<p>I watched a documentary about the tea party movement in one of my classes today and it was obviously biased (not gonna say whether for or against the movement).</p>
<p>But I want to know, what do you think about the Tea Party movement? (and I’ll be interested to see what people think who are Republicans but are more in the middle).</p>
<p>I personally find the whole thing annoying and unnecessary, but they have the right to speak and demonstrate freely if they feel they must.</p>
<p>What I have a problem with is the out-of-control threats and actions that some extremists of the movement have taken. Namely bigoted and disgusting remarks, death threats, and other questionable things. That is not the way to be taken seriously and it just makes everyone question the legitimacy of the movement.</p>
<p>Edit: And comments like “keep the government off my medicare,” don’t help their cuase either.</p>
<p>Republicans should have never let McCain be the '08 candidate. I agree with caemin, unnecessary and annoying but they have a right to be represented the way they want. The republican party is too broad for its own good, it was inevitable that it would split. </p>
<p>I don’t know if the tea party movement will continue but i’m pretty sure the Republican party will never be the same.</p>
<p>^^LOL yeah, I laughed so hard when I heard the “keep the government off my medicare”.</p>
<p>I personally find the whole thing annoying and unnecessary, but they have the right to speak and demonstrate freely if they feel they must.</p>
<p>What I have a problem with is the out-of-control threats and actions that some extremists of the movement have taken. Namely bigoted and disgusting remarks, death threats, and other questionable things. That is not the way to be taken seriously and it just makes everyone question the legitimacy of the movement. ~ Caemin</p>
<hr>
<p>There are wierdos on both sides of the political spectrum, but oppopsing views only focus on those extremes, which is why nothing is done.</p>
<p>Political, not much separate Democrats (by the traditional definition) and Republicans, however a great deal separates a Progressive/Socialist Liberal and a “Tea Party” Conservative.</p>
<p>For everyone Tea Party member who makes threats, you have a wacko on the other side to balance it out. For example, did you know the liberal groups are protesting/picketing at the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq/Afganistan? That is just as wacky to me, yet people still consider their party/movement legitmate.</p>
<p>Personally, I think they have very common sense views that should be adopted by our leadership.</p>
<p>Taken from Wiki:</p>
<ol>
<li>Identify constitutionality of every new law: Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does (82.03%).</li>
<li>Reject emissions trading: Stop the “cap and trade” administrative approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants. (72.20%).</li>
<li>Demand a balanced federal budget: Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax modification. (69.69%)</li>
<li>Simplify the tax system: Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words – the length of the original Constitution.(64.9%).</li>
<li>Audit federal government agencies for constitutionality: Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in an audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states or local authorities. (63.37%)</li>
<li>Limit annual growth in federal spending: Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of the inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth. (56.57%).</li>
<li>Repeal the health care legislation passed on March 23, 2010: Defund, repeal and replace the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. (56.39%).</li>
<li>Pass an ‘All-of-the-Above’ Energy Policy: Authorize the exploration of additional energy reserves to reduce American dependence on foreign energy sources and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation. (55.5%).</li>
<li>Reduce Earmarks: Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark. (55.47%).</li>
<li>Reduce Taxes: Permanently repeal all recent tax increases, and extend permanently the George W. Bush temporary reductions in income tax, capital gains tax and estate taxes, currently scheduled to end in 2011. (53.38%).</li>
</ol>
<p>[Tea</a> Party movement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement]Tea”>Tea Party movement - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>Other than 2, 7 and 10 (which are more big issues with Liberals) - I don’t see how anyone, in either party could disagree with their agenda. A balanced federal budget, Energy Policy, Reduced earmarks, and constitutionality for every new law seems like pretty good ideas.</p>
<p>Of course 2 and 7 woud/are feverishly opposed by the left, and prior to the election so was 10 - which isn’t a major issue right now.</p>
<p>They are also avid supporters of the 2nd Amendment, which I also support. </p>
<p>You could easily make the argument that some of their (or a segment) tactics hurt their cause, but you could make the same objection by people on the extreme other side of the political debate.</p>
<p>another thing that bothers me is some of the direct hatred leveled at President Obama. It’s one thing to attack his politics but another thing to attack him as a person and to hate him. I can’t help but think whether some of this is fueled by racism. Is there a minority backing of the tea party movement?</p>
<p>Also, some of the conspiracy theories thrown out there by Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are ridiculous (death panel in health care bill, sending Americans to concentration camps down the road)</p>
<p>haha oh yes, lets pin fred phelps as a legitimate democrat. We should shut the dems down because of him…</p>
<p>another thing that bothers me is some of the direct hatred leveled at President Obama. It’s one thing to attack his politics but another thing to attack him as a person and to hate him. I can’t help but think whether some of this is fueled by racism. Is there a minority backing of the tea party movement? ~ Pierre0913</p>
<hr>
<p>Don’t play the race card, America is tired of that…</p>
<p>Let’s not forget, that it was white America who collectively voted Obama into office, many of those voters are now Tea Party members.</p>
<p>The “hatred” isn’t any less intense than the lefts “hatred” for Bush/Cheney, you must have forget the “Bush is a murderer” signs and every other thing under the sun he was called. So if you have a problem with people attacking the “person”, look in your own political backyard.</p>
<p>Personally, I don’t want personal attacks either, but OKing it for one group but being critical of another for the same things is being a hypocrite. </p>
<p>It’s easy to say, “Don’t attack the person”, but like it or not - It’s the person making the decisions.
