toldailytopic: What do you think of the Tea Party movement?

[Nydhogg]

Heathens are not godless.

I should know, I'm a Heathen. We actually worship 32 gods, give one take one, although the big ones are roughly 10.


As for the rest of Nick M's rant, yes I'm worried.


Libertarians have routinely sided with the hardline Right to get their taxes cut. If Americans genuinely believe the Tea Party has a libertarian component to it, we're all screwed.

They'll elect a "true right winger" (for Nick, that probably means a fundamentalist that is willing to amend the constitution to make it submit to God's word, which is roughly kissing goodbye to freedom), and then the USA will stop being the greatest country in the world.

With a bit of luck the West Coast will secede if that happens. I am not willing to live under such a system and I have no desire to claim political asylum in the EU.


I supported the Tea Party when it started. Spending was out of control and TARP and the spendulus drove me over the edge. Then all the Dominionists and the Palin types and the Keyes types started taking over it and giving it an authoritarian, dominionist spin.

It's a threat.

 

[Nick_A]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for September 15th, 2010 09:57 AM

toldailytopic: What do you think of the Tea Party movement?

Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

There is nothing more repulsive to established politics and the media than those who are so stupid as to value the principles and freedoms America was founded upon.

So left to themselves, these people gradually formed this tea party that furthers these ideas in spite of the media and established politics.

It is very insulting. Who do these people think they are. We have experts to tell them what to do and they have the nerve to read the constitution and the founding fathers as guides rather than believe established politics and the elitist media. Terrible. Just terrible.

Well it just goes to show how far I've sunk since I support the need for the Tea Party to wake people up to what they are losing.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

With stuff like this coming from the left it's not hard to imagine why the Tea Party is gaining strength.

The left.

 

[kmoney]

I like the fact that a bunch of people are finally mad about something, but by and large the so-called Tea Party movement's composed of useful idiots.

It's interesting you said that. And by interesting I mean expected. But it might not be completely true. I just heard an NPR piece today about the Tea Party and the guy said that the Tea Party is actually composed of a significant number of intelligent people. It's easy to find media coverage of racist signs, etc., but perhaps that truly is the fringe and the majority of them are informed, concerned voters.


Another main point by the person was that its decentralized structure is both a blessing and a curse. Without a clear leadership, it's near impossible to drown out the lunatics that give them a bad name.





As for the topic - I like the Tea Party. Not necessarily because I agree with them on every point, but because, as others have mentioned, they are starting to change the dynamic in politics and may force some good changes. The 2-party system doesn't like them and I like anything that the 2-party system doesn't like.

I also wouldn't be surprised if TB is right though, that next year the Tea Party will just be a memory of the past.

 

[rexlunae]

There's no one face to the Tea Party, so it's hard to comment overall, but mostly I think it's powered by an engine of misdirected rage.

 

[kmoney]

There's no one face to the Tea Party, so it's hard to comment overall, but mostly I think it's powered by an engine of misdirected rage.

Where is this misdirected rage going?

 

[Cracked]

Guilty of what? Association of whom?? :idunno:

I mean that they will bare the disdain that there fellow baggers really only deserve - their mission, if you will, will be tainted by the nastiness present in the movement.

 

[Cracked]

And if you say that enough times, some people will start to believe you.

partisan - Where were they during Dubya's administration spending binge? If a repub gets a elected, I think you'll see the bagger group diminishing.

ignorant - bagger leaders have claimed that they have organized people who tend to stay away from politics. If 13% of Americans believe that Obama is a Muslim (as some polls show), I would bet my hat that those 13% are most are likely tea baggers or sympathetic to them. To be sure, there are certainly a group of fairly educated, wealthy, white men (predominantly) present, of course.

racist - I've seen many signs carried by the baggers at their various rallies and protests that are racist. These people are mixed right in with non-racists baggers with little condemnation (if any - actually, there might have been someone in the bagger group leadership that denounced these other baggers, I seem to remember something along those lines).

hucksters - Sarah Palin and Glen Beck. Case closed.

 

[Cracked]

Here's what I would do -
Get rid of the huckster leadership.
Strongly and consistently condemn the racist and ignorant elements publicly. Seek to inform/reform them or remove them from the group.
Maintain the movement through conservative governmental leadership - time will tell on this one.

Do this, and the tea baggers are looking pretty good.

 

[The Berean]

Here's what I would do -
Get rid of the huckster leadership.
Strongly and consistently condemn the racist and ignorant elements publicly. Seek to inform/reform them or remove them from the group.
Maintain the movement through conservative governmental leadership - time will tell on this one.

Do this, and the tea baggers are looking pretty good.

How about having Ice-T and Ice Cube in charge? :mrt:

 

[Alate_One]

Which is why Reagn got 60% of the vote in '84. But then again, look who is talking there, one of the TOL retards who doesn't know that spontaneous generation was proven wrong by the law of biogensis.

Reagan was not close to what the tea party stands for today. Was Reagan for repealing social security and getting rid of the department of Education? How about thinking the civil rights act infringes on private businesses?

Even Karl Rove thinks they're destructive to the republicans.

This objection from someone that apparently can't tell the difference between spontaneous generation and evolution. Not surprising you can't tell what is mainstream or moderate in politics either.

