Can someone explain to me what the Tea Party movement actually is

Star fight happening


Jenna vs. Curiousisall....top of page 10 is where i became a participant

reply to post by St Udio


What on earth is a star fight?

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
reply to post by davespanners

 

...
I remember Republican President Ronald Reagan's "Tear down this wall" speech at the Berlin Wall that separated Germany for decades. Yet what was good for the opposite side of the planet is not good for Americas' southern border with Mexico according to most Tea Party members I know of, they are not in favor of Illegal Immigration, support more laws against immigration, and want to use more tax dollars to enforce a security wall across the southern border with Mexico. At least their rhetoric seems to project this opinion.
...

h
The Berlin Wall, built by the East German government to keep East Germans from fleeing their socialist paradise for freedom in West Berlin, is substantively different than a wall to force people to go through customs and immigration at a border crossing in order to enter a country.

reply to post by Curiousisall


Disclaimer: I am not part of the TEA Party movement. I have never been to a TEA Party meeting, but I have watched a few on TV.

The TEA Party is a coalition of conservative Democrats, Independents, and Republicans who think that were are taxed too much already and the government is pending too much. It was the Bush and Obama bailouts and stimulus spending that was the catalyst for the formation of the TEA Party.

If the TEA Party is a wing of the Republican Party, then why did Karl Rove get so upset that TEA Party endorsed candidates won Republican primaries?

The TEA Party is just as much a threat to the Establishment, Conservative, Big Government wing of the Republican Party (maybe more so) as it is to the Democrat Party.

reply to post by davespanners

The Tea Party Movement is nothing more than people with the same ideas and ideals that America's Founding Fathers had. And, yes, it's that simple. 70% of what our government does is contrary to our Constitution, and it's time to begin getting back to basics.

Originally posted by jimmyx
3 themes i have heard from the tea party:

1...take back the country
2...give freedoms back
3...smaller government

all 3 are lacking in detail, and if given any detail, most of the consequences are left out or not fully explained.
the few that have details do not benefit the middle class or poor
therefore, my conclusion is that it is a movement that i do not agree with.

The middle class or the poor? Maybe one tenth of one percent of America's population is truly poor, and they like it that way. 39% of Americans do not pay taxes, and therefore should not be allowed to vote, because they don't have a dog in the fight. Reducing the size of government will definitely help the middle class, and everyone else.
High taxation takes, by force, freedoms. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

Originally posted by pajoly
The Tea Party, as it is today constituted, is made up of zealot evangelical American Christians. This group has been paid lip service by the establishment Republicans for about 25 years now. Those main stream Republicans would cater to them during an election period, then ignore them when they were elected. They voted reliably Republican, just as much as the American Black votes Democratic. However, during that 25 years these ultra-right theocrat leaning fascists slowly amassed power at the local level in school boards and city councils. From there, even as their churches gained massive power, they began founding universities, think tanks and funding candidates for congress in the U.S. House of Representatives. All this influence was only talked about in periodic pieces, with no one really connecting the dots of their path to power. Now, they have amassed enough power and indoctrinated enough of their zealot brethren, that they are the defacto Christian Church in America having usurped (and labeled as invalid and not really Christian) all the historic and moderate Christian groups. As rabid evangelicals, it is their literal mission to convert, by any means necessary. They are so righteous that they believe only they know the truth and that ignorant arrogance extends to their polical views, to their demented interpretation of the Constitution. They believe they have the Divine Right to power and they will have. The Media is having too much fun with the conflict and easy press this "Tea Party" affords them and much like the "normal" Republicans before them, they will not really take this threat seriously until it consumes us all.

In short, the Tea Party and the is Christian Right lunacy is worse than than the Wiemer Republic because it uses God. In short, the Tea Party is the greatest threat to a stable United States and that makes it the greates threat to everyone in the world, and that includes you.

Oh..... you mean like the Founding Fathers? Have you ever read the Constitution and Bill of Rights? You should read the Federalist Papers, and you'd realize that most of what the tea party members believe in is quite correct.

Originally posted by inforeal
The Tea party is just the wolf putting on a different or new clothing to mask the fact that they are still, just like most republican conservative philosophy, the wolf in sheep’s clothing.

They ruined the American economy under Herbert Hoover in the early thirties,
Ronald Reagan in the eighties, and George Bush in 2007 with the same old republican ideas of cutting taxes for the rich and neglecting the nations overall interests for the interests of the few . . . . And they will try to do it again under the Tea Party philosophy if they get enough of them elected.

