Fractures emerge as Tea Party convenes

reefedjib said:

Well, good luck defining the moderate position. In my book it is a practical, non-ideological position that borrows solutions from both the left and the right. It is solutions-based, not ideologically driven, since ideology is the problem.

Your metaphors are meaningless. The moderate position is not like quicksand or castles in the sky. It is flexible and NOT excessive.

Personally, I am a strict constitutionalist, intend to delegate entitlement spending to the states and want a non-progressive tax system that is pro-business.

Does that address your "concerns"?

Click to expand...

Amen! Except for the non progressive part. A 26 year old who is 6'11 and makes $25,000,000 a year (having fun) benefits from our system more so than a 50 year old man with 3 children (who want to go to college) making $250,000. :shrug:

chevydriver1123 said:

From what I have read about the Reform Party and its destruction was when Buchanan got on board his allies tried to turn it into a Paleoconservative party. The Party was supposed to be a Populist one and the original founders didnt like that.

Click to expand...

That's exactly what I am saying. When Perot started the reform party there were a lot of good people that had good ideas that were inspired and wanted to join believing that it was for the good of the country.
However after a couple of years, the party fizzled into a party of extreme wingnuts....Buchanon being the perfect example.

Goldenboy219 said:

Amen! Except for the non progressive part. A 26 year old who is 6'11 and makes $25,000,000 a year (having fun) benefits from our system more so than a 50 year old man with 3 children (who want to go to college) making $250,000. :shrug:

Click to expand...

The 26 year old does not benefit more from government services. He earns more based on his talents and abilities. He should not have to pay a higher percentage. They should both pay the same percentage. That's equitable.

hazlnut said:

But the first rally I went to in blue California last April had already been hijacked by far-right partisans and birthers. They didn't want to talk about common ground or bi-partisan efforts.

Click to expand...

This is what instantly raised my "BS" alert.

Even when the Tea Party movement was almost primarily the "Ron Paul" types it was never about Bi-partisan efforts. Not at all.

Being upset with Republicans because they're not conservative enough isn't being "Bi-partisan", its being staunchly conservative but not mindlessly party driven.

The Tea Party Movement from its inception was FAR from bi-partisan, it was ALWAYS staunchly conservative. The change has been recently that there has been an influx of social conservatives, turning it away from an almost primarily fiscal and size of government type platform, and an influx of hyper partisan REPUBLICANS, not necessarily conservatives, who simply see it as a method to push their partisan political agenda rather than the principles of Conservatism.

But bi-partisanship, it was never about.

Zyphlin said:

This is what instantly raised my "BS" alert.

Even when the Tea Party movement was almost primarily the "Ron Paul" types it was never about Bi-partisan efforts. Not at all.

Click to expand...

Funny, when FOX was promoting the first big event, they were saying it was going to be mix of people from all parties.

And yes, the initial idea was to demand Government work for US and not for themselves. Solve the problems with less politicking and more bi-partisan effort. That's how it was sold and promoted to me.

The Tea Party Movement from its inception was FAR from bi-partisan, it was ALWAYS staunchly conservative. The change has been recently that there has been an influx of social conservatives, turning it away from an almost primarily fiscal and size of government type platform, and an influx of hyper partisan REPUBLICANS, not necessarily conservatives, who simply see it as a method to push their partisan political agenda rather than the principles of Conservatism.

But bi-partisanship, it was never about.

Click to expand...

Maybe behind the scenes, but the initial events were promoted as bi-partisan--people from different parties invited to come together to demand government accountability on spending of tax revenue.

And the change was NOT recent, trust me, the far-right social conservatives showed up last April...

MrVicchio said:

You must really fear the Tea Party movement.

Click to expand...

Th Tea Party is just like any other political movement, common ideas for the most part with areas of disagreement on others.

