TPMMuckraker
Party Foul! Tea Partiers Eat Their Own In Bitter Internal Feud
Zachary Roth | November 12, 2009, 5:08PM
The Tea Party movement is being ripped apart by bitter internal rancor, highlighted by a lawsuit against a former leader, vituperative name-calling, and charges of financial mismanagement and corruption.
As we told you this morning, board members for the Tea Party Patriots (TPP) this week filed suit against Amy Kremer, a former TPP leader who fell out with the group over her involvement with a rival Tea Party faction, the Tea Party Express. And on Tuesday, a judge granted a preliminary injunction, ordering Kremer to return control of the TPP websites to the board, and to stop representing herself as a TPP spokeswoman.
But that's just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the Tea Partiers'
internecine strife. Emails obtained by TPMmuckraker detail how a rogue
faction of Tea Party Patriots is lashing out at the board for going
ahead with the suit against Kremer, and challenging the board's
financial management, triggering a state of acrimony that appears
serious enough to threaten the upstart movement's ability to continue
to mount an effective grassroots challenge to the Obama agenda -- just
days after the House passed the health-care-reform bill that the Tea
Partiers view as socialism.
In an email to fellow TPPers sent Wednesday, Gerald Merits called the lawsuit "the single most insane act of self destruction I have witnessed since this country elected Obama," and asked "how much donor money is being spent of (sic) suing Amy?"
For the rest of the day, the email list was consumed with charges and counter charges. In response to Merits, Josh Parker, a supporter of the board, wrote: "Amy created a situation where TPP couldn't do anything BUT sue her, then she goes on with her poor me crap. She brings this on herself and all the rest of us."
At the root of the dispute is the acrimony between TPP and the Tea Party Express, a newer group formed by a team of GOP consultants. Many TPPers sees TPE as inauthentic, calling it the "Astoturf Express," and deriding it as a "Republican front organization." But others -- including Merits -- have flirted with TPE, apparently out of frustration with the TPP's sprawling structure and unwieldy decision-making process. On Wednesday, David McKalip, the Florida neurosurgeon and one-time Tea Party Patriot activist, who found himself in hot water after we published an email he sent showing President Obama as a witch doctor -- addressed a Tea Party Express rally in Orlando.
In Wednesday's email exchange, several other TPPers sided with Merits in raising concerns about the lawsuit. And one, Jack Staver, raised a separate charge against the board, suggesting that board members were being insufficiently transparent about the organization's finances.
Wrote Staver:
How much money does TPP have? How much did we make in DC? Where are the financial statements? Do board members get paid and if so who? Who signs the checks? Where does our money go?
Merits echoed that theme. "Why are the financial records not public knowledge?" he asked. "Show me the money!"
Eventually a Tea Party Patriots loyalist couldn't take it anymore. "Why are you intentionally trying to destroy this movement??" he demanded.
Charges of lax book-keeping -- and worse -- appear to be breaking out across the Tea Party movement. In a separate email written Wednesday and obtained by TPMmuckraker, Matt Perdue, the president of a San Antonio Tea Party group, ripped into the group's treasurer, her husband, and their supporters for conducting a "mass redirection campaign," apparently to line their own pockets using Tea Party donations.
"Where has all this money gone?" asks Perdue. "If there is nothing wrong going on, why has there not been one single piece of paper produced to back up why people got checks, some for $3,000, $7,400+, $4,000, $10,400+??? Where is the documentation? Why isn't the cash deposited like it should be? Why did it take more than two weeks to deposit cash from the meetings?"
Meanwhile, other Tea Party factions are trying to distance themselves from the dispute between Kremer and TPP -- and position themselves to benefit. Darla Dawald, the leader of the Patriotic Resistance, a far-right grassroots group, wrote in a message on the TPP email list that her organization has "not supported any lawsuit or fighting ... but I felt obligated to inform our base what is happening so that you could make an educated decision about your support of the Group called the Tea Party Patriots." Dawald has been a key participant in the bus tour organized by the Tea Party Express -- an effort shunned by TPP.
And Eric Odom, the founder of the Tax Day Tea Party events, wrote in his own message that the acrimony "presents a dangerous situation for the movement as a whole," and urged TPPers to return to "defeating the socialist thugs who seek to destroy our country, not fellow patriots who seek to stop them." We reported that Odom this week launched a political action committee designed to channel Tea Party activism toward an electoral goal.
