• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Scott Brown snubs Sarah Palin, bags Tea Party rally

Ron Paul actually believes in the principles that the T-partiers claim they believe in and mouth off about. Paul also materially believes in the principles that Palin just mouths as bumper sticker material.

It is that Ron Paul has substance and the TP's and Palin show the show.
You haven't got a clue of what your talking about, or proof for your allegations. :doh
 
My grandfather isn't on Medicare; he has private health insurance and is a retired Navy veteran (he is entitled to VA care as well). He is just protesting the expansion of government, as is my friend's mother, and several other decent folks I know. None of them are racists or extremists. They are just regular people who are voicing their concern. People like Dana think they're extremists, though...:roll:

If your Grandad is "a retired Navy veteran " he is covered by a government insurance program called TRICARE as all of us retired military people are. The predecessor of TRICARE was CHAMPUS. In the event that you Grandad is not tuned into his benefits he needs to contact the DOD and get registered for TRICARE. Your Grandad can use TRICARE as a secondary carrier if he has his private insurance as I do. I see no need to use TRICARE as a prmary at this time since I can afford my private insuarnce. Yet it is there for THOSE WHO NEED IT. - retired military that is and dependents!!

ps don't let the TP's fool you or scare you about TRICARE. TRICARE is not socialist it is for military, retired military, dependents !!! and we ARE NOT SOCIALISTS no matter what some liars or confused people say !!!
 
Last edited:
You haven't got a clue of what your talking about, or proof for your allegations. :doh

What allegation !!! my words are facts !!! read them and learn !!! I need not show proof since the truth is on my side !! lol
 
1) Yes, the KKK did love Ron Paul, and Ron Paul condemned them. And, as I said before, the Tea Partiers condemned the KKK'ers when they showed up too. So what? That is just a red herring you are attempting to throw out there.

2)

You just called me a liar. I will let this one pass.

3) Here is the real meat of my argument. Ron Paul, in his campaign, was upbeat at all times, not trashing his opponents with lies and calling them Nazis, but telling Americans that they were capable of transforming this nation into something better. In fact, one of his slogans was "Hope for America", which the Obama campaign seemed to have conveniently stolen.

But don't take my word for it. Ask Vague. He and I met up at a Ron Paul rally, and he will tell you the exact same thing I just told you about him.

So what is the difference between the Paul campaign and today's Tea Partiers? While the Tea Partiers spend their time talking trash, those who worked on Paul's campaign worked on solutions, built solid platforms, and stayed on message. Now you might disagree with some of what Ron Paul wanted to do, and may consider some of it "out there", but at least he was sending a positive message, and presenting a solution, rather than just talking trash.
Yes let us do ask Vague. Surely he will support your prior assertion that you saw nothing but racist signs etc, etc and other sophistry Danny. Nothing but, in your words:
Could have fooled me. I saw a Tea Party rally in Houston earlier in the year, and I saw it in person at Memorial Park. There were at least 200 people there, and there could have been more. I did not see a single sign at that rally that didn't question Obama's citizenship, or his being a Communist or a Nazi, or executing the elderly with death panels, or being anti-American, or hating the troops. I even saw one sign that had a map of Africa, and the caption read "Obama Go Home". There were more signs that promoted Texas seceding from the Union, and recreating the Republic of Texas. You want to tell me what is moderate, or independent, about any of this?

Zyphlin is to be credited for making the plainly obvious call about your plainly obvious sophistry. Being a former three decade Houstonian with family and friends that attended the Memorial Park party, I plainly call you full of s@%t. As you quite honestly are. Go out on obviously creaky ill supported irrational branches and you deserve the fall you get. Just for yucks, do share with us the pictures of the "nothing but" photos from the Chronicle won't you? I mean those were not just the majority but all of signs right you managed to discern? Share with us the coverage from channels 2, 11, 13 and the lessor ones as well, the so oh so racist and hate filled events you swear you and Vague witnessed. I guess it was a Houston media conspiracy to hide it all eh? Chuckle. I say you are full of s*#t. To quote hazelnut hackery, I know it, you know it and we all know it.:roll:

