You have probably heard about the Tea Party movement, the group of Average Joes and Plain Janes fighting for freedom.

You have also probably heard of a few of the Tea Party's leaders, particularly Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. Palin and Beck are the mouthpieces of this grassroots political movement, the ones going around organizing communities to oppose the so-called "tyranny" of the current government.

Wait. Grassroots movement? Organizing communities? Wouldn't that make Palin and Beck ... community organizers?

If any of this sounds familiar, then you were paying attention during the last election cycle. These are the strategies and tactics that brought Barack Obama, the Tea Party's biggest enemy, so much success in 2008. And much as Obama and the Democrats were victorious two years ago, I foresee the Tea Party winning a few elections this year as well.

But the Tea Party took another page from the Democratic handbook: lack of a unified political ideology. Tea Party leaders would like us to think the Tea Party is solely about fighting big government. But it isn't. It is a movement that feeds off the fear and anger of so many Americans and takes hundreds of millions of dollars in funding from large corporations that have everything to gain by unseating the Democrats. For instance, The New Yorker recently reported that the Koch Foundation, backed by Koch Industries, has funneled tens of millions of dollars into the Tea Party movement. In 2008, Forbes named Koch Industries the second- largest privately held company in America.

Why are so many people angry? And what do they fear? Maybe it really is a fear of big government, but I think it is more likely a fear of the changing social and political landscape in America as represented by the Democratic Party.

In any case, governments aren't run on fear and anger — not good ones, at least. So even though Tea Partiers will surely find some success in this year's election, the movement is doomed to fail in the long run. Once people like Rand Paul of Kentucky and Joe Miller of Alaska find their way into political office, they will discover the hard way that their policy proposals are quite unpopular.

For instance, many in the Tea Party have proposed repealing many of the social safety nets provided by welfare programs and Social Security. Yet when it comes to passing legislation to repeal such programs, only a handful of Congressmen are going to risk their political lives to support them. The same is true of any attempts to overturn protections guaranteed under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as so many Tea Partiers would have. As successful as this legislation has been, I imagine more than a few people taking issue with their repeal. Any attempt to undo them is effectively political suicide.

The lack of a unified platform also poses problems for the Tea Party. In fact, under closer scrutiny, the Tea Party is less of a movement and more of a mob. So many angry people with so little direction are bound to fall apart at some point.

The one idea that underpins many in the Tea Party however seems counterintuitive considering the grassroots approach it embodies. Almost every Tea Party organization supports lower taxes and less government regulation, especially for large corporations. Unsurprisingly, those corporations with the most to gain from lower taxes and less regulation have poured millions of dollars into supporting these groups.

What is surprising is how much the average American who has nothing to gain from powerful corporations has clung to these ideas. Hopefully, these proposals to help the same corporations that ran the economy into the ground find enough resistance from Democrats and sensible Republicans to stop them dead in their tracks.

The Tea Party will surely have a profound effect on this year's election and the government's policies in years to come. If you thought that Obama was full of rhetoric and not enough policy, wait until you see the Tea Party once it finally reaches political office.