It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Southern Guardian
All true.
EXCEPT..
The Tea Party formed under Bush... not Obama.. it was hi-jacked by the Republican Party as soon as Obama won..
but only because many of the original Tea Party members, out of anger and frustration with the Republicans and Democrats, used their votes as weapons and purposefully cast against Republicans.
I voted Democrat,
But to think the movement started BECAUSE of Obama is ignorance of fact.
The tea parties formed in 2007 as a campaign movement to support Republican candidate Ron Paul. It makes no sense for you to argue that the tea parties were hijacked when they were formed specifically to back a Republican candidate.
So they used their votes as weapons to purposefully cast against the Republicans to vote in a Republican candidate?
Just to clarify, you voted for Obama?
The tea parties in 2008 gained more members because of the election of Obama.
Originally posted by Rockpuck
The "Tea Parties" were formed in 2006 under and actual political party called the Boston Tea Party,
Are you purposefully ignorant? The to parties are hardly black and white.. there are numerous shades of gray.
Paul himself (I assume your talking about Paul again since you made no sense) is shunned by Republicans,
No, I voted (for President) Chuck Baldwin (who Ron Paul endorsed) of the Constitutional Party
Never denied it.
Originally posted by theWCH
Like Rockpuck, I openly endorsed the Democratic party on the grounds that the GOP did NOT represent libertarianism in even the slightest way, shape, or form. I remember seeing hardcore libertarian bloggers endorsing Obama, because he at least seemed to have a clue (McCain didn't) and also because they were fed up with the supposedly "small government" Republican party increasing federal spending and expanding executive powers.
But those people aren't the current Tea Party. Hell, I see Tea Party candidates suggesting prohibition of alcohol (because that worked out so well the last time we tried it ). That's positively anti-Free-Market, and anti-Individual-Liberty.
I regret ever having anything to do with the so-called "Tea Party Movement," but I do think that it's important that people understand that it didn't start out as a GOP/Neo-Conservative movement. Media outlets turned it into a GOP movement.
I'm done with political involvement. I view it the same way that I view Tic-Tac-Toe: The only way to win, is to not play.
Originally posted by theWCH
Like Rockpuck, I openly endorsed the Democratic party on the grounds that the GOP did NOT represent libertarianism in even the slightest way,
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Originally posted by theWCH
Like Rockpuck, I openly endorsed the Democratic party on the grounds that the GOP did NOT represent libertarianism in even the slightest way,
Just to clarify, you voted Democrat? Or did you just find them more favourable during the 2008 elections? Its interesting you and Rockpuck are saying so much on this thread considering your past posts. You essentially support the Democrats who made it clear they were going to bring about healthcare reform, made it clear that they were going to withdraw troops by 2011 and increase troops in afghanistan, made it clear that they were going to bring about financial reform, and yet you and rockpuck here pulled a fuss over all this since Obama got elected... yet you supported the Democrats in 2008? I find that rather hypocritical.