The Republican Thread

[Rex Kickass]

Great example of bias in reporting. They stand for lots of things so now they are some how they have no aim. When the Democrats do it, it is called a large umbrella. If you don't know the big things the tea party's stand for, its because you haven't paid attention, or want to dismiss them easily.

 

I think it has more to do with the fact that the Tea Party "movement" is a "movement" and not a party. The "movement" does not speak with one voice. It does not have one or a few leaders who you can point to and say this is the person who represents the vision of the current state of the movement. Individual "tea party" movements stand for things, but there is no national movement stance on any one thing - I think that's the issue here.

 

I can point to that with the Democrats - Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, Reid, even Tim Kaine.

I can point to that with the Republicans - Boehner, McConnell, to a lesser extent McCain, Palin and Steele.

 

Please name me one "tea party" leader.

[Balta1701]

Glenn Beck?

[Jenksismyhero]

I think it has more to do with the fact that the Tea Party "movement" is a "movement" and not a party. The "movement" does not speak with one voice. It does not have one or a few leaders who you can point to and say this is the person who represents the vision of the current state of the movement. Individual "tea party" movements stand for things, but there is no national movement stance on any one thing - I think that's the issue here.

 

I can point to that with the Democrats - Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, Reid, even Tim Kaine.

I can point to that with the Republicans - Boehner, McConnell, to a lesser extent McCain, Palin and Steele.

 

Please name me one "tea party" leader.

 

Is that really a bad thing?

[Rex Kickass]

Is that really a bad thing?

It's not a good thing if you want your movement to survive. Because it allows you to be characterized by the most extreme elements in your movement.

 

Because right now the leaders are the people who own the websites. And the owner of teaparty.org was two weeks ago saying that there were no racial slurs at his tea party rallies.... two months after he was photographed holding a sign that said "N****R" on it at one of his own rallies. Right now, that guy is the face of that movement. Eric Erickson (Mr Redstate himself), a guy that threatened (jokingly or not, not honestly sure) that requiring phosphate free dishwashing detergent was going to be the straw that broke the camel's back when it comes to armed revolution aimed at taming the government. Those people are your representative faces of the Tea Party.

 

If that's who you want running your movement, feel free. But when that plus Michelle Malkin is the face of your organization, don't come crying about respect when you are compared to a bunch of crazy people - because thats the face of your movement.

 

For every Al Sharpton, the Democrats have Barack Obama.

For every Bob Dornan, the Republicans have John McCain.

For every Glenn Beck/Michelle Malkin/Eric Erickson, the Tea Party has....?

[southsider2k5]

I think it has more to do with the fact that the Tea Party "movement" is a "movement" and not a party. The "movement" does not speak with one voice. It does not have one or a few leaders who you can point to and say this is the person who represents the vision of the current state of the movement. Individual "tea party" movements stand for things, but there is no national movement stance on any one thing - I think that's the issue here.

 

I can point to that with the Democrats - Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, Reid, even Tim Kaine.

I can point to that with the Republicans - Boehner, McConnell, to a lesser extent McCain, Palin and Steele.

 

Please name me one "tea party" leader.

 

That is an incredible double standard. If they aren't a political party, how are they going to have politicians?

 

As for what they stand for, if the name doesn't tell you what they stand for, there is nothing I can tell you past that.

[kapkomet]

That is an incredible double standard. If they aren't a political party, how are they going to have politicians?

 

As for what they stand for, if the name doesn't tell you what they stand for, there is nothing I can tell you past that.

 

 

They're not liberal, utopian, redistribution of wealth, everyone needs to be equal in society people (oh, wait for it... wait for it... wait for it... GOVERNMENT SAVES!!!), therefore, they're nutbags without a leader.

[EvilMonkey]

It's not a good thing if you want your movement to survive. Because it allows you to be characterized by the most extreme elements in your movement.

 

Because right now the leaders are the people who own the websites. And the owner of teaparty.org was two weeks ago saying that there were no racial slurs at his tea party rallies.... two months after he was photographed holding a sign that said "N****R" on it at one of his own rallies. Right now, that guy is the face of that movement. Eric Erickson (Mr Redstate himself), a guy that threatened (jokingly or not, not honestly sure) that requiring phosphate free dishwashing detergent was going to be the straw that broke the camel's back when it comes to armed revolution aimed at taming the government. Those people are your representative faces of the Tea Party.

