What is the Tea Party?

[CallMeJoe]

(Sarah Palin...) That's not bad. The rub of it comes down to her support for Neocon McCain. That alone should make them very angry towards her.

Sarah Palin almost single-handedly ended any possibility of a McCain presidential victory in 2008. That alone, by your reasoning should make the Tea Party Faithful even more devout worshippers.

 

[spidey07]

I find it funny nobody mentioned it stands for Taxed Enough Already which is the root of it. It's core are white middle class people which Obama failed to connect with in the 08 elections and continues to tick them off.

 

[kage69]

Partisan sensitivities mixed with sore loser syndrome, running amok.

 

[cganesh75]

I find it funny nobody mentioned it stands for Taxed Enough Already which is the root of it. It's core are white middle class people which Obama failed to connect with in the 08 elections and continues to tick them off.

thats exactly why i feel like tea party is where the racists come out.

 

[spidey07]

thats exactly why i feel like tea party is where the racists come out.

Just admit it. You think white people are racist. That makes you even more racist.

Or you're suffering from the huge burden of white guilt.

 

[sandorski]

I find it funny nobody mentioned it stands for Taxed Enough Already which is the root of it. It's core are white middle class people which Obama failed to connect with in the 08 elections and continues to tick them off.

That really does not clarify anything. Especially considering what has been occurring.

 

[Pens1566]

That really does not clarify anything. Especially considering what has been occurring.

You mean that taxes haven't magically increased by .... oh wait, they haven't.

 

[wiretap]

As I wrote my post, I considered, I don't feel like repeating the fact of my hobby of JFK, but should I to prevent you, if you haven't seen previous posts, from makinmg a fool of yourself if you are one to do that?

I wondered is it giving you rope to hag yourself with? I figured no, it's up to you not to say something irresponsibly inaccurate - but you went beyond even that.

JFK has been a hobby of mine for decades. I have a pretty literal JFK library, stopped counting somewhere well over 100 books, among other research. I've probably studied him more than anyone in your city.

But yet 'you can tell' I'm just 'souting off generalities' without... oh, never mind. Your idiocy is so massive, it begs description.

If we needed a poster child for how idiotic some of the posting here is, you provide an excellent candidate. This should be a clue for you to recognize how bad off you are being misinformed, but I doubt it will.

Enough of that. You are offensive for how wrongly you insult, how you are a harm to the forum with that behavior, but enough. Let's get to the issues. But query posts with my name and John Kennedy for a taste.



No, they were more progressive. He lowered the top tax rate from the 90% rate useful during the crisies of the great depression and WWII, to the rate his (liberal) economists advised him would stimulate growth and benefit the economy - 70%. It remained there until (JFK's political enemy) Reagan - and the beginning of the flat wages for the bottom 80% of Americans, the syrocketing debt and increase in share of wealth by the ultra rich. JFK did not set it to 35%, or 39%, or 50%, or 60%. 70% was the rate.

I'm ready to follow 'real American' JFK's policy on 'lowering the rate to 70%'.



What the hell are you talking about? What policies are you referring to? As for 'family values', his personal behavior, well, for all his good qualities I like, that was very bad. His adultery was shameless.




You don't have a clue of which you speak. As I said, you are a victim of right-wing propaganda and your irresponsibility to learn the facts.

In short JFK was a near-radical for peace in ways. He was a strong supporter of having a very strong military at the height of the cold war with which to leverage his views - but his views were to pursue *peace*.

If you learn the history, you will get a clue that he was fighting for peace in a time of the cold war, using that rhetoric as needed, keepng strong political support.

You're clueless, as I said, about modern Democrats as well.



He strongly supported alliances against the communists in the cold war.

He was also a radical for liberal US foreign policy. He ended decaees, and really policies for our whole history, of the US blindly supporting European allies in naked aggression in the third world.

Again and again and again, the US had consistently sided, mostly reinforced under the Dulles brothers (John as Secretary of State and Allen as the head of the CIA, running around overthrowing governments) with European allies in their colonial policies. JFK said 'no' to this support, and backed off supporting colony after colony, infuriating Europe. It was partly his view of what the US shoulod stand for and also a strategy - he recognized the communists' ability to use the Western abuses of the third world to gain loyalty and create 'wars of liberation', and he chose that supporting 'real' independance, not puppets, was how to counter it.