 

[The Horn]

"Powered by an engine of misdirected rage". Very well put !!!
Bravo ! I couldn't have put it better myself.
The problem with the tea partiers is that they support politicians,or potential ones who haven't served in any political office, who would be much,much worse than Obama and his administration, or any of the current democrats in Washington, as imperfect as they are .
And it's so presumptuous to compare themselves to the original Americans back in the 18th century who inspired the term they use for themselves.Those tea partiers had legitimate grievances of an entirely different kind.
They claim to want "limited government" ,but too many of them want unlimited power for the government to pry into our bedrooms and elsewhere. They want to bring"morality" back to America. But WHOSE morality? They have absolutely no monopoly on morality and the truth.
They want to "Take America back". But to what? !7th century
New England run by the Puritans? Or the middle ages? This is progress?

 

[elohiym]

partisan - Where were they during Dubya's administration spending binge? If a repub gets a elected, I think you'll see the bagger group diminishing.

That speaks nothing about the emerging Tea Party movement, and it's pointless speculation on your part.

ignorant - bagger leaders have claimed that they have organized people who tend to stay away from politics. If 13% of Americans believe that Obama is a Muslim (as some polls show), I would bet my hat that those 13% are most are likely tea baggers or sympathetic to them. To be sure, there are certainly a group of fairly educated, wealthy, white men (predominantly) present, of course.

So some people believe that Obama is lying about his true religious beliefs and you conclude that Tea Party members are ignorant?

racist - I've seen many signs carried by the baggers at their various rallies and protests that are racist.

So all someone has to do to destroy a movements credibility in your mind is hire some people with racist signs and stand among them during rallies.

hucksters - Sarah Palin and Glen Beck. Case closed.

Right, because that proves Tea Party members are hucksters.

 

[Cracked]

That speaks nothing about the emerging Tea Party movement, and it's pointless speculation on your part.

No, its not. They came into being during the presidency of a democrat after much of the damage had been done. Either their timing is very poor, or they are disingenuous.

So some people believe that Obama is lying about his true religious beliefs and you conclude that Tea Party members are ignorant?

Yes - those particular ones are. If Obama were to say he was a Muslim, I would say, "meh." Which is the same thing I say when he claims to be Christian. These people actively seek to demonize him by calling him a Muslim because of some rumor pulled painfully from his name, color of his skin, supposed "real" place of birth, etc. It is ignorant.

So all someone has to do to destroy a movements credibility in your mind is hire some people with racist signs and stand among them during rallies.

LOL - I suppose this is possible, but I don't think it is necessary. As I noted, consistent and public condemnation of such elements is warranted.

Right, because that proves Tea Party members are hucksters.

No, not all tea baggers are hucksters, but the two goofballs who are the face of tea baggerism are.

 

[Nick M]

Reagan was not close to what the tea party stands for today. Was Reagan for repealing social security and getting rid of the department of Education? How about thinking the civil rights act infringes on private businesses?

Yep. He made deals with Tip O'Neal. That was his one downfall. He thought they would actually keep their promises and scale those things back.

The Tea Party and Reagan are much much closer than what Bush and Karl Rove are to Reagan. And you really really are an idiot.

 

[PyramidHead]

can't really support a party that wants to abolish public education :^(

 

[Nick M]

can't really support a party that wants to abolish public education :^(

I sure can!

 

[PyramidHead]

I sure can!

is it the education part that bothers you, or the fact you gotta pay taxes for it

 

[The Graphite]

In principle, the Tea Party movement is great, and drastically needed to clean up the terribly compromised Republican Party.

But, they need to wrap their head around the fact that blood trumps money -- abortion is absolutely more important than matters of fiscal policy! May we never say that "Bob Smith does support the legal murder of millions of innocent human beings, but I do like his thoughts on tax policy and his position on school choice." The Tea Party must stand on conservative principles, and there is no division between "moral issues" and "fiscal issues," because all fiscal issues are moral issues. Therefore, they cannot be divided or treated separately. And while all political issues are moral issues, some are more important than others. Widespread, "legal" killing of children must be more important than money matters.

The movement is already playing with fire, courting pro-homosexual, pro-abortion RINOs like Sara Palin. It is already acting very favorable and friendly toward the Libertarian philosophy (ie. immoral conservatives). But, this is exactly what corrupted the Republican Party and sent it into the direction it's going in, now. This is what caused the problem to begin with. When the Republican Party began compromising on the most fundamental moral issues (the right to exist), the rest was inevitable. If a man is willing to compromise on the killing of children, what will he not compromise on? It is the "gateway drug" to liberalism for political conservatives. It is the first step on the road to hell.

It is still early. We cannot afford to sell out our conservative moral principles so early in the game to the likes of Palin and others who publicly defend keeping abortion legal. Here in Colorado, we were duped by Dan Maes who claimed to be 100% pro-life. He must be using the Nat'l Right to Life standard of "100%" since as soon as he won the primary he quickly appointed a pro-abortion extremist as his running mate, and publicly trivialized and demeaned the Personhood amendment (62) on the ballot this fall, with dismissive arrogance.

By compromising on these issues, we then continue to play by the big party rules of the GOP, and they do that better than we do. We can't beat them in the "compromised pseudo-conservative politics" game. They've perfected it. The only hope we have is to stand on the righteous standard of Jesus Christ. To do otherwise is to be worldly and yoke ourselves to the world, and there is no hope in that, even if we win elections. After all, what good is it for us to get our guys in office if our guys are the enemy? Is that the victory we yearn to cheer for?

If the Tea Party derails by compromising on such fundamental values as the very right to live... it will be nothing more than Republican Party #2, and what is the point in that?

 

[rexlunae]

Where is this misdirected rage going?

Whereever it is lead. Mostly against Obama and the Democrats, or anyone they can reach.