The problem with social/political movements is it's very easy for them to be hijacked (or appear to be hijacked in the eyes of everyone else) by a small cabal of vocal radicals. Radicals can turn the movement away from it's original ideals towards what they want, causing disenchantment among some participants, and giving the movement less credibility in the eyes of the public.

Zyphlin said:

This is what instantly raised my "BS" alert.

Even when the Tea Party movement was almost primarily the "Ron Paul" types it was never about Bi-partisan efforts. Not at all.

Being upset with Republicans because they're not conservative enough isn't being "Bi-partisan", its being staunchly conservative but not mindlessly party driven.

The Tea Party Movement from its inception was FAR from bi-partisan, it was ALWAYS staunchly conservative. The change has been recently that there has been an influx of social conservatives, turning it away from an almost primarily fiscal and size of government type platform, and an influx of hyper partisan REPUBLICANS, not necessarily conservatives, who simply see it as a method to push their partisan political agenda rather than the principles of Conservatism.

But bi-partisanship, it was never about.

Click to expand...

I can only speak of the two Tea Parties I went to..... there were Conservatives, Libertarians, and Liberals at those functions, not just "Reich-Wing Nut Jobs".... they were truly bi-partisan gatherings.

Coronado said:

Chain-mail wisdom ... just can't beat that. :roll:

Click to expand...

Weak attempt at a deflection on your part. The story is far from a story but accurate. Repubs claim they have earned where they are on their own..lie...Repubs are among the biggest leeches of tax dollars there are..:2razz:

hazlnut said:

.

And the change was NOT recent, trust me, the far-right social conservatives showed up last April...

Click to expand...

Its not SOCIAL Conservatives America needs to hear from. They serve no real purpose. its FISCAL Conservatives that are needed but sadly few excist anymore..save in name only( fakers).

We do need to take a large chunk off of our debt, but fiscal conservatism isn't a valid strategy anymore. The economic and military position occupied by the United States requires our government to borrow money, just like the Athenian, Roman, and British Empires; although the Athenians and to a lesser extent the Romans sort of appropriated rather than borrowed a lot of their budget.

Morality Games said:

We do need to take a large chunk off of our debt, but fiscal conservatism isn't a valid strategy anymore. The economic and military position occupied by the United States requires our government to borrow money, just like the Athenian, Roman, and British Empires; although the Athenians and to a lesser extent the Romans sort of appropriated rather than borrowed a lot of their budget.

Click to expand...

What do you mean by the US "economic position"?

We need to lessen our military position. That would lessen our debt.

please forgive me again for imposing considerations of democratic party politics into this fine symposium on tea party problems...

but, oh, such a day...

first, the president conceded he might have to surrender on health care

gosh, i wonder how rockefeller, wyden, schumer, woolsey, wiener, the progressives, the cbc and a hundred others are gonna take that

in the gut, that's how

Obama admits health care overhaul may die on Hill - Yahoo! News

then we learned that once the cameras were turned off at the newseum funnyman franken tore into obama-by-proxy david axelrod

and stuart smalley wasn't the only one

the white house has provided no leadership on health care, franken fulminated

it's not good enough, not smart enough, and doggone it, no one likes it

all the white house's fault, fusses franken

Franken lays into Ax over health bill - POLITICO.com Print View

then india announced the un couldn't be trusted anymore when it comes to anything having to do with climate and so the second most populous nation on earth will have to rely on itself

all this blatant lying and covering up, the emails and the himalayas, seem to have undermined appreciably that "ovewhelming scientific evidence in favor of global warming..."

i mean, that's what THEY say

we all know climate accords have been colder than killed for months

but the piling on is still painful

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/en...7590/India-forms-new-climate-change-body.html

next, china announced it was putting a new tariff on us chicken ("one of the few us industries that profitably exports to china")

how inhospitable of hu

and the timing, so telling, so following upon obama's empty pronouncement in his sotu to double exports in the next 5 years