Watched a wonderful debunking of the Danny approach to the Tea Party tonight on Anderson Copper 360. Even managed to nick me a link to, shall we say, a more honest look at what really goes on at those oh so violent, racist HATE FILLED Tea Party rallies.:roll:
Reporter's notebook: What really happens at Tea Party rallies - CNN.com

Bad news for your type is that common sense and basic human honesty are starting to creep into the spin people like you (and others) are trying so desperately to pretend at. To what profitable end, I can't imagine. Naked bias on display IMO. God knows you don't have common sense, intellectual honesty and integrity on your side here sir. Oh I'm certain you could care less, but I've been here a while and Zep is right, pretty frakin pathetic of you all the way around. Actual HACK material. Shame shame shame on you.
 
Last edited:
Continued thanks to the usual DP "server too busy" at 2AM thingy............meant to edit out the word racist, as you did not level that irrational aspersion. That was so many others at DP, my bad.

BTW Danny, what was the date of that Tea Party you attended at Memorial Park? Just curious..............

Meanwhile, looky looky at all the signs from the birthers! The "Nazi" and "communist" signs! The execute the elderly with death panel signs! The succeed from the union signs! They were so prevalent that they obscured all others! Jesus Dan, way to lower your intellectual capital. Deservedly so too............

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CicPhKGmqkg&feature=related"]YouTube- Houston Tea Party[/nomedia]

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwuCArp4vc8&feature=related"]YouTube- Houston Tea Party Crowd Scan[/nomedia]

Oh my GOD! Is that....GASP....a black Tea Partier?? WTF? What a racist!! Oh MY GOD, look someone is holding up a..........Atlas Shrugged sign!! OMFG!!

Chuckle.
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgdWL8pjo6I"]YouTube- Houston Tea Party, February 27, 2009[/nomedia]

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NikQ4c67JOw"]YouTube- Interview with a voter. Tea Party, Houston, TX, 4/15/09[/nomedia]

Just look at that black racist spouting racist hatred.................such a typical tea party member!

Danarhea, you sir are festooned with dung.:shock:
 
Last edited:
Continued thanks to the usual DP "server too busy" at 2AM thingy............meant to edit out the word racist, as you did not level that irrational aspersion. That was so many others at DP, my bad.

BTW Danny, what was the date of that Tea Party you attended at Memorial Park? Just curious..............

Meanwhile, looky looky at all the signs from the birthers! The "Nazi" and "communist" signs! The execute the elderly with death panel signs! The succeed from the union signs! They were so prevalent that they obscured all others! Jesus Dan, way to lower your intellectual capital. Deservedly so too............

YouTube- Houston Tea Party

YouTube- Houston Tea Party Crowd Scan

Oh my GOD! Is that....GASP....a black Tea Partier?? WTF? What a racist!! Oh MY GOD, look someone is holding up a..........Atlas Shrugged sign!! OMFG!!

Chuckle.
YouTube- Houston Tea Party, February 27, 2009

YouTube- Interview with a voter. Tea Party, Houston, TX, 4/15/09

Just look at that black racist spouting racist hatred.................such a typical tea party member!

Danarhea, you sir are festooned with dung.:shock:
It appears he's against anything conservative.
 
It appears he's against anything conservative.

If you believe that passing laws to regulate morality is Conservative, then I would like you to share some of what you are smoking with me. Conservative is many things, but it is not government intervention. Many who call themselves Conservatives (while having the gall to call other people fake Conservatives) are fake Conservatives themselves.
 
Last edited:
well put

conservatives really need to stop fighting amongst themselves until AFTER they have WON something to FIGHT OVER

to dispute now is COUNTERPRODUCTIVE

it's also MOOT

all opponents of the prodigiously powerful PARTY IN POWER need to concert their efforts to EMASCULATE the prodigiously powerful PARTY IN POWER

once that BIG STUFF is taken care of, then we can stand up for some of the principles that genuinely do split us

but not until

really, for someone to look at american politics today and primarily see the divisions that have always been part of the right would require a microscope

we're comparitively so small

it would also require some kind of all consuming agenda, at times like these

my opinion
 
If you believe that passing laws to regulate morality is Conservative, then I would like you to share some of what you are smoking with me. Conservative is many things, but it is not government intervention. Many who call themselves Conservatives (while having the gall to call other people fake Conservatives) are fake Conservatives themselves.

