CNN announced that its partnering with the Tea Party Express to co-host a debate:

They have some things in common — the need to rebound from recent woes and to carve out identities against fierce competition — but CNN and the Tea Party Express would seem like unlikely candidates for a partnership.

In fact, Friday’s announcement that they will co-host a Republican presidential debate for early September 2011 in Tampa, Fla., seems like a risky play for both.

I really, really disagree with this:

“This is nothing more than a press stunt for CNN that cries out ‘Pay attention to us!'” said Everett Wilkinson, an organizer with the South Florida Tea Party, who said there’s been talk in tea party circles about protesting the debate or even infiltrating it.

Is the goal to change hearts and minds or just to win an argument? If it’s the latter then congratulations, count yourselves amongst the progressive mindset on that one, because that’s their only goal. Don’t complain about how the MSM ignores the movement and then when it attempts to do something to recognize or work with it (even if the “it” in this case is a consultancy group masquerading as the leading entity of the grassroots movement) pitch a fit because now that liberal entity with whom you were mad for ignoring the movement has committed the sin of daring to remedy it. At least give them credit for trying, otherwise you come off sounding like a hypocrite and the people whose hearts may have been softened just enough may hardened them again when their efforts at being balanced are rebuffed. I know I would.

Is anyone stopping any grassroots group from reaching out and doing the same thing? No. So why get mad because some other entity beat you to it? I didn’t hear any rumblings from any other groups attempting to broker a debate scenario with media outlets. I don’t want to see people whom I really respect use the argument of the ACLU in banning religious displays. You have to take it down the baby Jesus because there aren’t any other displays of faith here. OK, so erect one. Use that can-do conservative spirit!

I don’t want people to discount the validity of a co-hosted debate simply because a non-Fox entity is involved. You can’t call preaching to the choir “outreach.”

“You knew that in 2012 there had to be a tea party debate,” he [CNN political director Sam Feist] said. “The tea party movement has become iconic for Republican politics. … So we thought that it’s the right time and right place to do it.”

If I had a statement to make, I’d say that I’m pleased that CNN wants to reach out to mainstream America by partnering with one of the many groups in the movement and co-hosting a debate with them, but wish that the group selected was one that actually represented the grassroots movement.

Frankly, I don’t even mind the TPE so long as they acknowledge that they weren’t formed and curated over beers in the corner of a pub over bar fare and a dissatisfaction with policy, like some groups I know, including the group with whom I’m involved and co-founded, the St. Louis Tea Party. They have, mostly, the same goals. The only way that the “astroturfed” label affects the grassroots movement is if the movement allows it. It’s a popular Alinsky rule: use your enemies standards against them. Prog-socialists have been astroturfed for years (George Soros funds Media Matters for shat’s sake) and they seem to only have a problem with it when it concerns conservatives. Suddenly, standards!

I think “astroturfing” goes against the conservative creed because it violates the desire we share to be self-sufficient and this is understandable, something with which I agree. But if one group wants to be openly astro and they aren’t an enemy, do I necessarily have time to give a crap? Sometimes it seems like people are fighting over “rights” to this movement and the entire conversation makes me want to grab a dram of scotch and sit in a corner very far away from those people.

I realize the focus of this post went entirely off-topic – or maybe it didn’t. Maybe people are freaking out because a business entity thought to act before a grassroots entity did, and now grassroots entities are complaining because they thought of the idea second? I know my fellow patriots are way too clever for that.

Leaders lead. I hope the grassroots movement continues to do so and doesn’t allow anything to distract it from its goal.