birdog1960 Posted July 12, 2012 Author Posted July 12, 2012 Birdog objects to any candidate that would seek the backing of a rich guy. Koch bad. Soros good. Not to mention the Hollywood fund raisers. no, i object to people who think that grassroots party funded by big money remain grassroots. i object to self deception. and i don't much care for anyone being treated like a rube. it's no secret that soros is a huge political donor on the left and has power and influence. same for spielberg and his clan. no one i know is under any illusions. i happen to agree with them on many issues. seems tea partiers may be operating under some misconceptions. but if you're ok with big money pulling the strings of your independent, lily white, everyman tea party candidates, then i'm ok with it too. just making sure you're aware.
OCinBuffalo Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 no, i object to people who think that grassroots party funded by big money remain grassroots. i object to self deception. and i don't much care for anyone being treated like a rube. it's no secret that soros is a huge political donor on the left and has power and influence. same for spielberg and his clan. no one i know is under any illusions. i happen to agree with them on many issues. seems tea partiers may be operating under some misconceptions. but if you're ok with big money pulling the strings of your independent, lily white, everyman tea party candidates, then i'm ok with it too. just making sure you're aware. Anyone who is paying attention? This is why liberals FAIL. They are mapping their organizational structure...big city Democratic political machine....onto an organization that is the polar opposite. Then, when their map leads them astray, and they lose the argument, or more likely, multiple elections, they don't understand why....so they lash out at Sarah Palin. And, their biggest mistake: rather than blaming their map, they blame the organization they incorrectly mapped....or Sarah Palin.
3rdnlng Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 no, i object to people who think that grassroots party funded by big money remain grassroots. i object to self deception. and i don't much care for anyone being treated like a rube. it's no secret that soros is a huge political donor on the left and has power and influence. same for spielberg and his clan. no one i know is under any illusions. i happen to agree with them on many issues. seems tea partiers may be operating under some misconceptions. but if you're ok with big money pulling the strings of your independent, lily white, everyman tea party candidates, then i'm ok with it too. just making sure you're aware. You don't have a clue. Google Tea Party. You won't find some national Tea Party organization. You'll find the Tea Party of Orlando, Nashville, Syracuse, Terre Haute, Austin and many more. Yes there are some groups that want to represent everyone. The Tea Party movement is totally grass roots. You guys misrepresent them. They are totally behind the financial issues and refuse to take a stand on the social issues that your ilk try to pin them to.
birdog1960 Posted July 12, 2012 Author Posted July 12, 2012 You don't have a clue. Google Tea Party. You won't find some national Tea Party organization. You'll find the Tea Party of Orlando, Nashville, Syracuse, Terre Haute, Austin and many more. Yes there are some groups that want to represent everyone. The Tea Party movement is totally grass roots. You guys misrepresent them. They are totally behind the financial issues and refuse to take a stand on the social issues that your ilk try to pin them to. ask yourself what successful players like the koch's are spending their money on.
dayman Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) My question is what has the Tea Party brought to Washington? What leaders has the movement sent to actually lead in government for whatever their purpose is and what have they done to be proud of? The idea that there is nobody to target (I believe there are but I guess the movement will deny them all since it's the political equivalent to anonymous now ) doesn't mean a thing. And there is not even a coherent set of policies within the movement. The Tea Party turned into a wave that a bunch of nobodies rode to create the worst Congress in my lifetime. And that was the point of last episode...the elected officials who rode that wave in 2010....hell it shed some good light on some more cooperative Repbulicans who ya know...do their job in office. Are there some principles some people can attribute to the "idea"...sure. But that doesn't mean anything...that I can make sense of anyway as far as being ... ya know... meaningful ... and the tea party is no more grass roots than anything else. Grass roots for grass roots sake means nothing anyway. Grass roots is Paulbot libertarians (as much as I disagree and agree w/ them at the same time). That's a movement. The Tea Party is just a mess that birthed a bunch of nonsense attitude into the house of representative and hurt the country as a result. The bottom line I want to know is do tea party people here think it is unfair to label this congress the tea party congress? Do Tea Party people understand compromising issues in a way that advocates your position w/ out compromising yourself and then moving forward is what being in government is all about? Is there anyone in government of any note that has done anything on behalf of this "party" that anyone can say that about? Edited July 12, 2012 by TheNewBills
dayman Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/politics/assets_c/2010/04/Tea%20partiers%20Gallup-thumb-380x660-24176.jpg I mean it looks from that poll like they're just like everyone else in almost every category including wage,(w/ more men maybe). So are half not paying any federal income tax in the "taxed enough already movement?" We to reduce rates and broaden the base (caused many if not most Tea Party people to pay more) to fix this? IN the Taxed Enough Already Party? They're actually chanting to be taxed by the government? Edited July 12, 2012 by TheNewBills
GG Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 The Tea Party turned into a wave that a bunch of nobodies rode to create the worst Congress in my lifetime. Is that because they put up a roadblock to runaway spending? Why does the 2010 freshman class get such a beating, while everyone skims over the main point that the only reason they were elected was the revolt against the California-lled liberals?
