Tea Party Democrats

[Phatscotty]

Interesting information I found, finally. Many people, many times have called me a liar for simply telling the truth that about 10-15% of the Tea Party are Democrats. Also, Independents make up 30% of the Tea Party. Many people still believe to this day that the Tea Party is just a far right Republican wing that only cares about racism and being hateful. Far right wing when 4-4.5 in 10 are either democrat or independent? Bullshit!

In case you have been living under a rock for the last 10 years, the USA has some serious fiscal issues and debt problems that must be addressed, and the Tea Party is the movement that is going dedicated to demand fiscal responsibility. These are the most serious issues of our time, and we should question the motives of the people who are not only spreading hate and lies, but equally devastating is the slight-of-hand to take our eyes off the crucial issue of debts and deficits.

The Winston Group, a GOP polling firm, last year showed that 13 percent of tea partiers were Democrats; Gallup put the number at 15 percent.

On the lower end, the number was 9 percent in a TargetPoint poll and just 4 percent in a CNN-Opinion Research poll.

More recently, a poll for Resurgent Republic, a Republican-aligned conglomerate of pollsters and consultants, showed that 11 percent of those who viewed the tea party favorably were Democrats. (That’s not an ideal measure, of course, since one need not be a tea party member to view it favorably.)

Who are these tea party Democrats?

Republican pollster Dan Hazelwood said that just as some Democrats moved to the GOP because of social issues in recent decades, some are now moving to the tea party because of fiscal issues.

“They have the same populist point of view of the rest of the tea party movement,” Hazelwood said. “Their ideal would be a Dennis Kucinich type who was anti-spending and for budget austerity. So they are people who are adrift on the left because of spending and on the right because of social issues.”

Though there has been some intermingling between the two camps, the country has yet to see a formidable Democrat emerge as a tea party candidate.

In the 2010 election cycle, the Tea Party Express endorsed a “Blue Dog” Democrat, Rep. Walt Minnick of Idaho, in his unsuccessful reelection bid

Former Democratic nominee Jack Davis ran on the “Tea Party” line in the recent New York special election but received just 9 percent of the vote. (Davis had run three times before as a Democrat and seemed to have a flexible ideology.)

There was also a Democratic tea party supporter who ran a meagerly funded primary campaign against Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) in 2010, taking 15 percent of the vote.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html

[thegreekdog]

RACISTS! HICK HAYSEEDS!

[Pirlo]

is it true that teabaggers hold some hate posters like "send Obama back to Kenya?"

[thegreekdog]

is it true that teabaggers hold some hate posters like "send Obama back to Kenya?"

Yes.

It's also true that some Democrats held some hate posters like "Bush = Hitler." Did you know that? Or did the media marginalization merely affect your views on the Tea Party?

[keiths31]

is it true that teabaggers hold some hate posters like "send Obama back to Kenya?"

Yes.

It's also true that some Democrats held some hate posters like "Bush = Hitler." Did you know that? Or did the media marginalization merely affect your views on the Tea Party?

It seems it is okay to demonize conservative leaders (Harper, Bush), but voice your dislike for a liberal leader and you are a racist or bigot.

[Pirlo]

is it true that teabaggers hold some hate posters like "send Obama back to Kenya?"

Yes.

It's also true that some Democrats held some hate posters like "Bush = Hitler." Did you know that? Or did the media marginalization merely affect your views on the Tea Party?

you know I'm not in America and the media don't interest me much, but when i watch media, the media i watch don't mention local stuff about america.

you know, a a non-american, US foreign policy could affect/interest me more

[thegreekdog]

is it true that teabaggers hold some hate posters like "send Obama back to Kenya?"

Yes.

It's also true that some Democrats held some hate posters like "Bush = Hitler." Did you know that? Or did the media marginalization merely affect your views on the Tea Party?

It seems it is okay to demonize conservative leaders (Harper, Bush), but voice your dislike for a liberal leader and you are a racist or bigot.

That seems correct; although I think (again because I'm a cynic) that there is a coherent movement to marginalize the Tea Party by both Democrats and Republicans. The views expressed by the Tea Party (or Ron Paul or any other third party, like Libertarians) are valid views that should be debated. But I think those in power, the Republicans and Democrats, don't want to debate these issues; in fact, I would say they are scared of these issues. Thus, to ensure that these issues aren't debated, the people that espouse these views are marginalized as racist or radicals or Communists. Most people in the United States don't want to be labelled racist or radical or a Communist. If there was open and honest debate, it would be different. Instead we get Janeane Garofolo on MSNBC saying that Tea Partiers are racist.

