Tea Party Events

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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
That's just arguing semantics.


There were too many causes being rallied against, all of them government caused and/or controlled.
 
Should we also be ashamed of "The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants"?
Click to expand...

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



WildyourviolenceinoktheirsisntAlaska TM
 
LOL...read Lenins line below. Same same, just depends how you look at it
Click to expand...
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.
 
Last edited:
MrNiceGuy said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

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

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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
That's just arguing semantics.
Click to expand...

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.
 
you're taking semantics to a whole new level.


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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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.
 
Personally, I think it would be a very bad idea... For no other reason than the fact that some of these types of events tend to turn violent. Not to say that these will, but the possibility exists. I would tread carefully at any/all events like these, whether carrying or not, if I were to decide to go at all...
Click to expand...

So, because "some of these events tend to turn violent" the OP should not open carry? Why, exactly? Not that any of these were violent, BTW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top