• 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!

The tea party

Are you or have you ever been a member of the tea party?

  • Total voters
    61
I voted yes but have never sent any money to the party itself. I support many of the ideas that lead to the forming of the party, that's where I stand, it doesn't matter if there is a formal candidate on not.
 
Howard the Duck said:
You is a pronoun both plural and singular.

There's a hint for you.
Click to expand...

aaaaand another dodge. thats what I thought. next time dont make posts you cant back up and they wont be exposed, proved wrong and mocked so bad LMAO
You could just post with integrity and honesty and simply admit you mispoke, made a mistake and you have no idea who I am, how ive treated others and how ive been treated. But im guessing you wont so ill ask my question again.

Howard the Duck said:
You view today's politics differently because you are being treated as you treated others in the past.
Click to expand...
me? who am i?
By all means tell me how "I" am being treated and how I treated "others" in the past?
Who are these others?

any takers my question is dodged again?
 
AGENT J said:
aaaaand another dodge. thats what I thought. next time dont make posts you cant back up and they wont be exposed, proved wrong and mocked so bad LMAO
You could just post with integrity and honesty and simply admit you mispoke, made a mistake and you have no idea who I am, how ive treated others and how ive been treated. But im guessing you wont so ill ask my question again.


me? who am i?
By all means tell me how "I" am being treated and how I treated "others" in the past?
Who are these others?

any takers my question is dodged again?
Click to expand...

You. First person. Plural.
 
Howard the Duck said:
You. First person. Plural.
Click to expand...

I love it, more dodges further exposing your false claims. Let us know when you can answer my questions instead of dodging them, thanks!!!
Howard the Duck said:
You view today's politics differently because you are being treated as you treated others in the past.
Click to expand...
me? who am i?
By all means tell me how "I" am being treated and how I treated "others" in the past?
Who are these others?

will it be strike 3?
 
AGENT J said:
I love it, more dodges further exposing your false claims. Let us know when you can answer my questions instead of dodging them, thanks!!!

me? who am i?
By all means tell me how "I" am being treated and how I treated "others" in the past?
Who are these others?

will it be strike 3?
Click to expand...

You are overly aggressive and no longer will you have access to the Duck's wise counsel.

The winged one is not required to interact with you.

Welcome to my ignore list.
 
Last edited:
Howard the Duck said:
1.) You are overly aggressive and no longer will you have access to the Duck's wise counsel.
2.) Welcome to my ignore list.
Click to expand...

1.) translation: i asked you to support your claims, pointed out where they are factually wrong and asked you to define what you said and YOU cant and dont like it. SO now you are deflecting and calling it aggressive. Hint: it wont fool anybody honest educated and objective. It just leads to further mocking of your claims LMAO
2.) bonus for me if true!! but ill keep asking and anytime you make a post the same way as the horrible and false claims above ill expose it and mock it again. :shrug:

Howard the Duck said:
You view today's politics differently because you are being treated as you treated others in the past.
Click to expand...
me? who am i?
By all means tell me how "I" am being treated and how I treated "others" in the past?
Who are these others?
 
It's nice to see that 10 years on so many people STILL don't understand what the basis for the Tea Party was. All they seem to know is what it turned in to and how it was portrayed in the media.

Back in early 2009 CNBC's Rick Santelli went on an epic rant at the CME -



He ranted against bailouts and federal intervention to pick winners and losers in the economy. This rant came on the heels of McCain suspending his presidential campaign and running back to DC to hand out a trillion dollars to failed financial institutions. This came on the heels of Obama and Reid flat out rejecting even the prospect of Republican input regarding the economic situation. Santelli's rant sparked a lot of people to get involved in what was happening in DC.

At the start, the Tea Party was focused on holding politicians accountable for their decisions and reining in a lot of the "help" they were providing with our money. There was very little distinction made between Democrats and middle of the road Republicans. The idea was simple, "we let the federal government get too big and now we need to cut them down to size". The initial gatherings were rather small. We had 6 at our first meeting (arranged through a political discussion forum) and a group on the other side of town had about 50 (they offered free hamburgers and hot dogs). In the following months we planned a larger gathering and the April 15th event drew several hundred. The 4th of July event we held drew a couple of thousand and included attendance by a few candidates for local office. At that point we were still opposed to endorsing any candidate from any party. Our goal was to inform voters of what was going on in government and to encourage voters to seek out candidates who wanted to shrink government instead of expand it. Other groups in other states may have done things a little differently but our goals began and ended with voter education and promoting limited, Constitutionally focused government.

That 4th of July event was where I first started seeing rabble rousers. Some of the rabble rousers were outed as Democrat antagonists. Some were outed as various right wing extremists. When they popped their heads up they were asked to leave and, generally speaking, they did. Later events drew more attendees and, as a result, more idiots. While the vast majority of the crowd was there for our original purpose there were some who came merely to disrupt things. Naturally, those are the ones the media gravitated toward. It was at this point that Michelle Bachmann chose to glom on to the movement and Dick Armey started doing his bus tours. The movement had become commercial and a lot of us backed away because it wasn't where we wanted to go.

