WOW, you sure sound ignorant in your assumptions since you have never been to any of the Tea Party events. Has the HUFF POST and MSNBC been been influencing you independent thoughts?

Stay the course right?

Remember what Hillary Clinton said as a Senator in 2003. (screeching): I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic, and we should stand up and say, "WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DEBATE AND DISAGREE WITH ANY ADMINISTRATION!"

Whatever happened to "dissent is the highest form of patriotism," which was so prevalent during Pres. Bush's (43) administration?

Interesting logic there. First question the validity of a movement because it did not exist before 2008.

And then dismiss the entire movement as racist because there are too many white men for your liking.

The simple fact that both of us are well aware of is that minorites have not traditionally rallied for smaller government, personal responsibility, and lower taxes. In fact as a voting bloc they have usually gone the opposite direction on these core Tea Party issues. Yes it would be great to have Tea Party meetings look a lot more diverse.

But to be "uncomfortable in room full of white men" insinuate that the Tea Party movement has put up a racial barrier that simply does not exist.

It's interesting that a movement that claims to be based on "personal responsibility" spends so much time blaming other people for the country's problems.

Good thing Tea Partiers don't bring guns to rallies -- oh wait, they DO -- cos they'd shoot themselves in the foot...

Nice dodge, trapper, but no one denied your right to disagree with this administration. The question is, why weren't the Tea Partiers disagreeing with the previous administrations that created the messes we're in, R or D, all the way back to the Reagan nonsense that cogmeyer is parroting?

The Reagan "smaller government, personal responsibility, and lower taxes" mantra, resulting in corporate consolidation, deregulation and destruction of the social safety net, is why ALL (except the top sliver of less than !%) of us are where we are today -- and why generations now and in the future are bankrupt.


Got any new ideas?

"Got any new ideas?"

yes!!!! stop with the party politics and move forward. reagan is dead, his administration was 30 years ago. clinton and both bush senior and bush w. are also out of office, just in case people have failed to realize it. lobbing insults over the isle to each other does not make for a better america. neither side has all of the answers. eventhough i could care less about the tea party, if the rest of america was as passionate as these yahoos, then maybe this country has a chance. but right now, the old white-haired society of BOTH parties is in control,

further proof that you don't read or comprehend very well. Note the "R and D" and drop your continuous false accusations. ("lobbing insults over the isle" is kinda cute).

like you, anyone who doesn't realize this dismantlement of the American Dream has been systematically achieved since the Reagan days will have a hard time coming out of denial or actually taking any personal responsibility for allowing themselves to be cut off at the knees in so many vital ways.

it's even reassuring to pretend that it's not about party, even though it is Republican policies -- and Democratic participation -- that brought us to this point. of course Republicans and "libertarians" won't take any responsibility for endorsing and supporting those policies. Like cogmeyer, they are using literally the same ideas to solve the problems that created them: the definition of insanity.

of course "these yahoos" are "passionate" -- they were fine as long as everyone else took the socioeconomic hits. Now it affects them, they found out they're not immune and can't just mouth off about how it's someone else's fault (oh wait, they still DO that), safe in their little cocoons. They finally woke up and THEY DON'T LIKE IT.

Speaking of insanity, how bout that Sacramento radio hater that got booted out of the Tea Party cos his response to accusations of racism was to publish a racist blog post.

if you think "this mess" started during the reagan years, then it is you who needs to read something other than "liberal magazine today". there are plenty of cases studies that suggest a lot of how things are today is based on FDR's 3+ terms in office. see social security, welfare, etc. (if you would like an unbiased book on FDR, which is one i recently finished, i suggest "The Defining Moment: FDR's first hundred days and the triumph of hope" by Jonathan Alter) but then again, for an idealogue such as yourself, i would expect nothing less than blaming the other party as opposed to accepting equal blame. like you say about KJ, obama (who i voted for and would vote for again by the way) inherited the mess and the situations we are in. the problems are his now, not reagan's, not clinton's, not FDR's.

what has your democratic party done to turn the economy?

again, you don't read or respond what i write, you toss in something from left field and make more false accusations. game over.

yes you are right. i didn't respond to your poor attempt at blaming the entire economic and social situation on ronald reagan. yes game over, have a nice life.

more false accusations. read for comprehension. focus on the concept of policies that are passed on.

where did i accuse you of anything, captain paranoid? instead of making statements like "more false accusations" why don't you back that statement up with a quote from me or anything that i have said that is false or accusatory?

i guess that would require you to think and actually explain why anything i have said is false and your nancy pelosi handbook forbids you to think for yourself. so once again, unless you want to actually discuss facts with facts....have a nice life.