That's a reason his picture has been on the walls of huts aroudn the third world for decades.

When he'd do things like pursue an atmospheric nuclear test ban, over the objections of the Join Chiefs, people called him the very 'traitor' to the US you say he's not but modern Democrats are.

People like yuou ran full page ads with 'mug shots' of him and the headline 'wanted for treason' - incuding in the Dallas Newspapers when he was assassinated.



Wrong again on both counts. You might remember his willingness to use the Justice Department to harrass the entire US Steel industry to force them to lower their prices - in a major political battle he won.

THere's a lot more, but you aren't ready for it IMO.



What are you talking about? He was a Catholic whose almost exclusive role with religion was to try to win election in 1960 by minimizing the votes of anti-Catholic votes, and gain votes in sympathy.

What policies did he have on religious you are claiming were notable about 'free study'? If you think JFK wouldn't have 'demonized' the radical right religious movement today, you don't know him.

So yes, I'd like you to 'get datiled' as you offered.

Let's try to see if we can disabuse you of some notions.

lol, you're a pathetic JFK 'guru'.

- He fought against the UNIONS, not the steel industry itself. My mother was a steel worker.. as well as several other family members. We remember this issue well.
- By family values.. that's one of the tenets that he ran on.. not breaking families apart through policy.
- Test bans aren't a right versus left paradigm issue.. it's a human health issue. We knew the effects of nuclear weapons.. we tested them on our own people for years.
- War isn't a right versus left paradigm issue.. and national defense and allied support is a separate issue from war. I would think any sane person would want to avoid war at all costs regardless of political standing.
- His voice of Church and State was not one of removing church.. it was letting it co-exist without persecution.
- I don't want anyone dead or assassinated. I use the political documents setup by our founding fathers to take action in removing someone from office.
- He did not support enemies outside the US.. nor did he support people who didn't share our country's core values.. obviously. He didn't blindly listen to government agencies who told him the politically expedient answers for who to throw support behind.

Seriously, get a clue.

 

[wiretap]

Sarah Palin almost single-handedly ended any possibility of a McCain presidential victory in 2008. That alone, by your reasoning should make the Tea Party Faithful even more devout worshippers.

Actually, after she joined the ticket, McCain's poll numbers took quite a jump for the better. If anything, she brought him back within range instead of dying off completely.

 

[cubby1223]

Q: What is the Tea Party?

A: Something that those who ask this question, do not actually care to find out about.

 

[ccbadd]

Exact definitions of "bring back the country to constitutional values" please.

I highly doubt something supported by the likes of Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are truly "constitutional."

Because you are an IDIOT! Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin may also support the special Olympics, does that make anyone else who supports them to be just like Beck and Palin? If you payed any attention to what the Tea Party people have been saying, but I would be you spend you time listening to morons on MSNBC instead, you would know the answer to that question. it is simple:

1. Limited National Government. Remember that little thing called 'States Rights'?
2. Strong National Defense. The primary reason for a national government.
3. Personal Liberty. Just leave good law abiding citizens alone and let them create prosperity on their own.

Now, was that so difficult???

Now it's your turn to fire away with your leftie hate speech, i.e.: I am a racist redneck tea bagging bible thumping,ect..... Let me hear it!

 

[sandorski]

You mean that taxes haven't magically increased by .... oh wait, they haven't.

That and the Fact that the movement has been all over the place with Issues.

 

[Craig234]

I find it funny nobody mentioned it stands for Taxed Enough Already which is the root of it. It's core are white middle class people which Obama failed to connect with in the 08 elections and continues to tick them off.

Yes, people who are blind ideologues who would oppose Obama no matter what until he leaves the Democratic party, drops acid and talks like Glenn Beck makes it Obama's fault they're against him.

 

[Craig234]

Because you are an IDIOT! Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin may also support the special Olympics, does that make anyone else who supports them to be just like Beck and Palin? If you payed any attention to what the Tea Party people have been saying, but I would be you spend you time listening to morons on MSNBC instead, you would know the answer to that question. it is simple:

1. Limited National Government. Remember that little thing called 'States Rights'?
2. Strong National Defense. The primary reason for a national government.
3. Personal Liberty. Just leave good law abiding citizens alone and let them create prosperity on their own.

Now, was that so difficult???

Now it's your turn to fire away with your leftie hate speech, i.e.: I am a racist redneck tea bagging bible thumping,ect..... Let me hear it!