As Wednesday wore on, the TPP internal email list degenerated into name-calling, sarcasm, and personal attacks. "Jack, you REALLY look clueless right now," Parker wrote to Staver at one point. Parker also ripped Merits for "your usual pissing and moaning without knowing nothing." And Staver deemed Parker "not worthy of a response."
Some TPPers expressed concern that the acrimony could damage the movement if exposed. "Daily Kos and other left wing interest groups are going to love running with this story," wrote one.
Merits appeared to share that concern. "This will go public if we let it drag on long enough and if you don't think this will have a chilling effect on all Tea Party movements raising funds you are living in a world of fairy dust and gingerbread houses," he wrote. "Read my previous emails. If this goes on long enough, we all go down - NOT just TPP and TPE - ALL OF US."
In Biblical times, the Scapegoat was an important community ritual, whereby a litany of the sins and tribulations of the tribe were recited, and symbolically laden onto the back of a goat. The goat was then released into the desert, to bear their burdens away.
A cleansing had occurred, through the ritual of naming and atonement.
~*~
But scapegoating isn’t about ritual anymore, is it?
We don’t make masks, or sacrifice goats – we sacrifice people – people who challenge our status quo, make us feel uncomfortable, do things we don’t agree with or think are ‘right’ – or people who fail to do what we have decided they ’should have’ done. Scapegoats are people who are just plain vulnerable to the hostile social, psychological discrediting routine some people use to shift accountability, responsibility, guilt and blame away from themselves. As was said in a recent Tricycle post, “if you want to hurt someone, demonize them first.”
Scapegoats are sisters, brothers, fathers, mothers, aunts, uncles, cousins, friends, lovers, husbands, wives, ex-anyones, co-workers – they sit beside you in restaurants, on buses, and at your dinner table.
Scapegoats are never born. They are made.
Scapegoat could be me …
or you.
Thoughts to ponder:
- Do you feel you have been scapegoated in your family?
- Can you be self aware enough to see where you may have scapegoated others in your family?
- What might change in your family if people could deal openly and compassionately with the issue of scapegoating?
http://www.ingenio.com/details/Mark-Sichel/Other/5148124
Sweet Jesus. Enuff said.
I've been practicing for over twenty years and am experienced with
almost every kind of problem. I have no difficulty figuring out what
you need to do and telling you how to do it....whether it's a problem
with your mate or your spirit, nerves, or trauma, let's get to work and
get YOU feeling better fast. My social worker 'spidey' senses tingling, heart sinking, I began reading.
The Reader's Digest version of the article is, writer, Julie Myerson is accused of writing about her children, thusly denying them both respect and privacy. She is accused of betraying love, intimacy and motherhood by various rabidly angry critics and Mark Sichel, rather than taking a more objective, principled high road, throws a few more sticks on Myerson's pyre in the town square. He states that Ms Myerson, "resigned from her job as Jake’s mother", after asking her 17 year old son to leave the family home for his drug abuse and chaotic behavior. A strategy known to many parents as "tough love".
Mr Sichel might have chosen to explore the historical context of tough love, and how various people have experienced this parenting strategy as both powerfully positive and also horribly horrific. He may have wanted to look at the sorts of advice parents are given from family, friends and so called 'experts' about how to manage an 'out of control child'. He might have looked at how very often the responsibility to manage these 'out of control' children resides with the mother. He may have chosen to look at the social constructions of motherhood, mother blame and 'good enough' parenting as presented by psychologist Donald Winnicott. He may have wanted to acknowledge that Myerson is hooped either way she fights the fight: Allow her son to remain in the family home, exposing the larger family to the chaos of a drug abusing teen - or ask him to leave ... either way, she will be criticized as a mother, as a woman.
Sichel criticizes Myserson's decision as an abdication of parenthood and frames it in the context of Myerson's estrangement from her own father. There is a suggestion here that Myserson has somehow failed to 'learn the lesson' inherent in her own experience of parental estrangement . Sichel however, does not go on to explore the very frequent pattern of inter-generational family estrangement, or to consider how Myserson may have been profoundly shaped by her experiences. There is little of compassion in Sichel's criticisms of Myerson, a quality I consider as primary and central to the family estrangement discourse.