UPDATE 3-China to levy anti-dumping duties on US chicken | Reuters

it's as if these rising superpowers are intent on embarrassing the skinny kid with the big ears, like they're doing it on purpose

on tuesday a member of hu's foreign ministry said us-china relations have "deteriorated" under obama, citing conflicts over currency, the climate, trade, arms sales to taiwan and, most important to our putzy prez, sanctions against iran

Chinese diplomat: Ties with US deteriorated recently - Israel News, Ynetnews

finally, some news out of chicago, have you heard?

the winner of tuesday's blue primary for lieutenant governor, it turns out, in 2005 beat up his prostitute girlfriend and held a knife to her throat

scott lee cohen's ex wife also claims he was quite violent with her, attributing his mad rages to steroids

the rub is---in lincoln land, gov and lt gov form one ticket

http://www.wtkr.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-us-lieutenant-governor-illinois,0,5358481.story

can we call it a culture of corruption yet?

rangel, murtha, geithner, blago, burris, dodd, frank, holder...

the knife wielding wife beater from chitown

too much, no?

thanks for listening

enjoy your tea

The Prof said:

please forgive me again for imposing considerations of democratic party politics into this fine symposium on tea party problems...

but, oh, such a day...

first, the president conceded he might have to surrender on health care

gosh, i wonder how rockefeller, wyden, schumer, woolsey, wiener, the progressives, the cbc and a hundred others are gonna take that

in the gut, that's how

Obama admits health care overhaul may die on Hill - Yahoo! News

then we learned that once the cameras were turned off at the newseum funnyman franken tore into obama-by-proxy david axelrod

and stuart smalley wasn't the only one

the white house has provided no leadership on health care, franken fulminated

it's not good enough, not smart enough, and doggone it, no one likes it

all the white house's fault, fusses franken

Franken lays into Ax over health bill - POLITICO.com Print View

then india announced the un couldn't be trusted anymore when it comes to anything having to do with climate and so the second most populous nation on earth will have to rely on itself

all this blatant lying and covering up, the emails and the himalayas, seem to have undermined appreciably that "ovewhelming scientific evidence in favor of global warming..."

i mean, that's what THEY say

we all know climate accords have been colder than killed for months

but the piling on is still painful

India forms new climate change body - Telegraph

next, china announced it was putting a new tariff on us chicken ("one of the few us industries that profitably exports to china")

how inhospitable of hu

and the timing, so telling, so following upon obama's empty pronouncement in his sotu to double exports in the next 5 years

UPDATE 3-China to levy anti-dumping duties on US chicken | Reuters

it's as if these rising superpowers are intent on embarrasing the skinny kid with the big ears, like they're doing it on purpose

on tuesday a member of hu's foreign ministry said us-china relations have "deteriorated" under obama, citing conflicts over currency, the climate, trade, arms sales to taiwan and, most important to our putzy prez, sanctions against iran

Chinese diplomat: Ties with US deteriorated recently - Israel News, Ynetnews

finally, some news out of chicago, have you heard?

the winner of tuesday's blue primary for lieutenant governor, it turns out, in 2005 beat up his prostitute girlfriend and held a knife to her throat

scott lee cohen's ex wife also claims he was quite violent with her, attributing his mad rages to steroids

the rub is---in lincoln land, gov and lt gov form one ticket

Ill. Lt. governor nominee denies holding knife to girlfriend's neck, admits past steroid use - WTKR

can we call it a culture of corruption yet?

rangel, murtha, geithner, blago, burris, dodd, frank, holder...

the knife wielding wife beater from chitown

too much, no?

thanks for listening

enjoy your tea

Click to expand...

None of that has anything to do with the topic of this thread. It's just you whining about the Democrats. If you want to start a thread about that please go do so.

Also feel free to start a thread of ideas for improving the GOP.

the party in power is committing suicide

self destruction fast, dramatic and on every tv screen

that aint whining

opposition, politically, needs little improvement

all it needs do is oppose

sorry

hazlnut said:

Funny, when FOX was promoting the first big event, they were saying it was going to be mix of people from all parties.