I could respond to the rest of your post, but I'll respond to your 'racism' comment.

The thing that's racist about your post is that it mocks there being any such thing as racism.

You say nothing directly racist, but you imply that there is no such thing as racism. You imply all complaints of racism are a joke and wrong.

And that's supporting racism.

You also have the logic backwards, by the way.

It's not that Beck and Palin support the special olympics so that anyone who supports the special olympics also supports Beck and Palin.

It's that they specifically support Beck and Palin, which shows big problems they have.

Adolf Hitler is said to have liked animals. That doesn't mean people who like animals liked Hitler. On the other hand, people who support Hitler do have issues.

 

[cganesh75]

Just admit it. You think white people are racist. That makes you even more racist.

Or you're suffering from the huge burden of white guilt.

lol. no. You are the one i am talking about.. why would you mention "white middle class people" ? according to you Obama connected with "other" middle class people?

 

[spidey07]

lol. no. You are the one i am talking about.. why would you mention "white middle class people" ? according to you Obama connected with "other" middle class people?

It's not according to me. Read it in a AP article just today.

But keep calling them racists. It just ticks regular people off even more. I think the media's push to call normal people racist is back firing and driving more people to it.

 

[boomerang]

What is "Sandorski's Head"?

I'll take P&N for $1,000 Alex.

This is the funniest thing I've read all week. I'd give it two thumbs up if only that emoticon was available. :biggrin:

 

[Craig234]

lol, you're a pathetic JFK 'guru'.

You're an idiot. For the general reader, I'll reply to this post of disinformation by you. You will need to get a clue if you want a discussion better than you drag it down to.

- He fought against the UNIONS, not the steel industry itself. My mother was a steel worker.. as well as several other family members. We remember this issue well.

JFK was strongly pro-union as far as workers' rights. The steel industry conflict was a major incident in his presidency; for you to say it was not the 'steel industry itself' is like saying Katrina wasn't a Bush incident.

Kennedy had negotiated anm agreement between labor and management in the steel industry (there's more of that 'laissez-faire' you claim), and had gotten concessions from steelworkers while steel companies agreed not to increase inflation with price increases. Not long after, they raised their prices, in unison, and Kennedy declared political war - he went on national tv to say 'in his inaugural, he asked Americans to ask what they could do for their country. He had the answer from the steel companies'. His war was DIRECTLY with the steel industry owners, not the unions.

He used various government leverage and got the first company to buckle and withdraw the increase, after which all the others did the same.

On labor in general, it is worth noting labor had more organized crime ties then - like their enemy Jimmy Hoffa, and going after the mob and that corruption was a major project of the Kennedys.

But he was still pro-union for the workers.

- By family values.. that's one of the tenets that he ran on.. not breaking families apart through policy.

You offered 'detail'. I'm still waiting. What are these policies you refer to?

- Test bans aren't a right versus left paradigm issue.. it's a human health issue. We knew the effects of nuclear weapons.. we tested them on our own people for years.

Like many Kennedy policies, what WAS a left right issue is now a non-controversial issue.

If you knew a thing about the history you would know he faced alot of right-wing opposition to that treaty.

Today, Medicare for the elderly isn't controversial. You won't find a Republican in Congress against it I know of. But at the time, Ronald Reagan began his political career by being the AMA national spokesman against Kennedy's plan for expanded Medicare, sending albums of himself around the country with a speech that Medicare was "socialized medicine". Sound famiiar?

- War isn't a right versus left paradigm issue.. and national defense and allied support is a separate issue from war. I would think any sane person would want to avoid war at all costs regardless of political standing.

You would be wrong.

War DOES have left versus right politics all the time. JFK was under constant pressure from the Republiicans for more war. Most of the wars the US has fought have not 'avoided war at all costs'.

While Kennedy was able to avoid war, with great effort against all kinds of opposition including not only Republicans but the Join Chiefs and even his own advosors at times, LBJ wasn't so able.

He had everything from an unjustified overthrow of a left-wing government in the Domincan Republic, to facing such strong Republican pressure to go to war in Vietnam even though he didn't see how we could win, that he finally escalated that conflict in a major way - largely motivated by domesticpolitical concenrs that not going to war endangered his legislative program.

Kennedy had plenty of opponents to his peace agenda.