I'd invite you to go to the Tea Parties "contract from america" which is the closest thing to a clear and consise unified statement of the Tea Parties "platform" or goals and show me which ones are about regulating morality.
 
I'd invite you to go to the Tea Parties "contract from America" which is the closest thing to a clear and concise unified statement of the Tea Parties "platform" or goals and show me which ones are about regulating morality.

This is ridiculous and quite dishonest. When Republicans and by that I mean Tea Baggers - who no longer want to call themselves Republicans - want to regulate morality, they won't say it in those terms. They'll say 'limit the government'. They don't want to cut military spending or medicaid for old people, they want to cut social spending and regulate who gets married.

Why don't we even the playing field a little bit? Find me a single prominent Republican promoting the Tea Party who isn't for regulating morality and you'll have found yourself a Republican I would vote for. Bobby Jindal maybe? Sarah Palin? Michelle Bachman? The contract from America is just a conservative fluff job pretending to be something it isn't. No different than the Newt Gringrich authored document from which it gets its name Contract with America.
 
Last edited:
This is ridiculous and quite dishonest. When Republicans and by that I mean Tea Baggers - who no longer want to call themselves Republicans - want to regulate morality, they won't say it in those terms. They'll say 'limit the government'. They don't want to cut military spending or medicaid for old people, they want to cut social spending and regulate who gets married.

Why don't we even the playing field a little bit? Find me a single prominent Republican promoting the Tea Party who isn't for regulating morality and you'll have found yourself a Republican I would vote for. Bobby Jindal maybe? Sarah Palin? Michelle Bachman? The contract from America is just a conservative fluff job pretending to be something it isn't. No different than the Newt Gringrich authored document from which it gets its name Contract with America.

it appears Ron Paul can expect your vote
 
This is ridiculous and quite dishonest. When Republicans and by that I mean Tea Baggers - who no longer want to call themselves Republicans - want to regulate morality, they won't say it in those terms. They'll say 'limit the government'. They don't want to cut military spending or medicaid for old people, they want to cut social spending and regulate who gets married.

Why don't we even the playing field a little bit? Find me a single prominent Republican promoting the Tea Party who isn't for regulating morality and you'll have found yourself a Republican I would vote for. Bobby Jindal maybe? Sarah Palin? Michelle Bachman? The contract from America is just a conservative fluff job pretending to be something it isn't. No different than the Newt Gringrich authored document from which it gets its name Contract with America.

I wouldn't say that, because the Tea Party I went to was before "Contract from America". I didn't see anything there about it. So, as much as Zyph and I are bashing each other in this thread, I still have an open mind, and would be willing to check it out. If it turns out like he said, then that certainly would change my opinion of the Tea Partiers, or at least, of some of them. What turns my stomach is the crap that I have seen, but doesn't mean that there aren't some REAL grass roots Tea Partiers out there, who are protesting over real issues, such as taxation, instead of protesting over BS, such as the birthers and deathers are doing. If these groups are kicking the birthers, deathers, and the crazy name callers to the curb, and actually tackling real issues, instead of personalities, then there might be something there that I could support. I am certainly willing to take a listen.
 
Last edited:
it appears Ron Paul can expect your vote
Doubt it :

Ron Paul on the Issues

* Abortion is murder. (Apr 2008)
* Roe v. Wade decision was harmful to the Constitution. (Apr 2008)
* Define life at conception in law, as scientific statement. (Feb 2008)
* Protecting the life of the unborn is protecting liberty. (Feb 2008)
* Get the federal government out of abortion decision. (Nov 2007)
* Delivered 4000 babies; & assuredly life begins at conception. (Sep 2007)
* Sanctity of Life Act: remove federal jurisdiction. (Sep 2007)
* Nominate only judges who refuse to legislate from the bench. (Sep 2007)
* Save “snowflake babies”: no experiments on frozen embryos. (Sep 2007)
* No tax funding for organizations that promote abortion. (Sep 2007)
* Embryonic stem cell programs not constitionally authorized. (May 2007)
* Voted NO on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Jan 2007)
* Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
* Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
* Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
* Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
* Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
* Voted YES on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
* Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
* Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
* Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
* Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)
* No federal funding of abortion, and pro-life. (Dec 2000)
* Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
* Rated 56% by the NRLC, indicating a mixed record on abortion. (Dec 2006)
* Report on Medicaid payments to abortion providers. (Apr 2009)