KD in CA Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 The bottom line I want to know is do tea party people here think it is unfair to label this congress the tea party congress? Do Tea Party people understand compromising issues in a way that advocates your position w/ out compromising yourself and then moving forward is what being in government is all about? Is there anyone in government of any note that has done anything on behalf of this "party" that anyone can say that about? I don't know what the qualifications are to be a 'Tea Partier' but I'll answer your question. Unfair? More like downright ignorant. Last I checked there were two houses of Congress. Exactly how many Senators are part of the Tea Party? Answer: 4. And the Democrats control the chamber. And how many House members? 62; 14% of the House. So a group that represents barely a quarter of the party that controls one of the two houses of Congress is the group running Congress? That's joe-the-six-pack level stupidity. Once again, we have people allowing the media to spoon feed them the perspective that the left wing wants you to imagine, which is: "Obama vs. the Scary Tea Party". p.s. and someone who is planning to vote for Obama yakking about the lack of compromise is really priceless.
CosmicBills Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 This is you: This is is the TEA party: This is you trying to understand the TEA party: This is what the TEA party does to you while you are talking = calling them racists, rather than thinking = understanding them: Jesus...I am considering whether I should spell it out at a 5th grade reading level. It's very difficult for me not to because one on hand I don't like ignorance, on the other, it's funny , but mostly I just feel like I'd be wasting my time. I dunno. 5th grade reading level? Come on, I'm all for reaching for the stars but stick with what you know. 3rd grade reading level is your ceiling. Let's not fool ourselves.
B-Man Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 I don't know what the qualifications are to be a 'Tea Partier' but I'll answer your question. Unfair? More like downright ignorant. Last I checked there were two houses of Congress. Exactly how many Senators are part of the Tea Party? Answer: 4. And the Democrats control the chamber. And how many House members? 62; 14% of the House. So a group that represents barely a quarter of the party that controls one of the two houses of Congress is the group running Congress? That's joe-the-six-pack level stupidity. Once again, we have people allowing the media to spoon feed them the perspective that the left wing wants you to imagine, which is: "Obama vs. the Scary Tea Party". p.s. and someone who is planning to vote for Obama yakking about the lack of compromise is really priceless. Best reply that I have read all day KD. .