I can’t say if there is a “minority backing the Tea Party”, but I can certainly say there are minorities within the Tea Party, however they compromise a small percentage, admittedly. However, whether or not minorities back the group is irrelevant, because its a group of Americans - and color really shouldn’t play a factor when analyzing their agenda, unless you just knee-jerk react with RACISM!</p>
<p>^good points</p>
<p>McCain was a decent candidate until he started sucking the GOP party line. Now he’s just like every other politician with an R.</p>
<p>"There are wierdos on both sides of the political spectrum, but oppopsing views only focus on those extremes, which is why nothing is done.</p>
<p>Political, not much separate Democrats (by the traditional definition) and Republicans, however a great deal separates a Progressive/Socialist Liberal and a “Tea Party” Conservative.</p>
<p>For everyone Tea Party member who makes threats, you have a wacko on the other side to balance it out. For example, did you know the liberal groups are protesting/picketing at the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq/Afganistan? That is just as wacky to me, yet people still consider their party/movement legitmate."</p>
<p>I don’t disagree with you (I hate extremism on both sides of the spectrum) but this absolutely disrespectful protesting is done by both liberals and conservatives who seem to think that these deceased soldiers planned the war policy. </p>
<p>In any case, some of the ideas of the Tea Party Movement aren’t bad, but I disagree with the overall message. </p>
<p>And while racism isn’t always the cause (or even a part of) of these protests, it certainly plays a part in those certain bigoted statements that I previously mentioned. </p>
<p>And “death panels” was another one of those statements I find to be both utterly horrible and absolutely hilarious at the same time. I had to pick one though ;)</p>
<p>“4. Simplify the tax system: Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words – the length of the original Constitution.(64.9%).”</p>
<p>Why is it that Conservatives are overwhelmingly against long documents, education, and schooling in general? Are they too dumb to understand the tax code? Do they have short attention spans and cannot focus on reading a document more than 4,543 words? Arbitrarily linking the word limit it to the constitution is pointless. And also, why do they think that going to college is “elitist” and bad?</p>
<p>The thing that frustrates me about the Tea Party the most is that it has absolutely nothing to do with tea.</p>
<p>You’d have to show me some evidence of a conservative group protesting the funeral of a killed soldier, because you aren’t making sense.</p>
<p>As far as racism is concerned (yawnnnn, do we still need to debate that?) Racists aren’t unique to any single party or political affiliation, and most of the drummed up racism has been just that, drummed up and manipulated to serve an agenda.</p>
<p>If people don’t agree with the Tea Party’s agenda - fine. But I think they are missing the overall big picture. The fact that there is a legitimate movement that is gaining enough momentum to become a third party is incredible. The two party system has abused out country for long enough, and never before has a third party had enough backing to actually get candidates elected until now.</p>
<p>I have no issue with saying the Tea Party is extreme, however don’t turn the blind eye to your own splinter cell of a political organization - Progressives, who are now in control of the Democratic party. They two are “extreme” and have separated from their affiliation, they just weren’t willing to walk away from their voting base and support individual candidates. Because the current Democratic Party is nothing like the traditional Democratic party you saw in the 50’s, this is the 60’s marxist philosophy being shoved down the countries throat.</p>
<p>If you could put a “tag line” on the Tea Party, it would have to be the party of small government, which is something I just don’t understand how anyone COULD NOT support. I mean, who really wants more government? When has the government ever done anything efficiently, under-cost, and then passed control back to the people? Once the government gets control of something, it never gives it back - and the problem is then just shoved onto the tax payer (auto bailout prime example). The problem then becomes more rampant, because it’s no longer being contained by actual budgets and free market principles (such as - if you aren’t making money you close), but taxpayers - which have no control in how the money is dispersed.</p>
<p>I always found it odd that the Liberal 60’s movement was mainly an anti-government movement, yet today those same liberals embrace government and want to turn over all it’s control to the very people they protested against, doesn’t that seem odd to anyone else? </p>
<p>In our current system, the party dictates what candidates come up for nomination and election. Is that what you want? I mean what is the point? Sure, you get to vote for whom you wish, but when a party controls what people you are able to vote for, what’s the point? Because as of right now, no candidates make it passed the primaries without party consent, approval and endorsment - and MONEY!</p>
<p>It’s a puppet system. Your vote is worthless, because they know you are gonna vote for one of two people, who are both part of their party. </p>
<p>See what I mean?</p>