Sichel points out that Myerson may have used her son's period of abstinence 'as a stepping-stone to repairing the rift
between Jake and his family' and seems to freeze this possibility as a one off opportunity, now missed - due to the fact Myerson broke the Golden Rule, Thou Shalt Not Write About Thy Children. It should be said that even after a fairly vigorous search for this literary 'rule' I have seen no evidence of it. The world is full of books, blogs, magazine articles of people writing about their kids. It is not until we see mothers, speaking of their experiences of parenting in less than glowing terms, that the 'mommy police' come out of the woodwork. [see my recent post, Bad Mommy]. Had Sichel included even a brief mention of this phenomena, I'd have been appeased. But no.
"Julie chose to publicly expose her child’s drug problems and the related behavioral problems caused by the drug abuse. Now that, in my opinion, is off limits, indecent and obscene." So says Sichel. "Any parent with respect for their child and human decency, love and kindness would not be critical of their child in their writing and publicly humiliate them for their own glorification as a writer." Suddenly Myerson is without decency, love or kindness and has behaved 'obscenely'. There is no room given for Myerson to write about her obviously very difficult experiences as a parent, no question about the truth of her experiences having equal validity, no room for Myerson to be central to her own story.
In Sichel's opinion, "Julie Myerson, however, made two indefensible moves: she not only publicly defamed her son but she never, at least in public, reflected on her role in her son’s problem." Is it defamation to speak truthfully, openly, passionately about how Myserson as a mother was impacted and influenced by her child's behavior? I say no, no it is not. I have read excerpts from Myerson's book, 'The Lost Child: a True Story' and no offense to her, she is perhaps more literary than some, but it's nothing that I haven't read in numerous places (books, blogs, articles) from other parents and mothers who have parented through a teen's crisis. I would argue that Myerson's choice to write at all about her children may be viewed as an effort to make sense of her experiences as a mother, and is nothing if not a reflection of her role in her son's difficulties and broader life.
All this leaves me wondering what is it about Myerson that brought the "mommy police' out in all their rampant glory? As I ask that question, I am quite cognizant that it doesn't have to be much, luck of the draw, wrong place, wrong time, one 'hostile bystander'. Why Myerson, remains however a valid question.
I'd like to see Julie Myerson's choices as a writer considered both from a place of gendered analysis and also framed in context to larger research about family estrangement. Hell, I'd like to see Julie Myerson's choices as a mother considered from the same places. I dare say the article would read considerably different from that of Mark Sichel, a publicly acclaimed psychologist and an "expert" in family estrangement.
I am so very grateful that I did not find my way to Mr Sichel's office to address my family estrangement issues. Shame on you Mark Sichel.
Without question, being in a perpetually hurtful relationship hurts. Many people come to estrangement after years of working really hard to try to mend broken relationships, heal wounded ones and grow stunted ones – and failing. For most people, estrangement was not their first choice, but does estrangement really put an end to the hurt?
“I don’t have to deal with new hurt.
That’s the ‘gift’ of estrangement. I know if I were involved with my
family, I would fall right back into being their punching bag. I’m not ok though. Not ok at all.”
Estrangement can seem like the only solution when it feels like you
have tried everything else. In the case of truly abusive and damaging
relationships, estrangement might appear a wise and healthy choice indeed. “My father sexually abused my sister and me. He has no remorse around any of it. We don’t need him in our lives.”
However, some people who have consciously chosen to estrange to prevent
further injury, will report feeling emotionally tethered to the
relationship, even though the person(s) are no longer a part of their
lives. “I feel like I have spent my whole life looking for people
to give me the love, acceptance and approval I never got from my
mother. We will die without me ever having known why she couldn’t love
me.” Other people who are estranged from a family member report very high levels of ambivalence about their relationship and
choice to sever the relationship. “I don’t want to be around him, but it hurts to be without him. I’m numb about the whole thing.”
Estrangement carries consequences that
people may not consider at the point of choosing to cut away from their
families. Each family member carries a piece of the ‘collective’ family
story and to lose even one person, is to lose an essential part of the
history and story of the family. “I have no photos of myself as a
child. My family would have them, but I can’t ask for them. I feel like
I am a ghost sometimes.” Estrangement also carries some very pragmatic losses. “I’m
pregnant and will be having my first child. I have no idea if there are
health things I should be aware of..you know, stuff that runs in the
family … because I don’t talk to anyone in my family.”
Estrangement does not always end the hurt, and in fact, can create a whole different set of consequences, which are often just as painful.
Things to ponder ….
- Has estrangement ‘fixed’ your hurts?
- Has your estrangement created hurt for others?
- How do you emotionally ‘manage’ your estrangement?
- Do you feel like you have lost part of your family ’story’?
- Do you ever feel like you have lost essential pieces of your own history?