[thegreekdog]

is it true that teabaggers hold some hate posters like "send Obama back to Kenya?"

Yes.

It's also true that some Democrats held some hate posters like "Bush = Hitler." Did you know that? Or did the media marginalization merely affect your views on the Tea Party?

you know I'm not in America and the media don't interest me much, but when i watch media, the media i watch don't mention local stuff about america.

you know, a a non-american, US foreign policy could affect/interest me more

Do you know what most Tea Party members believe from a foreign policy perspective?

[Pirlo]

is it true that teabaggers hold some hate posters like "send Obama back to Kenya?"

Yes.

It's also true that some Democrats held some hate posters like "Bush = Hitler." Did you know that? Or did the media marginalization merely affect your views on the Tea Party?

you know I'm not in America and the media don't interest me much, but when i watch media, the media i watch don't mention local stuff about america.

you know, a a non-american, US foreign policy could affect/interest me more

Do you know what most Tea Party members believe from a foreign policy perspective?

I honestly heard of Tea Party first time here (thanks to pimpdave). then I started reading articles and watching youtube videos.

as a foreigner and apart from all pimpdave's anti-teabaggers stuff, when I see a pic for their protests, I find a lot of hate posters. however, I'm a bit doubtful about posters because any idiot can hold any kind of poster andd pretend he belongs to this or that. like for example a pic of a muslim-looking girl holding nazi sign or hate sign against jews,, etc etc you know. this is why I asked. i intended to make sure not to troll this thread.

[thegreekdog]

Tea Party members likely differ with respect to foreign wars, but I would say most (at least the ones I talk to on a regular basis) are in favor of less foreign intervention. This has nothing to do with being nice, and everything to do with less government spending.

Most of what you'll find on the internet about the Tea Party has to do with racism or poorly conceived political posters. Like I said before, that's how those in power can marginalize those that don't agree with them.

[PLAYER57832]

The problem with the Tea Party is twofold. First, there is no real tea party.. just people who latch onto that name because they want lower taxes or "limited government". They are meaningless terms without a plan of action.

Second, they make a pretense of "reducing government" and cutting taxes as if their policies would help everyday Americans. Its not YOUR taxes that are going to be cut! In fact, most of us will see our STATE or LOCAL taxes increased to make up for federal shortfalls. NO, the "debate" is over taxing BIG corporations and the wealthy. (note, a few others might get caught up in it... and I would say that is mostly so these tea partiers can trot out a few examples of how terrible the changes were, not becuase they need to be included). Reducing government.. just code for "don't force business' to clean up their own messes"

The results today are pretty telling. I heard several comments along the lines of "we have to give Washington a MESSAGE" .. by not boosting the debt limit!

I mean.. they have NO CONCEPT of how that will actually impact us. Its not "Washington" that will pay for their stupidity, its all of us.. for several generations. ALL of us will see interest rates rise, taxes INCREASE to pay off the increased interest our government will have to pay, etc.

AND.. the taxes they are refusing to raise have nothing to do with average Americans. They are targeting the WEALTHIEST Americans.. not the $250K group, either. THAT figure came from Obama's campaign and was grossly distorted anyway. NO, the figures being trotted around today have to do with reversing tax breaks given to large corporations and perhaps increasing income taxes on those making over 1 million a year.

Is that absolutely "fair"? No. But, it is necessary. Cutting education, healthcare not only won't balance the budget, it will put us in harms way as a society.

Its time to stop seeing "the government" as some esoteric unrelated entity. The government IS us.. if we only bother to take the reigns, intelligently instead of this stupidity that pretends to be about helping all of us, but is really just feeding more of corporate America

Dispute that? Then take a GOOD LOOK at the tax "increases" that are actually being considered.. and being blocked by so-called "Tea Partiers".

[Pirlo]

Tea Party members likely differ with respect to foreign wars, but I would say most (at least the ones I talk to on a regular basis) are in favor of less foreign intervention. This has nothing to do with being nice, and everything to do with less government spending.

Most of what you'll find on the internet about the Tea Party has to do with racism or poorly conceived political posters. Like I said before, that's how those in power can marginalize those that don't agree with them.