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul]Political positions of Ron Paul - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Don't ask, don't tell

In the third Republican debate on June 5, 2007, Paul said about the U.S. military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy:

"I think the current policy is a decent policy. And the problem that we have with dealing with this subject is we see people as groups, as they belong to certain groups and that they derive their rights as belonging to groups. We don't get our rights because we're gays or women or minorities. We get our rights from our Creator as individuals. So every individual should be treated the same way. So if there is homosexual behavior in the military that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. But if there's heterosexual behavior that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. So it isn't the issue of homosexuality. It's the concept and the understanding of individual rights. If we understood that, we would not be dealing with this very important problem."[186]

Paul elaborated his position in a 65-minute interview at Google, stating that he would not discharge troops for being homosexual if their behavior was not disruptive.[185] Ron Paul has been a critic of the Supreme Court's decision on the Lawrence v. Texas case in which sodomy laws were ruled unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment. In an essay posted to the Lew Rockwell website he described his opposition to "ridiculous" sodomy laws, but his fear that federal courts were grossly violating their role of strictly interpreting the constitution, and setting a dangerous precedent of legislating from the bench, by declaring 'sodomy' a constitutional right.

"Consider the Lawrence case decided by the Supreme Court in June. The Court determined that Texas had no right to establish its own standards for private sexual conduct, because gay sodomy is somehow protected under the 14th amendment “right to privacy.” Ridiculous as sodomy laws may be, there clearly is no right to privacy nor sodomy found anywhere in the Constitution. There are, however, states’ rights – rights plainly affirmed in the Ninth and Tenth amendments. Under those amendments, the State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards."[187]
 
Delivered 4000 babies; & assuredly life begins at conception.

How does the second follow from the first? Delivering babies is not being there at conception.
 
I have long thought, and have documented the thought here at DP, that the Tea Party movement was something set-up by GOP interests to seperate themselves, as a party, from the embarassment of people out there on the outer perimeter, just long enough to get back in the good graces of mainstream America. But, in the end-game, the TP'ers will "suddenly" dissolve and throw their weight behind the GOP.

Otherwise, why would GOP heavy hitter's be seen at the TP knowing that, the Tea Party, as an independant, "grass roots" :roll: party, would only split the GOP vote?

It's as obvious as the nose on one's face if you ask me.


You may have been right. A PAC has treated the Tea Party as a brand and used it that way to raise money for GOP interests. The Tea Party is pretty unhappy about it too.

“We’ve worked hard to distance ourselves from the Tea Party Express because of their close affiliation with the Republican Party, the Republican establishment and their PAC,” said Debbie Dooley, a national coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots, a national umbrella group of local activists. The Patriots have supported a strict nonpartisan posture but also have struggled to raise money, and Dooley contends that’s partly because of Tea Party Express.

“When people donate to Tea Party Express, they think that they are donating to a tea party, because they don’t read the fine print at the bottom of their e-mails that says it is a PAC,” she said. “And that hurts the local grass-roots tea party organizers, since a lot of that is actually taking some money away from them.”

Adds Ned Ryun, president of American Majority, a nonprofit group that trains local tea party organizers: “I’m concerned that they’re using (Tea Party Express) as a marketing gimmick to line the pockets of consultants instead of actually helping the tea party movement. People are already pretty fired up, so enough protesting and rallying — they need to be empowered to go back and organize their communities.”

