Tea Party Events - Page 3

JuanCarlos · April 16, 2009, 01:21 PM

I'm just not a protest guy. I've found that pretty much any protest focused on a specific civil right tends to be a complete mess. Like, even if I agree with the the cause people are riled up about I'll swing by, see that it's a mix of people trying to piggyback for tangential issues, signs that make no logical sense, or absolute kooks I have no desire to associate with or risk implying any support for (often those last are a combination of the other two as well).

Just not my thing. Some of the rallies I've seen focused on specific civil rights are just as bad, but they at least seem to be better.

Te Anau · April 16, 2009, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Yeah and that one about bullets first surely reflects well on gun owners

There's nothing wrong with letting people know where you stand.Should we also be ashamed of "The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants"?

MrNiceGuy · April 16, 2009, 04:06 PM

Quote:

There's nothing wrong with letting people know where you stand.Should we also be ashamed of "The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants"?

Advocation of violence is nothing to be proud of.
Advocation of violence at a peaceful protest is abhorrent.

Trying to turn an anti-big spending rally into a forum for gun rights is both selfish and rude... it does nothing but damage all causes associated.

So yes, if you felt the need to start spewing that dribble at rally against big spending, you should be ashamed of yourself

homefires · April 16, 2009, 06:07 PM

I would love to see enough We The People stand up and tell the Guberment Enough is Enough! I just don't see it doing any good until you can find away to regain the country through Ballets. There are just too many takers then givers out there. As long a the takers keep voting in the ones taking yours and giving to them we loose.

huchahuchax · April 16, 2009, 06:19 PM

JuanCarlos wrote:

Quote:

I'm wondering why there weren't TEA parties (gotta love the backronyms...wait, no you don't) on 15 April 2008, personally. I guess nearly limitless deficit spending was cool.

There wasn't one in 2008, but there was one in 2007. It was pretty much for the same reasons, and the participants were considered "wackos".

JuanCarlos · April 16, 2009, 06:28 PM

Quote:

There wasn't one in 2008, but there was one in 2007. It was pretty much for the same reasons, and the participants were considered "wackos".

Ah. I may stand corrected. But then, how many attended in 2007?

huchahuchax · April 16, 2009, 07:01 PM

Oh hell, here is where I open the can of worms:
DISCLAIMER!!! I'M NOT PROMOTING RON PAUL, I'M SIMPLY RECOUNTING AN EVENT FROM THE PAST. That said...

The 2007 "Tea Party" was one of the Ron Paul money bombs. I'm not sure if it was on April 15th, but there were rallys all over the country, though attendance was not anything like what happened yesterday. The noteworthy part was the cyber aspect (the "money bomb"). I think it was his second money bomb, and he brought in over $1M online in a 24 hour period.

I just bring all this up because earlier today I had a laugh out loud moment while I was reading one of the right wing news blogs (HOTAIR or Ace of Spades). They had the CNN video of the female reporter at the Chicago tea party, trying to push the buttons of the biggest wacko she could find. Then they had another video of what happened after CNN cut their feed. A very calm and reasonable woman was questioning the reporter on why she had to find the craziest person in the crowd to interview? Finally the reporter asked the lady why she was there and she immediately started expressing her disagreements with the Federal Reserve. So here we had a left wing ideologue reporter, spouting conspiracy theories about FOX News, we had the paranoid guy, implying comparisons between Obama and Hitler, and the Ron Paul supporter acting as the voice of reason. Now that's entertainment!

jammin1237 · April 16, 2009, 08:47 PM

i cant think of a worse place to bring a firearm, whenever politics or religion are up for rally or discussion things usually get over heated and the last thing anybody needs to do is "force feed their individual right on somebody else in a threatening manner, which is what i think most would "see" if they saw you armed in this situation"... in my opinion the 2nd amendment exists for singular personal defense and the ability of a society to ward off an oppressive totalitarian government ...firearms don't belong in debate, they belong in the lost cause of common sense reasoning....

JustDreadful · April 16, 2009, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Yeah and that one about bullets first surely reflects well on gun owners

Much as it pains me, I have to agree. I didn't see any unfortunate gun references in Vegas (some gun references, but none wing-nut style).

Remember what a miscalculation it was when the "immigration reform" advocates marched a while back, holding signs that said things like "This is OUR country"? Those demonstrations sank the immigration legislation.

If the antis can paint us as wackos, a new gun ban becomes MUCH more likely.

My favorite sign, BTW, said "Give me liberty, don't give me debt." I thought that was clever.

Te Anau · April 17, 2009, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Trying to turn an anti-big spending rally into a forum for gun rights is both selfish and rude... it does nothing but damage all causes associated.

The Tea Party I attended focused on taxes and the ridiculous size of government,but also had a healthy dose of the 1st,2nd & 10th amendments.

OuTcAsT · April 17, 2009, 09:50 PM

Quote:

There wasn't one in 2008, but there was one in 2007. It was pretty much for the same reasons, and the participants were considered "wackos".

Ah. I may stand corrected. But then, how many attended in 2007?