- His voice of Church and State was not one of removing church.. it was letting it co-exist without persecution.

Which made him stand out not at all from other presidents. What HAS changed is the religiousu right.

Read Kevin Phillips' "American Theocracy" for a hint.

- I don't want anyone dead or assassinated. I use the political documents setup by our founding fathers to take action in removing someone from office.

What are you talking about?

- He did not support enemies outside the US.. nor did he support people who didn't share our country's core values.. obviously. He didn't blindly listen to government agencies who told him the politically expedient answers for who to throw support behind.

He frequently chose to support 'real independant leaders' over our nation's long-standing practice of supporting pretty much any right-wing dictator no matter how brutal for stong pro-US subservience.

He made a lot of enemies among allies and Americans for this.

You continue to misrepresent the modern Democrats as well, with some straw man about their 'being told by agencies what to do'.

Seriously, get a clue.

You're an idiot.

 

[woolfe9999]

By the way you're talking, I can tell you've never been to a rally and actually spoke with anyone there to see their views. You've taken the bait that the major media outlets have given you and you've ran with it. Classic. Just like they want the sheep to do.

You're right, I haven't been to a rally. I've been to their internet sites and read scads of their comments online. Should I assume that these websites and comments do not reflect the movement as a whole?

- wolf

 

[WhipperSnapper]

The real joke is that the Tea Parties are probably moneymaking businesses for whoever coordinates and runs them.

 

[yllus]

The real joke is that the Tea Parties are probably moneymaking businesses for whoever coordinates and runs them.

No probably - definitely!

Tea Party Convention Seems a Very Genteel Affair

The convention in Nashville has taken a beating for more than a month from other Tea Party groups and some Republican leaders for charging a $549 registration fee plus airfare and hotel. Two groups, the American Liberty Alliance and the National Precinct Alliance, are boycotting the meetings. And Representatives Michele Bachmann and Marsha Blackburn withdrew from speaking over concerns from the House Ethics Committee about members supporting a commercial venture — a taboo under House rules.

"I spoke to Marsha yesterday, and she wishes that she weren't getting mixed signals from the House Ethics Committee," says Mark Skoda, a Memphis Tea Party activist who has become the convention's unofficial spokesman. (See pictures of last year's Tea Party protests.)

Nashville Tea Party leaders Judson and Sherry Phillips, who organized the event, have made no secret of the fact that their group, Tea Party Nation, is a for-profit organization. But they argue that any profits are given back to the cause. "I don't run around in a sack," says Skoda, in a tan sports jacket, a black turtleneck and black slacks. "It's a misnomer that in order to be a grass-roots activist, you have to be a pauper."

 

[halik]

Yeah, they just suddenly happened to "wake up." Sorry, if you don't understand the Tea Party as basically a right wing movement, then you are beyond help.

- wolf

My sentiment exactly. I don't remember anyone yelling at townhalls, because a 1T is being spent on a place that only a few unlucky of us will ever go see.

On the same topic, all these people all the sudden feel the need to yell (nonsense) at representative across the country and within 3 month period. You must be young, naive or both if you think this wasn't part of an organized campaign.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I find it funny nobody mentioned it stands for Taxed Enough Already which is the root of it. It's core are white middle class people which Obama failed to connect with in the 08 elections and continues to tick them off.

My guess is that Spidey is close to the truth. It's the "I've got mine, fuck you!" and "Don't get sick and if you do get sick die quickly," crowd.

So what are the TEA Party's positions on the following issues:

• Foreign Outsourcing
• H-1B, L-1, and other work visas.
• Legal Immigration
• Illegal immigration
• Health Care
• Population Growth
• Abortion
• Birth Control
• Banking and Securities Regulations
• Environmental Issues
• Wealth Inequality

Have they announced definitive positions on these issues? Merely opposing deficit spending doesn't make for much of a platform.

 

[CallMeJoe]

(Sarah Palin) Actually, after she joined the ticket, McCain's poll numbers took quite a jump for the better. If anything, she brought him back within range instead of dying off completely.

There was a brief post-convention bump which might be attributable to the Palin nomination, followed by the long slide into oblivion.

 

[Craig234]

There was a brief post-convention bump which might be attributable to the Palin nomination, followed by the long slide into oblivion.

She strengthened support among the crazy base, who were the reason the planned Liebermann nomintation was aborted at the last minute, and galvanized same Americans against her election.