Basically, the Tea Party more or less split up at that point. The ones who wanted to get their name in the paper stayed on. The ones who wanted to promote certain politicians did that and the rest of us went back to our bar stools, diners, living rooms and back yards. We still have the same agenda we started with but realized that the louder our voice got the less people listened. We realized that everyone had their own agenda and were all too willing to latch on to our platform to promote it. We were, in effect, becoming a political party and that was NOT what we wanted to do. Where most of us are now is that we have stopped giving money to political parties and PACs. We give directly to the candidates we support. We host fundraising dinners for the candidates we support. We do what we can to get in and voice our concerns to the elected officials in our area. Mostly, we try to have reasonable conversations about politics and scrape people off the ceiling when they feel a need to freak out.
 
Oborosen said:
Lets just remember that the Tea Party consist of more then just white people, but your notion that it doesn't is rather telling in of itself.

I would believe the concept that they where a racist group, had they actually proved to be a racist group. Instead of just being a group with actual grievances with the president, besides his race.
Click to expand...

I will point out that it was about 90% white.
 
Oborosen said:
Lets just remember that the Tea Party consist of more then just white people, but your notion that it doesn't is rather telling in of itself.

I would believe the concept that they where a racist group, had they actually proved to be a racist group. Instead of just being a group with actual grievances with the president, besides his race.
Click to expand...

I covered Tea Party events all through Texas for the Huffington Post and other outlets.
They were 90-95% white so don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.



And, you might want to note that I originally wasn't in Obama's camp, by the way...
 
Lutherf said:
It's nice to see that 10 years on so many people STILL don't understand what the basis for the Tea Party was. All they seem to know is what it turned in to and how it was portrayed in the media.

Back in early 2009 CNBC's Rick Santelli went on an epic rant at the CME -



He ranted against bailouts and federal intervention to pick winners and losers in the economy. This rant came on the heels of McCain suspending his presidential campaign and running back to DC to hand out a trillion dollars to failed financial institutions. This came on the heels of Obama and Reid flat out rejecting even the prospect of Republican input regarding the economic situation. Santelli's rant sparked a lot of people to get involved in what was happening in DC.

At the start, the Tea Party was focused on holding politicians accountable for their decisions and reining in a lot of the "help" they were providing with our money. There was very little distinction made between Democrats and middle of the road Republicans. The idea was simple, "we let the federal government get too big and now we need to cut them down to size". The initial gatherings were rather small. We had 6 at our first meeting (arranged through a political discussion forum) and a group on the other side of town had about 50 (they offered free hamburgers and hot dogs). In the following months we planned a larger gathering and the April 15th event drew several hundred. The 4th of July event we held drew a couple of thousand and included attendance by a few candidates for local office. At that point we were still opposed to endorsing any candidate from any party. Our goal was to inform voters of what was going on in government and to encourage voters to seek out candidates who wanted to shrink government instead of expand it. Other groups in other states may have done things a little differently but our goals began and ended with voter education and promoting limited, Constitutionally focused government.

That 4th of July event was where I first started seeing rabble rousers. Some of the rabble rousers were outed as Democrat antagonists. Some were outed as various right wing extremists. When they popped their heads up they were asked to leave and, generally speaking, they did. Later events drew more attendees and, as a result, more idiots. While the vast majority of the crowd was there for our original purpose there were some who came merely to disrupt things. Naturally, those are the ones the media gravitated toward. It was at this point that Michelle Bachmann chose to glom on to the movement and Dick Armey started doing his bus tours. The movement had become commercial and a lot of us backed away because it wasn't where we wanted to go.

Basically, the Tea Party more or less split up at that point. The ones who wanted to get their name in the paper stayed on. The ones who wanted to promote certain politicians did that and the rest of us went back to our bar stools, diners, living rooms and back yards. We still have the same agenda we started with but realized that the louder our voice got the less people listened. We realized that everyone had their own agenda and were all too willing to latch on to our platform to promote it. We were, in effect, becoming a political party and that was NOT what we wanted to do. Where most of us are now is that we have stopped giving money to political parties and PACs. We give directly to the candidates we support. We host fundraising dinners for the candidates we support. We do what we can to get in and voice our concerns to the elected officials in our area. Mostly, we try to have reasonable conversations about politics and scrape people off the ceiling when they feel a need to freak out.
Click to expand...


What you saw was Dick Armey's FreedomWorks and a billion dollars from the Kochs.
I understood Rick Santelli's original rant at that time.

I didn't understand the sudden radicalization of the Tea Party into a secessionist, anti-government bunch of kooks who wanted to criminalize liberalism and shut out everyone in both parties and start sawing away on everything past the Tenth Amendment.