<p>Now, this same situation may occur with the Tea Party years out, we don’t know. But right now, I’d much rather cast my vote for them than some party line puppet.</p>
<p>Why is it that Conservatives are overwhelmingly against long documents, education, and schooling in general? Are they too dumb to understand the tax code? Do they have short attention spans and cannot focus on reading a document more than 4,543 words? Arbitrarily linking the word limit it to the constitution is pointless. And also, why do they think that going to college is “elitist” and bad? ~ 2black69</p>
<hr>
<p>Not sure what you are saying about education and schooling, at least not with how it relates to government verbage in bills.</p>
<p>If you are saying that liberals favor the current school system more than conservatives, than be my guest. Because anyone who would support this mess of a system is a few Aces short of a full deck.</p>
<p>The point is - no one is reading the bills! Did you take a look at the health care bill? That was a joke. The politicians who were voting on the bill didn’t even read the darn thing - because people don’t have time to read a 800 page bill.</p>
<p>Secondly, it eliminates obscure, hypcritical language that can later be used to refute the intended meaning of the bill.</p>
<p>Thirdly, it lessens ear marks and pork belly spending.</p>
<p>“If you could put a “tag line” on the Tea Party, it would have to be the party of small government, which is something I just don’t understand how anyone COULD NOT support. I mean, who really wants more government? When has the government ever done anything efficiently, under-cost, and then passed control back to the people? Once the government gets control of something, it never gives it back - and the problem is then just shoved onto the tax payer (auto bailout prime example). The problem then becomes more rampant, because it’s no longer being contained by actual budgets and free market principles (such as - if you aren’t making money you close), but taxpayers - which have no control in how the money is dispersed.”</p>
<p>Your problem is that you lack the inability to see how another person views the situation. I could go out and say honestly how could anyone not support a larger government? I love how the FCC keeps the airwaves clean so I don’t have to hear garbage when a rap song comes on the radio. I love how the government established a national highway system that can get me from Miami to Seattle or New York to Los Angeles quickly. I love how the FDA ensures that my food is safe to eat. (The Jungle anybody?)</p>
<p>To BigeastBeast: A longer bill ensures that there are more details to make the bill better. I did read the health care bill and I am glad that it passed. It seems that Conservatives cannot comprehend a large bill and just want everything dumbed down for them.</p>
<p>I am a moderate-conservative Republican and am relatively undecided on the Tea Party movement. I’m against runaway spending and all that, but not really a deficiet hawk. I’m more of a free trade type of guy in terms of issues of economic importance, which isn’t really a prime issue of the Tea Party.</p>
<p>Your problem is that you lack the inability to see how another person views the situation. I could go out and say honestly how could anyone not support a larger government? I love how the FCC keeps the airwaves clean so I don’t have to hear garbage when a rap song comes on the radio. I love how the government established a national highway system that can get me from Miami to Seattle or New York to Los Angeles quickly. I love how the FDA ensures that my food is safe to eat. (The Jungle anybody?) ~ 2black69</p>
<hr>
<p>Please, that’s lame. </p>
<p>No one said the government shouldn’t provide basic functions (security/le, public works, defense), but give me a break. This is turning into a nanny-state.</p>
<p>I don’t believe for one minute you read the health care bill, you can protest all you want - but I don’t believe you. I would wager not a single members of the House or Senate read that bill.</p>
<p>Dems just want longer bills so they can fit more pork and crap into it without people noticing. </p>
<p>If you really believe that longer bills mean more details, then I got some ocean front property in Nebraska to sell you.</p>
<p>And as far as “longer bills mean more details”, it’s obvious you don’t know how the government really operates. Long legal verbage is used to refute meanings, create loopholes and render bills worthless.</p>
<p>I see them as a more extreme version of Republicans. They’re pretty much against everything I believe in and vice-versa. </p>
<p>Every time I hear about the Tea Party, it usually involves something about Obama being a “socialist.” </p>
<p>Obviously, I’m not the only one who finds the irony of them being for deregulation and against “socialism” -cough- and then having them defend Medicare. >></p>
<p>I can’t help but shake my head at how they’re voting in more “extreme Republicans” and voting out those who aren’t “Republican enough” (aka moderates). That’s just what Congress needs to be, even more polarized. It’s not good enough that it’s already completely partisan. -facepalm-</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are mistaken. Even though the head of the WBC is a registered Democrat, he is as conservative a conservative could possibly be. The WBC is a conservative “church” that protests at military funerals. Party affiliation =/= political ideology.</p>