Click to expand...

FOX didn't organize the event. Who the **** cares what they say about it?

pugetsoundwa said:

Weak attempt at a deflection on your part. The story is far from a story but accurate. Repubs claim they have earned where they are on their own..lie...Repubs are among the biggest leeches of tax dollars there are..:2razz:

Click to expand...

It is a made-up chain email. It proves nothing. That's why I pointed and laughed at it. :laughat:

Post something non-fiction if you would like to be taken seriously.

hazlnut said:

Funny, when FOX was promoting the first big event, they were saying it was going to be mix of people from all parties.

Click to expand...

Crunch said:

I can only speak of the two Tea Parties I went to..... there were Conservatives, Libertarians, and Liberals at those functions, not just "Reich-Wing Nut Jobs".... they were truly bi-partisan gatherings.

Click to expand...

There is a difference between an event being something that draws people from multiple parties, and pushing "Bi-partisan" efforts and legislation.

The Tea Parties originated, in part, as something beyond political party. However, the IDEOLOGY of it was clearly, and fully, staunchly conservative. There is no if's, and's, or but's about that. It wasn't "moderate", it wasn't "attempting to bridge bipartisan views of liberals and conservatives". It was conservatism that was being pushed.

The goal, and the theory though, was that the majority of this country is conservative, or conservative leaning, and that there are both moderate conservatives in the democratic party and libertarian conservatives in the Libertarian party that could be attracted to a traditionalist conservative message such as low taxes, strong fiscal responsibility, and small government.

This was not "low taxes on everyone but the rich". This was not "Strong fiscal responsibility, but keeping entitlements". This wasn't "Small government by decreasing the military but keeping social services large".

It was "bi-partisan", in regards to PARTIES, in that it did have members from multiple parties there. But ideology wise, it was most distinctly not bipartisan in philosophy. It was decisively right wing.

hazlnut said:

Funny, when FOX was promoting the first big event, they were saying it was going to be mix of people from all parties.

Click to expand...

Which shows the hilarious notion of this. Tea Parties were going on well before Fox began promoting the movement. And early on they were definitely a mix of people...but the MESSAGE and philosophy behind it was not bipartisan in philosophy, even if it was in the type of people present to support it.

And yes, the initial idea was to demand Government work for US and not for themselves. Solve the problems with less politicking and more bi-partisan effort. That's how it was sold and promoted to me.

Click to expand...

Then apparently you got sold it far different than most everyone I've heard talk about it, outside of a few liberals that magically seem to claim that right before bashing the entire movement and everyone in it with broadscale generalizations.

I've never once saw it pushed across for "less politicking and more bi-partisan" effort. I did not ever hear it pushed across as a movement trying to get politicians to be moderates, or come together to compromise on issues, or other things associated with bi-partisanship. It was sold as staunch, traditionalist, conservatism with the idea that there are democrats, libertarians, and republicans that could all get on board with a traditional fiscal and governmental conservative message.

Getting Democrats to agree with Republicans by being conservative isn't "Bipartisanship", that's turning them onto conservatism. This is incredibly different than "Bipartisan" as its routinely used in politics today which is either referring to "moderate" legislation or compromised legislation that gives a bit to both sides.

Maybe behind the scenes, but the initial events were promoted as bi-partisan--people from different parties invited to come together to demand government accountability on spending of tax revenue.

Click to expand...

Yes, the spending of said revenue on things like the Bail Outs done by both Bush and Obama because they were anti-conservative ideology. Yes, in regards to the potential threats of raising of taxes, because that is anti-conservative ideology. Yes on the increase of the size and scope of government and power of politicians, because that is anti-conservative ideology.

Getting Democrats to agree with Republicans through the use of a conservative message isn't bipartisanship, that's essentially conversion or winning them over to the other side.