The turnout in 2007 was, I am sure, quite a bit less than this year but the outrage was no where near the level it is now. People are tired of the years of oppression thru taxes, and loss of liberties. Sure, there are folks who attended these rallies for various reasons, but the underlying rage over a government that is totally out of control remains a constant.

I have been classified a terrorist because of several beliefs that I choose to cling to. "Astroturf" you say ? I believe what you smell is the collective pot of oppression about to boil over.

MrNiceGuy · April 17, 2009, 09:53 PM

Quote:

The Tea Party I attended focused on taxes and the ridiculous size of government,but also had a healthy dose of the 1st,2nd & 10th amendments.

That is sad.

I believe that reason the tea parties were so quickly dismissed by everyone was because of the diluted reasoning behind them.

They started out as protest with a well defined purpose. They ended up being mostly anti government rallies and the message was lost along with the impact.

OuTcAsT · April 17, 2009, 10:12 PM

Quote:

They ended up being mostly anti government rallies

I will have to disagree to a point. They were not "anti-government" so much as "Anti-Out -Of-Control-too damn big-Government".

MrNiceGuy · April 17, 2009, 10:30 PM

That's just arguing semantics.

There were too many causes being rallied against, all of them government caused and/or controlled.

Wildalaska · April 17, 2009, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Should we also be ashamed of "The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants"?

LOL...read Lenins line below. Same same, just depends how you look at it

WildyourviolenceinoktheirsisntAlaska TM

Te Anau · April 18, 2009, 01:44 PM

Quote:

LOL...read Lenins line below. Same same, just depends how you look at it

Thanks,but no thanks.I'll choose to believe that our founding fathers were much wiser than any of us here and had a much better plan for America than 99.9% of people alive today.You go ahead and laugh out loud for me.I'll choose to show respect.

Brian Pfleuger · April 18, 2009, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrNiceGuy

They started out as protest with a well defined purpose. They ended up being mostly anti government rallies and the message was lost along with the impact.

If the purpose of the TEA parties was nothing beyond the rallies we saw last week then they would have no impact regardless of the reasoning.

The TEA parties and the associated 912 project must become a solid movement of regular people who are tired of the abuses of government power. Whether it be gun control, activist judges or being ignored by those who are supposed to represent us. If it's nothing more than a one day rally then it carries no weight, regardless.

Te Anau · April 18, 2009, 02:01 PM

Quote:

The TEA parties and the associated 912 project must become a solid movement of regular people who are tired of the abuses of government power. Whether it be gun control, activist judges or being ignored by those who are supposed to represent us. If it's nothing more than a one day rally then it carries no weight, regardless.

Bingo! It was more of a freedom rally than anything else as far as I'm concerned.

MrNiceGuy · April 18, 2009, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Bingo! It was more of a freedom rally than anything else as far as I'm concerned.

And selfish attitudes like that are precisely why it wont accomplish jack, didly, nor scat.

A freedom rally is only an expression of the freedoms you already have. You make no headway wallowing in your own footsteps.

And if nothing is accomplished, then the tea parties were nothing but a bunch of people taking the day off, hanging out, and whining inaudibly.

The tea parties transformed from a movement with a clearly defined goal to a group of whiners that dont like government.... And as a group of anti government whiners, you will accomplish nothing.... no matter how often you whine

Quote:

If the purpose of the TEA parties was nothing beyond the rallies we saw last week then they would have no impact regardless of the reasoning.

The purpose of the tea parties have been stretched, skewed, and divided... and as a result, nothing will ever come of them.
The very manner in which the parties were conducted assure that they and their nondescript causes will have no impact.

JustDreadful · April 18, 2009, 06:50 PM

Quote:

LOL...read Lenins line below. Same same, just depends how you look at it

So you're a Loyalist?

Wildalaska · April 18, 2009, 07:05 PM

Quote:

So you're a Loyalist?

Huh?

WildwhateverdoyoumeanAlaska ™

OuTcAsT · April 18, 2009, 07:15 PM

Quote:

That's just arguing semantics.

I beg to differ, There is a HUGE gap between the two.

I did not see anyone who was "Anti-Government" I saw nobody who advocated anarchy, ( That would be the term for Anti-Government ) and I honestly did not get the feeling at the rally I attended that anyone was advocating that government should be abolished. What I did see and hear was that people are tired of the policies that our government has shoved down our throats. Government is necessary for us to function as a nation, however the manner in which it is administered is the reason for all the angst.

Lot's of people are now trying to find better alternative fuels for automoblies because they are not happy with the price of fuel, environmental impact, oil dependency etc. would you refer to these people as "Anti-Car"? I think not.
They are not concerned with the vehicle as much as how efficiently it runs.

MrNiceGuy · April 18, 2009, 07:28 PM

you're taking semantics to a whole new level.