 

Dale Robertson, of whom you speak of, owns a website, and is therefor the teaparty leader?

http://rpc.blogrolling.com/redirect.php?r=...blogspot.com%2F

A Note on Dale Robertson, self-described “tea party leader”

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

By Felicia Cravens

In response to questions we have received regarding Dale Robertson and his involvement with HoustonTPS, and specifically in reference to his attendance at our rally on 27 Feb 2009, we would like to state that:

 

 

 

1. He is NOT a member of our Leadership team.

 

2. He owns a website with which we have never been affiliated.

 

3. He has never been a part of organizing any of the Tea Party rallies in the Houston area, or any other area that we can find.

 

4. We addressed some issues involving him back in April. Here it is on our website, where Mr. Robertson himself comments: http://houstontps.org/?p=318

 

5. We do not choose to associate with people that use his type of disgusting language.

 

 

 

A search on Google yields plenty of information about Mr. Robertson, and a search of the various leadership teams among legitimate national tea party organizations show him nowhere to be found.

 

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/01/wash-p...ea-party-leader

 

Like many of the media hounds claiming to represent the grassroots Tea Party movement, Robertson's main credential is opportunism. Last spring, as the movement was taking root, he had the foresight to register a whole bunch of tea party domain names, including teaparty.org, Texas Tea Party, Houston Tea Party, HoustonTXTeaParty, and so on. Then he tried to sell the names back to the actual Texas tea party leaders, making veiled threats about lawsuits over their use of the Tea Party name

 

[Rex Kickass]

They're not liberal, utopian, redistribution of wealth, everyone needs to be equal in society people (oh, wait for it... wait for it... wait for it... GOVERNMENT SAVES!!!), therefore, they're nutbags without a leader.

 

These kind of posts are exactly why I stop responding to you in the Filibuster. It's funny, I think you have lots of valid points to make in these discussions, and when we talk about this stuff via instant message - I always really appreciate the discussion. I wish you could bring that here, and this place might become a more interesting place to have discussions.

[Rex Kickass]

That is an incredible double standard. If they aren't a political party, how are they going to have politicians?

 

As for what they stand for, if the name doesn't tell you what they stand for, there is nothing I can tell you past that.

 

If that's a double standard, how is expecting a nebulous movement with no national leaders or direction to have the same respect as national political organizations not a double standard? Like it or not, the good work your Tea Party organization might be doing is always going to be drowned out by the bats*** crazy people who make headlines with their outrageousness as long as your organization has no national face and no national direction but demand national coverage.

 

I don't know it you noticed, but crazy usually speaks louder than good.

 

That's sort of my point. You can't have it both ways.

[kapkomet]

These kind of posts are exactly why I stop responding to you in the Filibuster. It's funny, I think you have lots of valid points to make in these discussions, and when we talk about this stuff via instant message - I always really appreciate the discussion. I wish you could bring that here, and this place might become a more interesting place to have discussions.

 

Yep, maybe. But then again, when people actually debate this stuff from a differing viewpoint, it usually ends up in a pretty, 1,000 word "GOVERNMENT SAVES" rant and how stupid those who have a different viewpoint really are. I just save the number of words to make the other viewpoint easy.

[southsider2k5]

If that's a double standard, how is expecting a nebulous movement with no national leaders or direction to have the same respect as national political organizations not a double standard? Like it or not, the good work your Tea Party organization might be doing is always going to be drowned out by the bats*** crazy people who make headlines with their outrageousness as long as your organization has no national face and no national direction but demand national coverage.

 

I don't know it you noticed, but crazy usually speaks louder than good.

 

That's sort of my point. You can't have it both ways.

