Why Is Everyone Calling Tea-Partiers Conservative Republicans When It Started During The Bush Admini

I'm just wondering
Every news article I read when they refer to the tea party they depict them as republicans and conservatives when their birth was during the previous presidency.

It doesn't make any sense, perhaps anti tea partiers can enlighten me

Thoughts?

reply to post by ModernAcademia


The tea party was originally a grass roots libertarian leaning movement begun mainly by followers of Ron Paul. It didn't take long for the conservatives to hi-jack it... basically once they had lost the Presidency and realized how much everyone hated them for driving us into the ground for 8 years they decided they needed fresh blood, which is where hi-jacking the tea party came in. What began as a movement of the people is now a puppet movement driven by politicians.

The tea party brings in fresh faces but no fresh ideas, just the same Conservative pseudo-libertarian garbage continuously peddled by Conservatives...Just like Obama was supposedly bringing in change but ended up being very middle of the road.

So Conservatives are angry at Obama for being centrist just like the Liberals are... the left and right fringes will duke it out while the ordinary Americans, mostly centrists and moderates, are left scratching our heads.

Because after Obama got elected it was infiltrated by republicans. It started out as a true grass roots movement, but now it is just a gimmicky way that republicans found they could use to their advantage. The true Tea Party movement is dead.

I personally don't understand the tea party movement anyhow.

A federal movement to complain about their taxes...yet most of them pay little to no federal taxes.

If anything, this should be a state to state tax as that is the thing that tends to hammer the middle class most of all...only the wealthy get hit with significant federal taxes, and...well, they are wealthy.

So, who is the tea party ultimately serving anyhow?

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
I'm just wondering
Every news article I read when they refer to the tea party they depict them as republicans and conservatives when their birth was during the previous presidency.

It doesn't make any sense, perhaps anti tea partiers can enlighten me

Thoughts?

The Tea parties in 2007 came about as a rally for Republican candidate Ron Paul, that is where it started. While there were criticisms of the Bush administration (in time for the general elections) it was not the basis for the tea parties back then, it was a campaign to raise money and rally Ron Paul towards the presidency to the start of the presidential election period. Back then the tea parties accounted for what? up to 7000 people in that march. Switch to a year and half later, around 75,000 conservatives, around 4 months after Obama has been sworn to the presidency, around 6 months after the financial collapse and bail outs, 6 and a half years after the passing of the patriot act, the conservative base in its majority decided to join the tea parties.

The tea parties are a movement of conservatives and Republicans because if that was not the case, we would have seen the tea parties following the passing of the patriot act, following the Iraq war, by the least following the bail outs, following the financial collapse. Aside from the years of keeping shut by much of the conservative voting base, you'd have to ask yourself why they did not come out in their 10,000's following the bail outs and the financial collapse? Maybe because they were playing their cards and expecting a McCain win?

Mind you, at Glenn Beck's 9/12 movement around 75,000 tea party protesters came up, afew thousand less than the April tea parties but similar nevertheless. If this was a grassroots movement agains the establishment we would not see the likes of Glenn Beck and Palin hold such influence over the movement.

Now you can argue that you spoke out against the Bush administration, that you never voted Republican, it still does not change the fact that the movement is flooded with that Republican and Bush ilk and without them the movement would not gain a blink of attention. That is the reality.

how can ANYONE think the tea party associated with ron Paul from around 07 is related in ANY WAY to the FreedomWorks Dick Armey 'Tea Party" of today?

Really. how?

Originally posted by SaturnFX
I personally don't understand the tea party movement anyhow.

A federal movement to complain about their taxes...yet most of them pay little to no federal taxes.

Whoa there Saturn...

You think perhaps they don't pay "enough" in taxes? How about these for starters?

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL License Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Federal Income Tax Federal
Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Tax
Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax)
IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Tax
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service charge taxes
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax (Truckers) Sales Taxes
Recreational Vehicle T ax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Tax
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Tax
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax

Perhaps you honestly think the poor don't pay enough already in taxes, but I disagree. So does Ezra Klein...

Do the poor really pay no taxes? by Ezra Klein WaPo

Didn't the Tea party start in 09?
When President Obama went into office?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
I'm just wondering
Every news article I read when they refer to the tea party they depict them as republicans and conservatives when their birth was during the previous presidency.

It doesn't make any sense, perhaps anti tea partiers can enlighten me

Thoughts?

The Tea parties in 2007 came about as a rally for Republican candidate Ron Paul, that is where it started.