Excuse me, but who taught you that? Obviously someone who knows nothing about economics. Reagans tax cuts gave America over 85 months of unparalleled economic growth. In 2005, America generated more NEW wealth than the entire economy of China. Employment was at 100%, the stock market was almost 15,000, and consumer confidence was at an all time high.

Originally the Tea Party was a somewhat noble conservative group in American politics and went largely unnoticed. They were true conservatives that believe foreign entanglements drain the treasury and therfor our wars are not good.

After Obama won the election there was a great unsettlement among the right wing bible banging racists in America and they hijacked the tea party. Later the tea party was embraced by Fox news, who is owned by Murdock and hates America and tailors their programming to divide us.

Watching the tea party is watching the republican party destroy itself before our very eyes. They are getting central leaning republicans out of office in favor of more right wing extremist... They eat their young! The tea baggers are a bunch of fear mongering, bigot idealouges that spout puppet rhetoric for big buisness. They typically have no original thought and only repeat what the AM radio baffoons spout. They are a very angry and fearful group, looking to obstruct their president at every turn regardless of how ridiculous. Its also a very hypocritical group, as most of them are older and on medicare yet they are against socialized medicine.
They are not the majority in America by any means, they are just very loud. Hatred is alive and well, many of them may not even realize their true f'd up internal motivations. Facts and truth are a tea-baggers worst enemy since their stances are usually based on irrational fears and special interests.

Originally posted by davespanners
Being a Brit I tend to stay away from the US politics discussions as I don't have much to contribute, but I see the phrases Tea Part movement bought up so many times lately that I really feel I should know more about it.

I've read the wiki page but that didn't clarify it much for me.

Can anyone give me a nice simple concise explanation of who they are, what their goals are etc.as I can't make head nor tail of it.

Originally, the Tea Party was a movement that expressed this community's concerns about the government, which had been gradually hijacked by the Rockefeller Cartel (look it up), particularly in the last decade. What happened was the Republican Party, a puppet of said cartel, infiltrated and hijacked the whole movement and made a mockery of it. I'm sure other people have a slightly different interpretation, but I've done my reading and that's my basic assessment.

reply to post by Syrus Magistus


I'm saddened to say that at this date, my opinion has changed. They have absolutely been hijacked by the Republican Party. What started out as a movement of ordinary people trying to get the government (and America) back on track with a little common sense (like stop spending money you don't have), has been usurped by the old "talking heads" of the GOP, stepping in and destroying it.

I personally changed my opinion on the movement (though I believe in the idea of political reform, less centralized government, and less taxes [and what revunue that is collected spent smarter]) when TEA partiers ran under the GOP ticket. I would have preferred they run Independent, on their own merit. Because they didn't, they are now shackled to the GOP.

I haven't been this disappointed since Colin Powell let me down at the UN in 2003. (I think he should have stuck to his own doctrine and resigned and instead of going along).

reply to post by indianajoe77


I am much more concerned with our disappearing civil liberties than overspending. The real truth is that most of the money we've lost is being spent on black budget projects that are unfathomable to the American public. Trillions each month have been sucked up until quite recently. The picture is much bigger than our line of sight.

Originally posted by indianajoe77
I personally changed my opinion on the movement [...] when TEA partiers ran under the GOP ticket. I would have preferred they run Independent, on their own merit. Because they didn't, they are now shackled to the GOP.

You do realize that to get into the primaries they had to run as either a Republican or a Democrat, right? Yeah they could have waited until November to get on the ballot as an Independent, but then they would be running against one more person than they will be by getting into and winning the primary in their area. Getting into and winning the primary was a smart move if you ask me since it knocks out some of the competition and lessens the chance of a good candidate getting overlooked because people just vote for the name they recognize from the last election.

It's not the letter that comes after someone's name on the ballot that's important, it's how much you agree with their stances on the issues that are important to you and how well they stick to their guns and listen to their constituents instead of just toeing the party line.

reply to post by Jenna


Could you clarify something for me. I ask not to argue but because I admit I just do not know. What are the issue/policy differences between the Tea Party supported Republicans and the regular Republicans?

reply to post by Curiousisall


Depends on the person, really. Many of the Republicans and Democrats currently in office have a history of saying one thing and doing another, while the new tea-party-backed Republicans, Libertarians, Democrats, and Independents generally do not. Could they end up being the same as the people already in office? Sure. If they turn out that way, then we need to vote them back out until we get someone in office who isn't the same as the rest. Voting the same idiots back in at every election and expecting things to change is just insanity.