Had the Tea Party stuck to just promoting fiscal responsibility I might have even joined them. I was not in favor of the bailouts either.
Once everything got radicalized however, it was the only choice in the face of a massive depression.
 
RAMOSS said:
I will point out that it was about 90% white.
Click to expand...

America is 60% white, and those interested in economic issues are probably 90% white. Occupy Wall Street was also 90% white. So Id call that representative.
 
calamity said:
Two options here. You either do not understand what I said, or you are intentionally being obtuse.

Tea+Party+Racist+signs.jpg


Nope, no racism there. :roll:
Click to expand...

That is what I saw at almost every Tea Party event I covered for the news media.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
What you saw was Dick Armey's FreedomWorks and a billion dollars from the Kochs.
I understood Rick Santelli's original rant at that time.

I didn't understand the sudden radicalization of the Tea Party into a secessionist, anti-government bunch of kooks who wanted to criminalize liberalism and shut out everyone in both parties and start sawing away on everything past the Tenth Amendment.

Had the Tea Party stuck to just promoting fiscal responsibility I might have even joined them. I was not in favor of the bailouts either.
Once everything got radicalized however, it was the only choice in the face of a massive depression.
Click to expand...

One of the biggest problems we had was a bunch of "hangarounds" who liked the idea of getting their face on TV. Throw in a few reporters who like putting idiots on TV and you've got a match made in heaven. The commercialization of the movement happened a lot faster than I thought it would but, frankly, a lot of good stuff came out of it anyway. There were a whole lot of lessons learned that first year.
 
Lutherf said:
One of the biggest problems we had was a bunch of "hangarounds" who liked the idea of getting their face on TV. Throw in a few reporters who like putting idiots on TV and you've got a match made in heaven. The commercialization of the movement happened a lot faster than I thought it would but, frankly, a lot of good stuff came out of it anyway. There were a whole lot of lessons learned that first year.
Click to expand...

Well, for YOUR side anyway, the biggest thing is, you threw out what your side considered dead wood and rebooted your party.
Again, these are things YOUR side would consider good. For Democrats, it meant the end of negotiating with conservatives because the people you put in had no intention of ever even talking to us at all.

And I'm not saying that it was ONLY the extremists at these events. Watch the sample clip I put up, people talked policy for sure.
But I never saw Rick Santelli at any of those events.
I did tons of these news stories, and the outlets I worked for didn't ask me to slant my coverage, just shoot and deliver the footage, that's all.
They told me to "spray" my coverage, meaning "get a wide variety of all POV's".

I did one particular town hall where Senator Joe Barton headed up the event.
It was a town hall about the Affordable Care Act.
This one really pissed me off, it's where Barton pumped the phrases "unplug grandma" and "death panels".
About twenty doctors attended that meeting and he only took statements from ONE of them.
I talked to all of them.
Barton was intent on LYING, flat out lying, and he did.

Socialism socialism socialism, government takeovers, unplugging grandma, death panels, loss of freedom, etc.
 
americanwoman said:
You don't have to, they willingly do it to themselves. :lamo

images



images


You're right though. We shouldn't laugh and mock them, we should really feel ashamed and pity for these dumbasses.
Click to expand...

Stupid people are everywhere now as America is deep in decline, even at and from the IVY's.

You act like you dont know this.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Stupid people are everywhere now as America is deep in decline, even at and from the IVY's.

You act like you dont know this.
Click to expand...

Considering this thread is about the Tea Party specifically, it was meant to call out the specific stupidity of the Tea Party.
 
calamity said:
Considering they emerged after the US elected a Black president, I’ll mock and demean the racist pigs all day.
Click to expand...
Correlation does not equal causation.
 
haymarket said:
But there is no Conservative Party in America. As political parties go, there never was a Tea Party either. They were always just right wing fringe Republicans.
Click to expand...

As in they run more traditional and conservative, than what we are used to seeing with the republican party.

Its still the same old small government song and dance though.

They have a nice pitch, but its just not what I am looking for in a party.
 
RAMOSS said:
I will point out that it was about 90% white.
Click to expand...

Which doesn't show that they are a racist group, while only showing that they still have non-white members.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
I covered Tea Party events all through Texas for the Huffington Post and other outlets.
They were 90-95% white so don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.



And, you might want to note that I originally wasn't in Obama's camp, by the way...
Click to expand...


It shouldn't matter that you were, or were not in Obama's camp on this topic.

Even at 90%, the opinion doesn't show that the group is all white, nor racist.
 
calamity said:
Considering they emerged after the US elected a Black president, I’ll mock and demean the racist pigs all day.
Click to expand...

Obama was as white as it gets. Trump is the first black president....... or maybe Bill Clinton. But Obama wasn't the first black president. He might have been the first gay president. He may not come out on that topic for a while yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom