’s mind our manners as we do.”
Agreed and I appreciate Jeff’s clarification in the comments that he was referring to two individuals only and not a particular group in his post.