dayman Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) I don't know what the qualifications are to be a 'Tea Partier' but I'll answer your question. Unfair? More like downright ignorant. Last I checked there were two houses of Congress. Exactly how many Senators are part of the Tea Party? Answer: 4. And the Democrats control the chamber. And how many House members? 62; 14% of the House. So a group that represents barely a quarter of the party that controls one of the two houses of Congress is the group running Congress? That's joe-the-six-pack level stupidity. Once again, we have people allowing the media to spoon feed them the perspective that the left wing wants you to imagine, which is: "Obama vs. the Scary Tea Party". p.s. and someone who is planning to vote for Obama yakking about the lack of compromise is really priceless. I don't think you understand good sir. And in any event, I'd like to see a response form anybody on the bulk of the post up there. Edited July 12, 2012 by TheNewBills
NoSaint Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 Bah...this is just too fascinating to pass up. Ok, I have an approach I'd like to try. I will post a series of statements and you will reply with true/false to each of them. I will try to make them comprehensive, so that you can actually just give a true/false, but it's not easy so don't give me crap about it. We'll see how you, or anyone else, answers them. This will give us insight into whether the basic premises of the TEA party concept can be grasped: 1. Groups require strong, singular leadership, and a well-defined organizational chart to be successful. This way everyone knows their role and co-operates with other members. When everyone is moving in the same direction, the group can be effective. 2. A political party must have a consistent message delivered by competent professionals to be effective. 3. A political party organizational structure will always evolve towards being based on power and money. Those who contribute the most money will always be in charge of the message and direction, and more often than not either be or select the leadership. Those that are selected derive their power from money. However, there are exceptions where an individual member's power comes from support of the group, and the money follows. 4. Political parties require populist leaders to fire up the rank and file. The policy wonks work for those leaders as advisers. The big donors either select the leaders, or, they select the wonks that will advise the leaders. Wonks are never allowed to lead the party. The only wonks who are, are also good populist leaders.(Think Bill Clinton or Paul Ryan) 5. We must have a centralized plan for a political movement. Policy must emanate from the top and be disseminated down to rank and file, so that we are all on the same page, and we don't contradict each other. There, that should be good enough to get started. It will be interesting to see the answers. Well, I think so anyway I'll come back this time tomorrow and see what the answers are, and we can go from there. I probably won't have the time, focus, or frankly desire to address this in the way I'm sure you will demand within your time frame. Truly, it's a ridiculous reply to someone asking you to point them to some strong tea party materials/members. The fact that it's met with a stonewall and so much hemming and hawing a big part of why the group does nothing for me. If its your thing - cool. The general attitude around it doesn't really appeal to me. No harm no foul. Go ahead and tell me I'm brainwashed and a child again.
dayman Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) I probably won't have the time, focus, or frankly desire to address this in the way I'm sure you will demand within your time frame. Truly, it's a ridiculous reply to someone asking you to point them to some strong tea party materials/members. The fact that it's met with a stonewall and so much hemming and hawing a big part of why the group does nothing for me. If its your thing - cool. The general attitude around it doesn't really appeal to me. No harm no foul. Go ahead and tell me I'm brainwashed and a child again. LOL. They can't be talked with, let it go. They can't really point to anybody as a good member/leader b/c nobody in government associated with the movement has done anything positive. Also if they did they would then have to live up to certain policies, ya know things that are real, as opposed to ideas or philosophies. Edited July 12, 2012 by TheNewBills
IDBillzFan Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 I don't think you understand good sir. And in any event, I'd like to see a response form anybody on the bulk of the post up there. It's a ridiculous waste of time to weigh in on a topic when, after watching liberal ideas get flushed away with logic, statistics and common sense, the stereotypical liberal response ultimately comes down to something like "You just don't understand. I'm not explaining this correctly. My message must be wrong." The problem isn't that your take on the Tea Party is stupid. It's that people are too stupid to get you.
dayman Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 It's a ridiculous waste of time to weigh in on a topic when, after watching liberal ideas get flushed away with logic, statistics and common sense, the stereotypical liberal response ultimately comes down to something like "You just don't understand. I'm not explaining this correctly. My message must be wrong." The problem isn't that your take on the Tea Party is stupid. It's that people are too stupid to get you. My problem is I'm talking to a Tea Party nut as if it's worth it.
KD in CA Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 I don't think you understand good sir. And in any event, I'd like to see a response form anybody on the bulk of the post up there. I understand perfectly your idioic attempt to label the Congress as the "Tea Party Congress" for no reason other than Congress sucks.
IDBillzFan Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 My problem is I'm talking to a Tea Party nut as if it's worth it. Yes, yes, we know. If only the world was smart enough to understand the message you keep trying to express...