Originally posted by Curiousisall
reply to post by Jenna

 

Could you clarify something for me. I ask not to argue but because I admit I just do not know. What are the issue/policy differences between the Tea Party supported Republicans and the regular Republicans?

Nothing....

You can put lipstick on a pig but it's still a pig.

Originally posted by Jenna
You do realize that to get into the primaries they had to run as either a Republican or a Democrat, right/

There is nothing stopping the tea parties from rallying behind third party candidates. There was never anything that prevented them from doing so, neither do I buy the excuse that they had to choose between Democrat and Republican. The choices are out there yet the general consensus for the tea parties are for Republican candidates.

Originally posted by Jenna
reply to post by Curiousisall

 

Many of the Republicans and Democrats currently in office have a history of saying one thing and doing another, while the new tea-party-backed Republicans,

The Republican candidates running on tea party endorsements are using the same political talk many of the incumbent Republicans used in the past. There is nothing different from what these tea party backed Republicans are running on other than the fact they are 'tea party backed'. As to whether they will make a different to the Republican establishment or mentality, I highly doubt it.

Libertarians,

Libertarians have a very small share of the tea party vote and there are no signs showing any changes. As you referenced earlier, the last libertarian candidates who ran for Massachusetts got 1% of the vote while their Republican tea party counter part got more than 55%. So I find it amusing that your telling us about 'tea party backed libertarian candidates', its a complete joke if you ask me.

Democrats,

Tea party backed Democrat?

Could they end up being the same as the people already in office? Sure. If they turn out that way, then we need to vote them back out until we get someone in office who isn't the same as the rest.

So the tea parties will continue to back in their majorities the same kind of Republicans with the same kind of political talk every campaign year.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
There is nothing stopping the tea parties from rallying behind third party candidates.

No there wasn't. They also couldn't get into the primaries without running as a Republican or a Democrat either.

There was never anything that prevented them from doing so, neither do I buy the excuse that they had to choose between Democrat and Republican.

To take part in the primaries, yes they did. As far as I'm aware no state has primaries for Independents, Libertarians, or any other third party out there.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
There is nothing different from what these tea party backed Republicans are running on other than the fact they are 'tea party backed'. As to whether they will make a different to the Republican establishment or mentality, I highly doubt it.

As I said, if they turn out to be more of the same then they should be voted right back out at the next election. Leaving the same idiots in office and expecting something different to happen than the same stuff they always do is insanity.

So I find it amusing that your telling us about 'tea party backed libertarian candidates', its a complete joke if you ask me.

Unsurprising really since you find anything you don't agree with completely to be amusing, a lie, or a joke.

So the tea parties will continue to back in their majorities the same kind of Republicans with the same kind of political talk every campaign year.

What? That sentence doesn't even make any sense and I can't for the life of me figure out how it applies to what you responded to with it.

Originally posted by Jenna
No there wasn't. They also couldn't get into the primaries without running as a Republican or a Democrat either.

Again, there is nothing stopping voters from rallying third party candidates or third parties. The fact there are only Republicans and Democrats hosting primaries does not mean the tea parties cannot rally behind a third party. The tea parties just as Democratic voters have the opportunity to change the political landscape and rally third party, but they choose not to. It has nothing to do with them not being allowed to do so.

To take part in the primaries, yes they did. As far as I'm aware no state has primaries for Independents, Libertarians, or any other third party out there.

And there is nothing stopping libertarians or any other third party from hosting their own primaries. What state laws forbid third parties from hosting their own primaries? I still don't see why just because the Democrats and the Republicans are the only ones holding primaries, does this force people not to vote third party in the elections? This is an excuse to explain why we see no alternative tea party candidates winning elections.

People have access to information, nothing is stopping them from deciding, nothing is stopping the tea parties, yet they continue to rally in their majorities behind Republican and I do not see any change in this.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
As I said, if they turn out to be more of the same then they should be voted right back out at the next election.

In 1990 Republican candidates ran on small government, fiscal and constitutional responsibility, freedom, family values.
In 1994 Republican candidates ran on small government, fiscal and constitutional responsibility, freedom, family values.
In 1998 Republican candidates ran on small government, fiscal and constitutional responsibility, freedom, family values.
In 2002 Republican candidates ran on small government, fiscal and constitutional responsibility, freedom, family values.
2006, same thing.
2010? Whats different? I see nothing different in what these new Republican candidates are running on. it seems as those its the same recycled talking points, and yet you are so insistent that the tea parties will do exactly what loyal Republicans have been doing for the last few decades. This is as much of a problem with the political party establishment as it is with the representitives.