Read more: GOP operatives crash the tea party - Kenneth P. Vogel - POLITICO.com
 
I wouldn't say that, because the Tea Party I went to was before "Contract from America". I didn't see anything there about it. So, as much as Zyph and I are bashing each other in this thread, I still have an open mind, and would be willing to check it out. If it turns out like he said, then that certainly would change my opinion of the Tea Partiers, or at least, of some of them. What turns my stomach is the crap that I have seen, but doesn't mean that there aren't some REAL grass roots Tea Partiers out there, who are protesting over real issues, such as taxation, instead of protesting over BS, such as the birthers and deathers are doing. If these groups are kicking the birthers, deathers, and the crazy name callers to the curb, and actually tackling real issues, instead of personalities, then there might be something there that I could support. I am certainly willing to take a listen.

Here is what I'd say Dana.

First, despite the fact that in some states people have organized an independent party under its name, the "Tea Party" as a whole is not a political party. It is a political and ideological movement that is pushing for politicians to represent their ideals...be it on the republican ticket, libertarian, conservative, etc.

Second, because of this what you're going to find is something similar to other political movements rather than parties...that you have people who support it and rally behind it that agree on the common interests of that movement but disagree on others. Much like the Anti-War movement could attract people who were pro-choice but anti-gun control or pro-life but pro-environmentalism or whatever else odd mix. That didn't mean the Anti-war movement was a Pro-Choice movement or an Anti-Gun movement, it just meant it had cross over.

The Tea Party's philosophy advocates fiscal conservatism, limited government, and an attempt to returning to more strict following of the constitution. It is not a social movement. However, its tenets DO appeal to many Social Conservatives and the Religious Right and even some Neocons or even Democrats. So they grab onto the Tea Party for the things they share in common, but that doesn't silence them about the things that they feel that aren't part of the core ideology of the movement.

Additionally, it is not a purely concentrated national effort but more of a loose confederation of multiple individual groups floating freely under a larger net. A Tea Party in Vermont may be organized and ran by a staunch libertarian while one in Texas could be ran by a Religious Right minister while still another two in Virginia could be within 100 miles of each other and one started by a moderate Republican and the other by a rather paleocon whose a hidden racist. In each case you'll likely find an underlining similar message...limited government, fiscal responsibility, a return to the constitution...but beyond that each will be shaped a bit by the person organizing it. Rather than look at the exceptions to the rule at each place I would say to get the real essence of the Tea Party movement would be to look at the message that is consistent through them all.

That in part is what the Contract From America is. Its backed and pushed by a coalition of various state tea parties and organizations that agree with and foster the movements ideals. It is that baseline message, the core of the philosophy.

And, sadly, like any group that gains large traction and gets a large voice you're ALWAYS going to have people that clamor onto it in hopes of using it and manipulating it without any real care for its meaning and message. Ultimately, for me, the Tea Party is not about any individual politician...certainly not Sarah Palin...but about a movement that is telling Republicans across the board that they had best start running as balanced conservatives focusing on fiscal and governmental matters and that when they're re-elected they best back up that talk.

The Republican Party has supporters and hangers on that are crazy idiots. The Libetarian Party does. The Constitutionalists do. Neoconservatism does. Paleoconservatism does. Libertarian conservatism does. Conservatism as a whole does. As does liberalism. And just about any political group, party, or ideology.

I generally don't judge a political entity solely on the basis of the crazies, even if that's what I've met first hand, unless there's overwhelming evidence that the crazies are the majority. You have, if nothing else, first hand accounts from numerous DP members...from right wingers that people can't stand to right wingers that others on the right call "phonies"...telling you they've gone to these things and the crazies were in the absolute minority. At the very least that should give pause to the notion that everywhere somehow its always the crazies in the majority.
 
the one thing that unites the Taxed Enough Already's is OPPOSITION TO OBAMA

they're, indeed, quite determined in their disagreement with the ditherer

ie, not dubious

they're opposed to obama, and they're opposed overwhelmingly
 
Last edited:
Here is what I'd say Dana.

First, despite the fact that in some states people have organized an independent party under its name, the "Tea Party" as a whole is not a political party. It is a political and ideological movement that is pushing for politicians to represent their ideals...be it on the republican ticket, libertarian, conservative, etc.

Second, because of this what you're going to find is something similar to other political movements rather than parties...that you have people who support it and rally behind it that agree on the common interests of that movement but disagree on others. Much like the Anti-War movement could attract people who were pro-choice but anti-gun control or pro-life but pro-environmentalism or whatever else odd mix. That didn't mean the Anti-war movement was a Pro-Choice movement or an Anti-Gun movement, it just meant it had cross over.