Quote:

Lot's of people are now trying to find better alternative fuels for automoblies because they are not happy with the price of fuel, environmental impact, oil dependency etc. would you refer to these people as "Anti-Car"? I think not.
They are not concerned with the vehicle as much as how efficiently it runs.

you're right... with that focused goal, they are not anti car.
like when the tea parties were focused on over spending and taxation, I did not consider them anti government.

but if they were as distracted as the tea partiers, it would closer equate to people who were anti gasoline, anti tire, anti paint, anti battery, anti mining, anti assembly, anti dealership, anti corporation... and in that case, despite being "pro transportation" I'd still consider them anti-car... just as I still consider this failed excuse for a movement to be anti government.

Just because you are "anti" doesnt mean you dont want the opposition to exist.
Just as in the last superbowl, the steeler fans were anti cardinals and vice versa. It doesnt mean they wanted the other team to cease to exist, only that they did not want the opposing team to succeed in their goals.

huchahuchax · April 18, 2009, 07:54 PM

I love how nobody knows what this thing is. Either that, or they simply aren't willing to say. A quarter of a million people got together to bash the Democrats AND the Republicans. Janeane Garofalo calls it racism - I call it a third party.

MBRinTN · April 18, 2009, 07:58 PM

If by "Loyalist," you mean a person who is loyal to his or her country, than yes I am a loyalist, and proud of it. You don't like the policies being "Forced down our throats?" Vote for the candidate of your choice. A significant majority of people in this country decided it was time for a change. That is called democracy.

April 16, 2009, 01:21 PM	#51
JuanCarlos Senior Member Join Date: July 22, 2006 Posts: 2,459	I'm just not a protest guy. I've found that pretty much any protest focused on a specific civil right tends to be a complete mess. Like, even if I agree with the the cause people are riled up about I'll swing by, see that it's a mix of people trying to piggyback for tangential issues, signs that make no logical sense, or absolute kooks I have no desire to associate with or risk implying any support for (often those last are a combination of the other two as well). Just not my thing. Some of the rallies I've seen focused on specific civil rights are just as bad, but they at least seem to be better.

April 16, 2009, 06:07 PM	#54
homefires Senior Member Join Date: July 8, 2007 Location: Deming New Mexico Posts: 1,495	I would love to see enough We The People stand up and tell the Guberment Enough is Enough! I just don't see it doing any good until you can find away to regain the country through Ballets. There are just too many takers then givers out there. As long a the takers keep voting in the ones taking yours and giving to them we loose.

April 16, 2009, 07:01 PM	#57
huchahuchax Senior Member Join Date: April 14, 2007 Posts: 298	Oh hell, here is where I open the can of worms: DISCLAIMER!!! I'M NOT PROMOTING RON PAUL, I'M SIMPLY RECOUNTING AN EVENT FROM THE PAST. That said... The 2007 "Tea Party" was one of the Ron Paul money bombs. I'm not sure if it was on April 15th, but there were rallys all over the country, though attendance was not anything like what happened yesterday. The noteworthy part was the cyber aspect (the "money bomb"). I think it was his second money bomb, and he brought in over $1M online in a 24 hour period. I just bring all this up because earlier today I had a laugh out loud moment while I was reading one of the right wing news blogs (HOTAIR or Ace of Spades). They had the CNN video of the female reporter at the Chicago tea party, trying to push the buttons of the biggest wacko she could find. Then they had another video of what happened after CNN cut their feed. A very calm and reasonable woman was questioning the reporter on why she had to find the craziest person in the crowd to interview? Finally the reporter asked the lady why she was there and she immediately started expressing her disagreements with the Federal Reserve. So here we had a left wing ideologue reporter, spouting conspiracy theories about FOX News, we had the paranoid guy, implying comparisons between Obama and Hitler, and the Ron Paul supporter acting as the voice of reason. Now that's entertainment!

April 16, 2009, 08:47 PM	#58
jammin1237 Senior Member Join Date: July 16, 2008 Location: Wisonsin Posts: 269	i cant think of a worse place to bring a firearm, whenever politics or religion are up for rally or discussion things usually get over heated and the last thing anybody needs to do is "force feed their individual right on somebody else in a threatening manner, which is what i think most would "see" if they saw you armed in this situation"... in my opinion the 2nd amendment exists for singular personal defense and the ability of a society to ward off an oppressive totalitarian government ...firearms don't belong in debate, they belong in the lost cause of common sense reasoning....

April 17, 2009, 10:30 PM	#64
MrNiceGuy Junior member Join Date: August 16, 2008 Posts: 919	That's just arguing semantics. There were too many causes being rallied against, all of them government caused and/or controlled.

April 18, 2009, 07:54 PM	#74
huchahuchax Senior Member Join Date: April 14, 2007 Posts: 298	I love how nobody knows what this thing is. Either that, or they simply aren't willing to say. A quarter of a million people got together to bash the Democrats AND the Republicans. Janeane Garofalo calls it racism - I call it a third party.

April 18, 2009, 07:58 PM	#75
MBRinTN Member Join Date: October 11, 2005 Posts: 91	If by "Loyalist," you mean a person who is loyal to his or her country, than yes I am a loyalist, and proud of it. You don't like the policies being "Forced down our throats?" Vote for the candidate of your choice. A significant majority of people in this country decided it was time for a change. That is called democracy.