 

Or they are a threat to the established parties, so there is a large incentive to make the bats*** crazy people their "spokespeople". That is my point. You obviously don't know much of the organization because you keep trying to make the failed point that they don't stand for any one thing. The name of the group tells you their main point. The extra stuff that gets emphasized instead of the thing that is spoken about at 90% of their rally's. Its funny that the same standards don't get applied to the fringes of the environmental movement. You've got people attacking ships and blowing up cars in the name of environmentalism, yet it doesn't seem to suffer at all as a national movement. They appear everywhere in the mainstream, with no mention of the outrageous of a few. Yet here people can take legitimate constitutional issues that folks have, and turn them into some sort of nutjob fringe movement. Yeah, those bats*** crazy constitutional authors, right?

 

Yep, no bias there at all.

[lostfan]

Or they are a threat to the established parties, so there is a large incentive to make the bats*** crazy people their "spokespeople". That is my point. You obviously don't know much of the organization because you keep trying to make the failed point that they don't stand for any one thing. The name of the group tells you their main point. The extra stuff that gets emphasized instead of the thing that is spoken about at 90% of their rally's. Its funny that the same standards don't get applied to the fringes of the environmental movement. You've got people attacking ships and blowing up cars in the name of environmentalism, yet it doesn't seem to suffer at all as a national movement. They appear everywhere in the mainstream, with no mention of the outrageous of a few. Yet here people can take legitimate constitutional issues that folks have, and turn them into some sort of nutjob fringe movement. Yeah, those bats*** crazy constitutional authors, right?

 

Yep, no bias there at all.

I don't think that's what Rex is saying.

 

Go back to the last conservative movement and think of a single message and the person that did the most in leading conservatives to carrying that message. Easy, right? Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America. What about now? John Boehner? No. Michael Steele? Oh god no. There's a nebulous group of people with a loose anti-government (the regular kind, not the militia kind) message that political junkies understand, but isn't really that clear to everyone else.

[Balta1701]

MITTENS! appears to have won the Southern Republican Leadership Conference straw poll by a single vote over Ron Paul.

[southsider2k5]

http://www.newsbusters.org/?q=blogs/lachla...gns-will-msm-ta

 

This week, Americans of all political stripes will take to the streets -- so to speak -- to protest what they see as excessive and out of control government spending and intrusion into their daily lives. Among the many Tea Party protesters, however, will be individuals plotting to undermine the peaceful grassroots movement.

 

Blogger Glenn Reynolds spotted CrashTheTeaParty.org today, a website that claims to represent "a nationwide network of Democrats, Republicans and Independents who are all sick and tired of that loose affiliation of racists, homophobes and morons; who constitute the fake grassroots movement, which calls itself 'the Tea Party.'"

 

Their plan is to "infiltrate" Tea Party protests to create the false impression that protesters are racists by … being racists. That's right, they will bring with them offensive signs and give wildly offensive interviews to reporters, all with the intention of smearing a movement that wouldn't bring those signs or give those interviews themselves. It remains to be seen whether the mainstream media will take the bait.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

 

Mark Tapscott dubs the leftist counter-movement "Saul Alinsky on steroids" for its "by any means necessary" approach to delegitimizing its political opponents. He notes that while the group claims to employ only non-violent means, that is an old leftist canard that is often discarded once non-violent means are exhausted and whatever leftist objective is on the agenda remains unaccomplished.

 

The Tea Party movement has been notably non-violent by the standards of any protest movement, but especially when compared with leftist anti-war and anti-capitalist groups (a lot of overlap there). It is not beyond the pale to expect that some crazies might try to shatter the near-perfect record of non-violent protest proudly worn on the Tea Party's collective sleeve by inciting or committing an act of violence.

 

"ome on the Left in American politics," Tapscott wrote today at the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog, "are running a KGB-like 'false flag' operation to discredit the Tea Party. The Left couldn't sell the idea that Tea Partiers are just a bunch of racists, homophobes and morons, so the Left is infiltrating the Tea Party in order to pose as a bunch of racists, homophobes and morons."

 

The question, as Tapscott notes, is how will the mainstream media address allegations of racism or -- God forbid -- violence. Will it parrot the claims of liberals without extensive investigation, as it did with the 'Spittlegate' incident after the passage of the ObamaCare bill? Or will it make a concerted effort to sort out fact from fiction -- and where it is unclear, report it as such?