The Tea Party's philosophy advocates fiscal conservatism, limited government, and an attempt to returning to more strict following of the constitution. It is not a social movement. However, its tenets DO appeal to many Social Conservatives and the Religious Right and even some Neocons or even Democrats. So they grab onto the Tea Party for the things they share in common, but that doesn't silence them about the things that they feel that aren't part of the core ideology of the movement.

Additionally, it is not a purely concentrated national effort but more of a loose confederation of multiple individual groups floating freely under a larger net. A Tea Party in Vermont may be organized and ran by a staunch libertarian while one in Texas could be ran by a Religious Right minister while still another two in Virginia could be within 100 miles of each other and one started by a moderate Republican and the other by a rather paleocon whose a hidden racist. In each case you'll likely find an underlining similar message...limited government, fiscal responsibility, a return to the constitution...but beyond that each will be shaped a bit by the person organizing it. Rather than look at the exceptions to the rule at each place I would say to get the real essence of the Tea Party movement would be to look at the message that is consistent through them all.

That in part is what the Contract From America is. Its backed and pushed by a coalition of various state tea parties and organizations that agree with and foster the movements ideals. It is that baseline message, the core of the philosophy.

And, sadly, like any group that gains large traction and gets a large voice you're ALWAYS going to have people that clamor onto it in hopes of using it and manipulating it without any real care for its meaning and message. Ultimately, for me, the Tea Party is not about any individual politician...certainly not Sarah Palin...but about a movement that is telling Republicans across the board that they had best start running as balanced conservatives focusing on fiscal and governmental matters and that when they're re-elected they best back up that talk.

The Republican Party has supporters and hangers on that are crazy idiots. The Libetarian Party does. The Constitutionalists do. Neoconservatism does. Paleoconservatism does. Libertarian conservatism does. Conservatism as a whole does. As does liberalism. And just about any political group, party, or ideology.

I generally don't judge a political entity solely on the basis of the crazies, even if that's what I've met first hand, unless there's overwhelming evidence that the crazies are the majority. You have, if nothing else, first hand accounts from numerous DP members...from right wingers that people can't stand to right wingers that others on the right call "phonies"...telling you they've gone to these things and the crazies were in the absolute minority. At the very least that should give pause to the notion that everywhere somehow its always the crazies in the majority.

OK, that makes sense. And it does give me hope that the Houston Tea Party organizer who had the sign that said "niggar" was thrown out, and will never organize another event. So, at least, here in Houston, they are attempting to moderate their events, and this is what they need.

The main problem with the Tea Partiers, as I see it, is that there are so many different groups with different philosophies. In attempting to wrest power from the Democrats, they are going to need to "gell" and come together on a common message. The excessive taxation message is well and good, but it is getting drowned out by a lot of other messages. If the Tea Party movement is going to gain traction, and not die out, their messages cannot be left to drown in "white noise". Look what Gingrich did, and he was successful, because his supporters stayed on message. Also, it is imperative that they kick the fringe to the curb. The fringe is part of what killed the Paul campaign in 2008. Finally, they have to be honest in their message. That means no fake plumbers who never had a plumber's license. Americans were too smart for that, and it is part of the reason McCain lost. If the Tea Party wants to move up, they cannot indulge in slick ad campaigns. They are going to have to speak honestly and from the heart.

If they can do all that, then I think I could support them. However, I was really turned off by what I saw here. This was nothing like the Paul campaign at all.

Now, you and I can argue from now until the cows come home about who is being honest, who is being dishonest, and other mundane things, but what will get done? Nothing. So I offer you an olive branch. Let's do this:

1) Let's agree that the Tea Party movement has a good central idea - Lower taxes, smaller government, and more individual freedom - Sounds like the old Gipper, doesn't it?

2) Let's agree that birthers, deathers, people screaming "Nazi", and the like, have no business in the Tea Party movement, but are detrimental to its well-being.

3) Let's also agree that, like Newt in 1994, they need to stay on message, and not be distracted by..... well, distractions (LOL), and if they do so, they could be a powerful political force.