Strychnine, you misrepresent what another says, through ignorance or intention, pretending it's true, which is aka lying. others can read for themselves and sort out the points that were presented from your rabid rantings. here's a clue:

My comment:

"The Reagan "smaller government, personal responsibility, and lower taxes" mantra, resulting in corporate consolidation, deregulation and destruction of the social safety net, is why ALL (except the top sliver of less than !%) of us are where we are today -- and why generations now and in the future are bankrupt."

Your false accusation of party politics and your ignorance that the policies live on beyond the dead president:

"yes!!!! stop with the party politics and move forward. reagan is dead"

Followed by more of your misreadings, blaming FDR for the destruction of FDR's policies, repeating the false accusation of "playing party politics," inability to comprehend that my comments were about Reagan's policies, not Reagan himself, ignorance about history and how those policies have been carried out, more personal insults and just plain BS.

Alas, I am not bbbbmer and don't have the interest to play your stupid game.

ok naga, false accusation of party politics, why is it you didn't put any blame on the clinton administration or any of their policies? that administration is tied a little more closely by way of a timeline than the reagan administration.

also, i never said i blame FDR, i said this :"there are plenty of cases studies that suggest a lot of how things are today is based on FDR's 3+ terms in office. see social security, welfare, etc."

no where in that statement did i use the word "i". but i did follow it up with a book, i even gave you the title to research (FYI this is called a source, you should try using them every once in a while) I have read about FDR which did make some of the cases i was pointing out.

i know you aren't bbbbmer, but you sure are close.

Pity the poor and learning disabled. Much like Barney Frank's dining room table, they aren't worth a rational discussion.

"why is it you didn't put any blame on the clinton administration or any of their policies? "


the question is Why can't you READ? Are your lies intentional or ignorant? READ IT AGAIN if you even read it the first time.



If you need help, here ya go. If you need everything spelled out in O'Reilly shouty slogans, yer on yer own. If you have NO clue about the past decades of socioeconomic history, get a clue before degrading SacPress Comments any further. Please.


"The question is, why weren't the Tea Partiers disagreeing with the previous administrations that created the messes we're in, R or D, all the way back to the Reagan nonsense that cogmeyer is parroting?"

AND

"anyone who doesn't realize this dismantlement of the American Dream has been systematically achieved since the Reagan days will have a hard time coming out of denial or actually taking any personal responsibility for allowing themselves to be cut off at the knees in so many vital ways.

"it's even reassuring to pretend that it's not about party, even though it is Republican policies -- and Democratic participation -- that brought us to this point. "

oh naga, i am so tired of your "why can't you read" BS. most people, when asked to back up a claim they make, will reference a source and/or answer direct questions. you and your "why can't you read" garbage is tiresome and boring. go sit around a campfire with bbbbmer and not use facts and figures, and keep to your one-sided ways. the rest of us would like to have a rational discussion, which i see from numerous attempts is just way too much to ask from you.

if you want to have blinders on and blame everything on reagan, then you are going to miss out on a lot. reagan certainly wasn't the greatest president of all time, and i have never claimed him to be. but your constant hiding of your head in the sand as to the faults of every administration, including your prized democratic presidencies, albeit is your choice, but not mine - good luck in neverland.

at this point Strychnine, you have proven that you are incredible and unbelievable. Thank you for making that clear. Are you paid or freelance?

"naga" nice try, but i am done with you for now. if i was to ask you to show proof of your statement, i would end up extending this conversation way beyond its shelf-life only to find out after 6-10 more ambiguous comments from you that you have zero proof.

have a nice life of anonymity and closed-mindedness

your bogus claims of what someone else should do based on your lies -- esp. in this case where your lies have been refuted and proof has been shown -- don't even make sense. lies about lies, hoping no one actually reads what's written, rather than your false claims about what's written.

right, and your proof is? or are you going to pull the old "i don't need to explain anything to you, if you can't read that is your fault" while the entire time you continue the cycle of insults, accusations, ect. routine while constantly asking me for proof and then i give you a book for you to read as a source? - again!!!!!!!

considering that is your modus operandi

again, dining room table.

willful ignorance, fodder for TP yellers and misspellers, supporting the policies and poobahs that are sending them down the drain.

Are you aware that the Tea Party Movement is a construction, an invention, a faux "grassroots" effort of Dick Armey and national Republican leaders? What do you think about that?

"Most Democrats have not been willing to take a stand against the policies of their own party."

Wrong. Most Congressional Democrats have not been willing to take a stand against the policies of the Republican party.

Please research the beginning of the Tea Party. You will find that Dick Armey, career elected ex-government official at ALL levels of government now retired on his government pensions and health care benefits is the founder as well as his Freedom Works. I agree that the front line Tea Parties seem very dedicated but they are being used and have been from the beginning.

