Tea Party

[princessgianna]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='27 February 2010 - 06:46 PM' timestamp='1267314393' post='2063975']
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZfRaWAtBVg[/media]
[/quote]
Wow that is an cool video.

And yes I do consider myself a proud tea party supporter*.

I was once told that "Even though there will always be disagreement, it's important that everyone exercises their freedom of speech. Because once you stop talking, the government will assume you support what they do. "


*Does that surprise anyone???

[eagle_eye222001]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='28 February 2010 - 03:37 AM' timestamp='1267346261' post='2064173']
hmm, personally if it wasnt for the abortion thing, i wouldn't mind if the GOP never won another election. the way the party is currently anyways.

and the teaparty being a political party would pretty much ensure that. no liberals would join it, it would cut out enough support from the republicans so they wouldn't win, and not enough so that the tea party could beat the liberals. not to mention, the remaining conservatives might just jump ship to liberal s and other third parties.

it would be a weird system for an election or two.
[/quote]

The whole reason the Tea Party is off the ground and getting national attention is due to the incompetence of the majority democratic party under their community-experienced-undeserving-Nobel-Peace Prize President. I don't think you have been paying attention to politics recently as there are two cases of conservatism outright crashing the general political party atmosphere.

What about NY-23 where the conservative came out of nowhere in the last few weeks, forced the Republican in name only to withdraw days before the race to avoid a scandalous loss at the polls and barely losing to the democratic by 5 thousand votes with no party support until mere days before the election? If the party was behind the conservative guy to begin with, it is very reasonable to think the democrat would have lost.

What about the upcoming senate race in Florida with the conservative Rubio coming out of nowhere and sending Crist, a very popular LIBERAL Republican who was completely winning in polls and very likely to decimate the opposing democrat (while not scientific nevertheless tend to accurately portray trends) scrambling? Rubio was behind by thirty points in the polls when he entered the race. Now the race between the conservative GOP and the liberal is a dead heat.

While liberals are not going to join the Tea party, there is a great dissatisfaction with the status quo and independents as evident by the recent special elections in Virginia and New Jersey. While a conservative did not win in these states, it was a big loss and a telling sign that the democrat candidate lost and the GOP won.

[Veridicus]

I am in favor of constructive dissent against the bureaucratic political class that stalemates real progress. Democracy is strengthened when people care enough to let their voices be heard...and sometimes voting simply isn't enough for your voice to be heard. This is true whether I agree with a particular movement or not. The voices of special interests are sure to make themselves heard.

Edited March 1, 2010 by Veridicus

[elizabeth09]

I like paying taxes because they help roads to stay nice, but I really do not like paying them. I take no side.

[Saint Therese]

I went to the big Tea Party last year in San Antonio. I think a better term for the people who attend these gatherings might be "constitutionalists". I never heard anyone there advocating not paying taxes.

And on a side note, Ted Nugent plays a wicked guitar!

[img]http://photos-d.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-sf2p/v645/248/108/1109334361/n1109334361_30227467_4720009.jpg[/img]

Edited March 1, 2010 by Saint Therese

[Veridicus]

I like the music vid btw. Although in the stage scene at the end of the video I think that Ben Franklin kinda looks like that evil clown character on Spawn.

[KnightofChrist]

The Tea Party movement isn't against paying taxes, it's against an over burden of taxes which harm the Nation.

[hoosieranna]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='28 February 2010 - 12:39 AM' timestamp='1267331949' post='2064114']
The dying Whig party probably said the same thing about the nascent Republicans in the mid-19th century.
[/quote]

There's actually a Modern Whig party that is somewhat intriguing. Off topic I know, but you reminded me of it.

[dairygirl4u2c]

i liken the tea party folks to an analogy i thought put it well, that i heard. the tea party folks, are a lot like hippies. they are much sentiment, and don't make a lot of sense in getting them to specifics. sure, im somewhat liberal, but you dont see me going to support hippies. that's what i see when i see people supporting them. the equivalent of hippies, essentially.
thought hardline tea parties and hippies, probably id go for the tea party ones, not sure.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='01 April 2010 - 04:23 PM' timestamp='1270156986' post='2085122']
i liken the tea party folks to an analogy i thought put it well, that i heard. the tea party folks, are a lot like hippies. they are much sentiment, and don't make a lot of sense in getting them to specifics. sure, im somewhat liberal, but you dont see me going to support hippies. that's what i see when i see people supporting them. the equivalent of hippies, essentially.
thought hardline tea parties and hippies, probably id go for the tea party ones, not sure.
[/quote]
How are tea party supporters similar to hippies, besides the fact that neither have mainstream goals?

[dairygirl4u2c]

they're all esoteric. they spew rhetoric. they're opposites in terms of their political beliefs, but they're the same in style etc. most tea party folks are pie in the sky, just like hippies were. they're all unrealistic etc. how are they not like the hippies? they're a little more 'civilized' but that only goes with the nature of their politics etc. a lot of them probably were hippies who did an about face, loooking at many of their ages etc.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='01 April 2010 - 07:47 PM' timestamp='1270169245' post='2085223']
they're all esoteric. they spew rhetoric. they're opposites in terms of their political beliefs, but they're the same in style etc. most tea party folks are pie in the sky, just like hippies were. they're all unrealistic etc. how are they not like the hippies? they're a little more 'civilized' but that only goes with the nature of their politics etc. a lot of them probably were hippies who did an about face, loooking at many of their ages etc.
[/quote]
Is this based on anything specific? I've heard a lot of valid arguments from that side, and I definitely wouldn't characterize them as style over substance.

[dairygirl4u2c]

there were a lot of intellectual hippies too, they had a lot of decent arguments. etc
style over substance, at least to th same extent as it was for the hippies.
both are grassroots for a cause. and all the stuff i said before.
watch any tea party gathering, and i could start poiting out their similiarities when randomites start talking. it's an ipression, i suppose you dont ahve to agree with it. and perhaps the burden is on me.
but id want to see how they are not the same moreso than how they are. it seems to me more like it's less clear how they are different. it might be a novel concept, but it's true from what i see.... the are the conservative form of hippies.

[dairygirl4u2c]

even this very reputable intellectual conservative agrees with me. brooks, from the PBS show, shields and shego. spelling?
now that i see this, i remember that's where i saw the analogy, actually.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/david-brooks-on-colbert-tea-partiers-are-like-wal-mart-hippies/

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='01 April 2010 - 08:11 PM' timestamp='1270170696' post='2085240']
there were a lot of intellectual hippies too, they had a lot of decent arguments. etc
style over substance, at least to th same extent as it was for the hippies.
both are grassroots for a cause. and all the stuff i said before.
watch any tea party gathering, and i could start poiting out their similiarities when randomites start talking. it's an ipression, i suppose you dont ahve to agree with it. and perhaps the burden is on me.
but id want to see how they are not the same moreso than how they are. it seems to me more like it's less clear how they are different. it might be a novel concept, but it's true from what i see.... the are the conservative form of hippies.
[/quote]
I'm going to need some specific examples before I concede this point. Both are grassroots, both have a non-mainstream cause. I so far see no evidence in calling them style over substance.