4) Finally, let's agree that I will promise to have an open mind, and see what happens. And, if it is good (that is, they do the things I detailed above), I will join them.

Like I said, I do have an open mind about this, despite what I have posted about them, but I hate the direction the Tea Partiers have been frequently pulled in, especially in Texas. If they show some real organization, along with some discipline, they could be an exciting force in politics. However, if they don't do what they need to do, I feel they will be a flash in the pan, having wasted their opportunity to do some good.

Fair enough?
 
Last edited:
Indeed. I agree with your assertion about Paul, fringers, and the Tea Parties. At the same time I think its a difficult rode to pave and I felt that way with Paul. Idiots and crazies that you give attention to, even negative attention, just feeds their activities and exposes them to more people. Its a tricky situation.

I also agree with the on message but at the same time don't know how it will work. One of the things that has made the Tea Party a success is also what's causing that trouble. It is a national movement made up of grass root individual localized groups (granted, some of which are less "Grass roots" than others). To much centralization and it feels less personalized and more like a sterile typical political machine.

I simply am hoping that even disjointed, the general message is loud enough to wake the GOP up to the notion that it is a balanced message, focusing as much on both the fiscal and governmental ends of conservatism as it does on any of the social or military matters and if they neglect it again, in campaigning or in governance, then the likelihood of a mass migration from the party is far greater than previously.
 
Indeed. I agree with your assertion about Paul, fringers, and the Tea Parties. At the same time I think its a difficult rode to pave and I felt that way with Paul. Idiots and crazies that you give attention to, even negative attention, just feeds their activities and exposes them to more people. Its a tricky situation.

I also agree with the on message but at the same time don't know how it will work. One of the things that has made the Tea Party a success is also what's causing that trouble. It is a national movement made up of grass root individual localized groups (granted, some of which are less "Grass roots" than others). To much centralization and it feels less personalized and more like a sterile typical political machine.

I simply am hoping that even disjointed, the general message is loud enough to wake the GOP up to the notion that it is a balanced message, focusing as much on both the fiscal and governmental ends of conservatism as it does on any of the social or military matters and if they neglect it again, in campaigning or in governance, then the likelihood of a mass migration from the party is far greater than previously.

Not too much centralization, but some national leaders who can pound home the points that need to be pounded home. The right leaders can provide the leadership the movement needs. No, there will never be another Reagan, but there are some good people out there who can be examples to follow. Let them stand up and lead.

Anyways, let's have a beer...... Oops, make mine a root beer. I am on probation, you know. LOL.
 
Last edited:
the one thing that unites the Taxed Enough Already's is OPPOSITION TO OBAMA

they're, indeed, quite determined in their disagreement with the ditherer

ie, not dubious

they're opposed to obama, and they're opposed overwhelmingly

But Obama has not raised taxes so why is it that "they" were not oppsed to spending and growth of government and a TARP being thrown on us before 14 months ago ?
 
you'd have to ask them

but they sure don't seem to like obama, whatever the cause
 
you'd have to ask them

but they sure don't seem to like obama, whatever the cause

And that is much of their problem. Many of them have been running a campaign of "personality" instead of a campaign of issues. Thus, the issues have been getting lost. The issues are what it is going to take to get people to listen, not the crazy. At least, there is now evidence that Tea Partiers want to tackle issues, and the crazies in the group are beginning to be marginalized, which is what is needed here.
 
And that is much of their problem. Many of them have been running a campaign of "personality" instead of a campaign of issues. Thus, the issues have been getting lost. The issues are what it is going to take to get people to listen, not the crazy. At least, there is now evidence that Tea Partiers want to tackle issues, and the crazies in the group are beginning to be marginalized, which is what is needed here.

When you bring in the word "ringers" such as the Palins and Bachmeans and Palin recycles and retreads the "community organizer " bumper sticker yes it is "personality" and not issues. Even the "we want to take our country back" implies that it was Obama who took "our" country.

Yet if one thinks about it isn't the country also Obama's, and mine, and yours, and the steel worker who is rebulding our rusted out bridges!!
 
Back
Top Bottom