Maybe I am misundestanding you and your use of bipartisan, but the way you use it followed by HOW you describe it just is not how I ever heard the tea parties talked about. Bipartisan in the make up of those there? Perhaps. Bipartisan in the style and philosophy of what was being promoted? Not at all.

Were these tea parties taking place before Obama was in the White House? I ask because I'm a fiscal conservative and a member of the Libertarian party. I don't remember any tea parties being mentioned before Obama. I certainly never saw any on the news.

It seems these tea parties either sprung up after Obama won, or they have been around for awhile but never got any news coverage until Obama won.

Am I correct in assuming that?

Winnb said:

Were these tea parties taking place before Obama was in the White House? I ask because I'm a fiscal conservative and a member of the Libertarian party. I don't remember any tea parties being mentioned before Obama. I certainly never saw any on the news.

It seems these tea parties either sprung up after Obama won, or they have been around for awhile but never got any news coverage until Obama won.

Am I correct in assuming that?

Click to expand...

yes. see ron paul.

the tea partiers are completely united on one issue---opposition to obama

tea is taxed enough already, which pretty clearly states their disaffection with big govt, big spending and hi taxes

but, to me, the idea of tea partiers trying to attract people of this or that stripe, attempting to portray themselves in this or that light, is very silly

the movement is the definition, the embodiment of grassroots

it's an EXPRESSION of strong feeling, so nascent, so from below, it lacks the wherewithal, the machinery, the leadership even to contemplate tactics

tea is so grassroots, at least, up to now, it is the soul of sincerity

it's losing a bit of its innocence this weekend in nashville

meanwhile, the party in power is imploding

don't forget that part

it's pretty important, in the big scheme

hazlnut said:

Fractures emerge as Tea Party convenes



The original notion of protesting overspending by both Republicans and Democrats appealed to me. Expressing my discontent with polarized, partisan politics in D.C., the need for congressional term limits--all things I could get behind...

But the first rally I went to in blue California last April had already been hijacked by far-right partisans and birthers. They didn't want to talk about common ground or bi-partisan efforts.

This morning I heard Dick Armey:



Diversity -- absolutely, maybe too much so.

Tolerant -- hardly. Go to a Tea Party rally and tell them you're an independent who thinks the real problem is congress and special interests and not really the President.

Click to expand...

seems some are pissed that palin took a 100k, and the event is being run as a for profit event. palin says she'll donate it to the cause, in that case, why take it in the first place?

Winnb said:

Were these tea parties taking place before Obama was in the White House? I ask because I'm a fiscal conservative and a member of the Libertarian party. I don't remember any tea parties being mentioned before Obama. I certainly never saw any on the news.

It seems these tea parties either sprung up after Obama won, or they have been around for awhile but never got any news coverage until Obama won.

Am I correct in assuming that?

Click to expand...

There were numerous "Tea Parties" by the Ron Paul grass roots movement prior to the election. They never received a large amount of coverage as they were not quite as wide scale as the one that happened on tax day and they were more directed in part towards a candidate AND his message rather than just a message. A candidate that essentially had little to no real shot at getting the nomination.

Historically, people are more apt to protest when they are in the opposition. Not necessarily because they weren't upset about their side, but people are generally always more likely in politics to be MORE vocal when they're out of power because beyond that they're powerless. So as the Republicans lost power, Obama gained power, and Obama started doing many of the same things Bush did that made those people mad PLUS started doing more things that made them mad, the fervor of it and the spread of the movement increased. The detachment from the Ron Paul campaigned also likely helped increase it spread, and its coverage, as you began to move away from a mostly outlying candidate who was extremely polarizing within the base.

What we have seen is these kind of movements are rife for the potential for crazies to latch on. At the beginning of the Tea Parties it was 9/11 truthers and people who believed the CFR was a clandestine group forging a world government to rule us all. In most recent time its Truthers and the Obama is a Nazi types.