You are wrong. The Tea party was an invention of the colonists that were at the foundation of American revolution.
Dick Armey can make his case, but the way I see it, many of the dedicated people within the TEA parties reject a large portion of any other agenda. Especially so when people like Armey and TEA Party Express types start cozying up to amnesty for illegals or racially based and racially specific cohorts like their Latino Water Rights Coalition.

why can't you acknowledge the truth? Dick Armey and the Republicans cooked this up, marketed it and voila.

and are any of these TP's so eager to deny others' civil rights, aware of -- or fighting for -- the state of their own?

Dick Armey was not alive during the Boston Tea party. I don't know what civil rights of others the TEA partiers are denying

you missed your chance to present a different impression of TP "thinking."

Darn! What was I thinking....

gondola, take my advice, don't argue with naga. he/she/it will twist and turn anything you say into his/hers/its own little spin, none of which has anything to do with what you have written. i would ask him/her/it to provide a source regarding his/hers/its dick armey claims, but based on prior conversations that is just way too much to ask. but then again, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the TP is a branch of the conservative/republican party, similar to the green party's affiliation with the liberal/democratic party. apparently in naga's world, only the left wing of the political spectrum is allowed to have a wacko/extremist wing, but no, no. no....there is no way the republicans could ever have their own wacko wing. i just love hypocrits....

Wow Rich E. speaking of paranoid. ROFL!!!!


Actually, this was a good opportunity for someone to present a different impression of the TPers, some rational comment. I'd love to see it. AG's bizarre comment just seems pathetic.

But you have verified that the TPers are "a wacko/extremist wing" so I guess that explains it.

Correct, however there has been ample time for whatever policies naga's democratic party were so important to have to be re-instated, considering for the first two years of the Clinton administration, he also had a democratically controlled congress.

who do you think sits on the corporations board of directors, are the CEO(s), etc....the white haired people. my wife says it best "most people get into politics with good intentions". i finish that statement by saying "then they get a taste of the good life and don't want to mess it up by having an independent voice instead of a party toting voice".

great quote by lincoln by the way...and so true.

Oracle, you are a hoot! LOL

Oracle: So, are you claiming that the Tea Party are primarily a racially-based/racist organization?

I guess if you look at the membership rolls (does the Tea Party actually have members?) of all these groups, La Raza, Tea Party and NAACP, you'd find mostly the color of skin they represent. That would seem racially-based, wouldn't it?
Members of all these organizations have been called "racist" over the years, but that doesn't make the entire group a racist organization. So, yes, it would appear all of these organizations are racially- based but not necessarily racist organizations.

Oracle, when you're in a hole, STOP DIGGING!!

Remember, dining room table.

The original and the current Tea Parties are more similar than you think.

The original Tea Party was started by wealthy merchants who didn't want to pay for the cost of the French and Indian War.

The new Tea Party was started by wealthy business interest who don't want to pay for the costs of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and the War on Terror.

What better way to stop a war than to cut off the funding?

Dale,
I know what you are referring to; It's the brush you want to paint everyone with that I reject. There's the Tea party spirit, and then there's the TEA Party Express. It's kind of like fishing or hunting; You have to examine each spiecies carefully before you commit, because there are very defined differences that matter in the larger scope of things.

The original tea party was a protest against taxation without representation.

This is in marked contrast to the current corporate-funded effort by a constellation of right wing organizations under the umbrella 'Freedomworks' of Dick Armey, the disgraced Texas congressman who was forced out of office because of drunken philandering and corruption that most certainly would have resulted in ouster and possible prosecution had the Republican controlled House Ethics Committee pursued their investigation.

The current organization's members are represented at every level of government, but their efforts seem calculated to reinforce a corporate will rather than any substantive protest. In fact there's an hysterical Media Matters vid on youtube that demonstrates the stupidity of their members very very well -- kinda like the 'keep your hands off my medicare' crowd, sporting teabag laden hats.

This type of fake grass roots effort is called 'astroturf' in the biz, and it is replicated in many different cities and on many different issues, including here in Sacramento with the mayor's 'strong mayor initiative' support group 'Sacramentans for Accountable Government' or whatever it has morphed into these days, completely lacking in substantive social grass roots and heavily financed by a small group of local elites.

But the 'teaparty' seems to be losing steam of late -- they cancelled their confab in LV in August using the excuse of 'the heat', when in fact they just couldn't sell enough tickets.

I think they are this year's Teddy Ruxpin and I doubt they'll make much of an impact by November -- so much so that I believe both houses of congress will remain in Democratic hands, with a possible gain in the Senate.