I thought the tea party was started by Rick Santelli, which I heard live on CNBC. In fact, they have even called it "Rick Santelli's Shout Heard 'Round the Worldck Santelli's Shout Heard 'Round the World" By: CNBC.com | 22 Feb 2009 | 04:51PM ET

Sorry, I just can't let Ron Paul take credit for the Taxed Enough Already (TEA) Parties, even though I agree with him about 65%.

Originally posted by Southern GuardianMind you, at Glenn Beck's 9/12 movement around 75,000 tea party protesters came up, afew thousand less than the April tea parties but similar nevertheless. If this was a grassroots movement agains the establishment we would not see the likes of Glenn Beck and Palin hold such influence over the movement.

If think you're thinking of the 9/12 Rally...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a3ce982cea6e.gif[/atsimg]

I think you're mistaken.

Caption should be 9/12 Rally v that other one... by SEIU

Originally posted by Jewish_Chick_With_Glasses
Didn't the Tea party start in 09?
When President Obama went into office?

Yes ma'am you are correct! Star for you!!

Originally posted by Califemme

Originally posted by SaturnFX
I personally don't understand the tea party movement anyhow.

A federal movement to complain about their taxes...yet most of them pay little to no federal taxes.

Whoa there Saturn...

You think perhaps they don't pay "enough" in taxes? How about these for starters?

Almost all of those are NOT federal tax, but rather local and state tax.

So, my point remains.

Originally posted by Califemme

Originally posted by Southern GuardianMind you, at Glenn Beck's 9/12 movement around 75,000 tea party protesters came up, afew thousand less than the April tea parties but similar nevertheless. If this was a grassroots movement agains the establishment we would not see the likes of Glenn Beck and Palin hold such influence over the movement.

If think you're thinking of the 9/12 Rally...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a3ce982cea6e.gif[/atsimg]

I think you're mistaken.

Caption should be 9/12 Rally v that other one... by SEIU

edit on 15-10-2010 by Califemme because: Caption should be 9/12Rally v that other one...

edit on 15-10-2010 by Califemme because: (no reason given)

So what your saying then is that the whole scary socialist liberal progressive movement sweeping the nation is in fact a media creation?

go figure...

but how can that be...Beck cries about it nightly..surely he wouldn't be drumming up some fantasy nonsense just for ratings

reply to post by SaturnFX


You should realize by now that the U.S. is not a nation where the majority rules. The majority is the source of all of the minority's problems, and is thus denied rights to fair trials, equal representation, free speech, and fair taxation.

Similarly, it is the evil empire of businesses and wealthy people that cause people to be poor. Therefor it is decided they are no longer entitled to their paycheck and it shall be divided amongst the voting people.

The 'healthcare reform' bill highlights the problem. Whether there is a substantial power-base these ideals are coming from, or not is rather irrelevant to the fact that they are being written into our legislation - and apparently plenty of people are rather upset about this.

Many are just 'waking up' to what is going on or, has been going on. Others are just now getting vocal, as the policies are beginning to visibly strain the economic outlook (The Confederacy did not form until their way of surviving was threatened - while slavery was a key issue, it was one of many issues leading to the first civil war... strangely enough, slaves were predominantly used in the North for a very long time to come - mostly as children taken from orphanages or immigrants from Europe - slavery of 'white' races was more common and brutal than 'black' slaves (more expensive, considered more physically tolerant, and thus not as expendable as orphans and the like)).

I recall listening to a radio show back around the announcement of the healthcare reform bill back in 09, and the host had been talking about the old tea party and commented on starting a "tea party." I want to say it was Hannity - but it could also have been Beck or one of the local network runs.

I'm sure the overall movement existed before then (perhaps even the "tea party" name) - but I thought it was rather cute at the time, and started listening a few months later and it's a fairly substantial movement called the "tea party."

I'm not sure where the actual name originated - but many conservatives (I would consider libertarians to be conservatives - they may disagree but that's too bad) have long been upset with the way things have been going. It is just approaching the "straw that broke the camel's back." Passing any bill longer than five pages is ridiculous. Handle funding requests separately and stop trying to append crap that has nothing to do with the title of the bill - no one wants to vote down the "make our schools better" bill because it looks bad... but it's got twice the amount of money spent on the original purpose going to things completely unrelated to the bill's title purpose. That's bull.

Congress should only have to pass legislation once in a blue moon. It shouldn't be a "hey, let's pass a law regarding that issue that one county in Ohio is having, because we need to do something this month, or fund more research on frisbees.... something..."

reply to post by Califemme


Sadly, this is just a small portion of what is taxed. I think the bottom line is that everything is taxed repeatedly...