dayman Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 I understand perfectly your idioic attempt to label the Congress as the "Tea Party Congress" for no reason other than Congress sucks. To quote a good mini-series "I'm an extreme moderate, Mr. KD. I believe anybody not in favor of moderation and compromise ought to be castrated.". The Tea Party is a force against that sentiment. It's infected the GOP led house and that's the main reason that it's become more dysfunctional than it has ever been in any of our lifetimes ("broken" is what many reasonable politicians on both sides call it). People want their elected officials to work together even when they have different opinions/philosophies, they must learn to actually do work. Not grandstand for their idiot base. Not be a retarded ideologue. Be a cooperative pragmatist with core beliefs. We should all demand this of our elected officials no matter what side. Bi-partisan compromise is basically a badge of corruption to the Tea Party. People got thrown out in 2010 for compromising issues with the other side. That's a !@#$ing joke. If you really cared about any of the "ideas" you attribute to your tea party then you would encourage the politicians you support/that ride that wave to actually represent/sell those ideas through methods of cooperation and debate (read: functional government). If the movement wants to improve the first thing they can do is drop the diva attitude, sense of righteousness, and learn to act like adults. But of course, that "attitude" is what the Tea Party is really all about anyway...they can't drop that b/c it's all basically just attitude. Good for riling people up, terrible for doing anything productive in government.
DC Tom Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 To quote a good mini-series "I'm an extreme moderate, Mr. KD. I believe anybody not in favor of moderation and compromise ought to be castrated.". The Tea Party is a force against that sentiment. It's infected the GOP led house and that's the main reason that it's become more dysfunctional than it has ever been in any of our lifetimes ("broken" is what many reasonable politicians on both sides call it). People want their elected officials to work together even when they have different opinions/philosophies, they must learn to actually do work. Not grandstand for their idiot base. Not be a retarded ideologue. Be a cooperative pragmatist with core beliefs. We should all demand this of our elected officials no matter what side. Bi-partisan compromise is basically a badge of corruption to the Tea Party. People got thrown out in 2010 for compromising issues with the other side. That's a !@#$ing joke. If you really cared about any of the "ideas" you attribute to your tea party then you would encourage the politicians you support/that ride that wave to actually represent/sell those ideas through methods of cooperation and debate (read: functional government). If the movement wants to improve the first thing they can do is drop the diva attitude, sense of righteousness, and learn to act like adults. But of course, that "attitude" is what the Tea Party is really all about anyway...they can't drop that b/c it's all basically just attitude. Good for riling people up, terrible for doing anything productive in government. To be more accurate w/r/t the Tea Party: they're moderate in goals and philosophy (largely), but oh-so-crazy extremist when it comes to the practical matters like, oh, tying budget negotiations to a debt ceiling increase and playing ridiculous brinksmanship with it to the point where US debt is downgraded...
KD in CA Posted July 12, 2012 Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) Best reply that I have read all day KD. Thank you B. TheNewBills and NoSaint have offered several examples of this phenomenon throughout this thread. Even if people don't want to be preached to by the media or don't believe they have been influenced by 'Newsroom' type propaganda, they frequently are. It's hard to avoid (and most don't even try) in our 24x7 information culture. Here's another example: The Tea Party is a force against that sentiment. It's infected the GOP led house and that's the main reason that it's become more dysfunctional than it has ever been in any of our lifetimes ("broken" is what many reasonable politicians on both sides call it). People want their elected officials to work together even when they have different opinions/philosophies, they must learn to actually do work. Not grandstand for their idiot base. Not be a retarded ideologue. Be a cooperative pragmatist with core beliefs. Wow, so this particular 12% of Congress is the main reason for its dis-functionality?? I guess I didn't realize that prior to 2010 Congress was all hugs and kumbaya. It's too bad Congress isn't as harmonious as in 1995 when they SHUT DOWN THE ENTIRE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT for 3 weeks over the budget battle! Your premise above is simply nonsense and more evidence that you are just regurgitating (intentional or otherwise) the successful campaign to paint all opposition to Obama as "radical ideas from unreasonable Tea Partiers". If you want a reason why Congress has become less functional over time it's because of resentments from multiple events that have built upon each other going back decades (Watergate, '92 election, Ken Starr's scandal hunting, '94 Republican Revolution/'95 Shutdown, Clinton Impeachment, 2000 election dispute, Bush & Obama both abusing recess appointments, battles over SC nominees, Iraq, the ACA, etc). If you really cared about any of the "ideas" you attribute to your tea party Huh? Now it's my Tea Party? Are you sure? I haven't seen any royalty checks yet. Edited July 12, 2012 by KD in CT
Recommended Posts