 

The irony of the Crash the Tea Party "movement" (I put it in quotation marks since it is not clear, website intro notwithstanding, that this group consists of more than one person) is that it may undermine its own effort to paint Tea Party groups as outside of the mainstream.

 

Suppose, for example, someone who may or may not be an actual Tea Party member shows up to a protest with an offensive sign. The mainstream media cannot responsibly report that that person is undoubtedly an authentic member of the movement. The lingering doubt that the person is a member of radical leftist counter-protests groups will remain until that possibility is disproved.

 

But given the mainstream media's reliably hostile attitude towards the Tea Party movement, such investigation in all likelihood will not take place. It may fall to citizen journalists to expose the leftists seeking to slander wide swaths of the American people.

 

Tea Party groups will be working to marginalize any undercover lefties that show up with malicious designs. If you get the chance, grab a video camera (or a smartphone) and head to your nearest Tea Party.

 

Who knows, your footage could dispel some false accusations; citizen-journalists are turning in the most reliable kinds.

 

Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/?q=blogs/lachla...a#ixzz0kpxDp3P0

[mr_genius]

http://www.newsbusters.org/?q=blogs/lachla...gns-will-msm-ta

 

doesn't surprise me at all. i'm sure they have doing it all along.

[kapkomet]

doesn't surprise me at all. i'm sure they have doing it all along.

 

 

No way, those racist, leaderless bastards. They are just an annoyance who is undermining our country's "progress".

[KipWellsFan]

http://www.newsbusters.org/?q=blogs/lachla...gns-will-msm-ta

 

I experienced phoney protestors trying to make it look as if left of center protestors were comparing the Prime Minister to Hitler here in Canada. There's always these idiots.

Edited April 11, 2010 by KipWellsFan

[kapkomet]

I experienced phoney protestors trying to make it look as if left of center protestors were comparing the Prime Minister to Hitler here in Canada. There's always these idiots.

 

 

I CANNNOT believe it!

 

[mr_genius]

No way, those racist, leaderless bastards. They are just an annoyance who is undermining our country's "progress".

 

It's probably just another racist tea party trick. See, they want you to think those are Dems putting on a charade, but those are really the tea party leaders (incognito of course). MY OH MY THE TEA PARTY IS EVIL.

[southsider2k5]

I will be interviewing the Indiana Secretary of Education tomorrow on my regular radio spot during the afternoon drive show. If anyone has a quality question they want to try to get asked, let me know!

[Cknolls]

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/04/12/e...lectivist-self/

 

 

Could make a difference in November.

[GoSox05]

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/04/12/e...lectivist-self/

 

 

Could make a difference in November.

 

 

I loved the work they did with Jonas Savimbi.

[EvilMonkey]

I will be interviewing the Indiana Secretary of Education tomorrow on my regular radio spot during the afternoon drive show. If anyone has a quality question they want to try to get asked, let me know!

How about: "The original intent of the generous pension plans teachers everywhere get was to reward them later for pay sacrifices now. Since public sector jobs now outpace private sector jobs in pay, both actual and realized when benefits are factored in, why can we not eliminate the pension entirely and have the employees on social security, 401k's etc like the rest of the people who pay their salaries?"

 

 

[Jenksismyhero]

How about: "The original intent of the generous pension plans teachers everywhere get was to reward them later for pay sacrifices now. Since public sector jobs now outpace private sector jobs in pay, both actual and realized when benefits are factored in, why can we not eliminate the pension entirely and have the employees on social security, 401k's etc like the rest of the people who pay their salaries?"

 

"Because that would be both logical and reasonable.”

[Y2HH]

How about: "The original intent of the generous pension plans teachers everywhere get was to reward them later for pay sacrifices now. Since public sector jobs now outpace private sector jobs in pay, both actual and realized when benefits are factored in, why can we not eliminate the pension entirely and have the employees on social security, 401k's etc like the rest of the people who pay their salaries?"

 

The fact that public sector jobs outpace private sector jobs in pay is just...I cannot summon the words for how stupid/bad/ridiculous this is. I have to go now, because just thinking about this makes me want to stab kittens.