In fact, I'm extremely against any kind of racism. maybe that's why it was the first thing to get my attention regardless of any efforts made to demonize the movement. of course not all members are racist, but I would not be a co-member with some racist person (more particularly if he/she shows his/her racism or hate).

but I understand why you would accept it if it was the best thing out of terrible choices for the sake of your country. I'm just giving a foreigner's perspective.

[PLAYER57832]

Most of what you'll find on the internet about the Tea Party has to do with racism or poorly conceived political posters. Like I said before, that's how those in power can marginalize those that don't agree with them.

True, but not true... not the way you imply.

Granted, I don't believe you or even Phattscotty for that matter are intentionally racist (set aside that just about everyone is more racist than we would like to believe.. we try and grow) and I think you do definitely do better than most people in that regard.

However, the Tea Party is attempting to be a "part of opposition" and the way it was gone about leaves it open to be used by any kind of opposition. In fact, the Tea Party "leaders" (though there are several Tea Parties, etc.) take pains not to limit anyone who will seem to agree with whatever they want their overall platform to be. So, Sarah Pallin can claim to be a "spokesperson", "representing the Tea Party", so can the racists, so can anyone else.

And, its convenient for them to keep that status quo. Any time someone disagrees, they can simply say "that's not Tea Party, tea party is only about lowering taxes". Yet... there are no real plans for how that will be accomplished. In fact, most people in the Tea Party are under the ilusion that this will somehow cut everyone's taxes, that cutting or holding everyone's taxes is the real goal. Yet.. the tax increases, changes they come out opposed to have to do with the wealthy and big corporations, NOT average people. OUR taxes are almost certain to increase, or we will indeed pay some pretty heavy penalties in things like very poor education, even more limited access to higher education, extreme limits to healthcare availabilities.

AND, far worse, particularly when it comes to the healthcare/medical issues, the rhetoric means that we are cutting the effective parts of medical care and expanding the ineffective parts.. on supposed "moral" grounds. As if denying care to thousands so one child without a real life can be sustained and breathing. (harsh, but true!)

The TRUTH I believe the more I look into this is that the Tea Party is just another highly deceptive spoiler. And it comes PRECISELY when we need to unite and demand that corporations are held accountable. Instead, they are being handed even more power.. thanks to the supposedly "grass roots" tea party garbage.

[thegreekdog]

The problem with the Tea Party is twofold. First, there is no real tea party.. just people who latch onto that name because they want lower taxes or "limited government". They are meaningless terms without a plan of action.

Second, they make a pretense of "reducing government" and cutting taxes as if their policies would help everyday Americans. Its not YOUR taxes that are going to be cut! In fact, most of us will see our STATE or LOCAL taxes increased to make up for federal shortfalls. NO, the "debate" is over taxing BIG corporations and the wealthy. (note, a few others might get caught up in it... and I would say that is mostly so these tea partiers can trot out a few examples of how terrible the changes were, not becuase they need to be included). Reducing government.. just code for "don't force business' to clean up their own messes"

The results today are pretty telling. I heard several comments along the lines of "we have to give Washington a MESSAGE" .. by not boosting the debt limit!

I mean.. they have NO CONCEPT of how that will actually impact us. Its not "Washington" that will pay for their stupidity, its all of us.. for several generations. ALL of us will see interest rates rise, taxes INCREASE to pay off the increased interest our government will have to pay, etc.

AND.. the taxes they are refusing to raise have nothing to do with average Americans. They are targeting the WEALTHIEST Americans.. not the $250K group, either. THAT figure came from Obama's campaign and was grossly distorted anyway. NO, the figures being trotted around today have to do with reversing tax breaks given to large corporations and perhaps increasing income taxes on those making over 1 million a year.

Is that absolutely "fair"? No. But, it is necessary. Cutting education, healthcare not only won't balance the budget, it will put us in harms way as a society.

Its time to stop seeing "the government" as some esoteric unrelated entity. The government IS us.. if we only bother to take the reigns, intelligently instead of this stupidity that pretends to be about helping all of us, but is really just feeding more of corporate America

Dispute that? Then take a GOOD LOOK at the tax "increases" that are actually being considered.. and being blocked by so-called "Tea Partiers".

Pure rubbish. Again, the problem here is the assumption you're making without any real evidence whatsoever. You are essentially accusing the Tea Party members of being pro-corporation Republicans in the guise of a grassroots organization. If this were the case, Tea Party members would unite behind someone like Michelle Bachman or Sarah Palin. Instead, most Tea Party supporters back Ron Paul. I will continue to point out to you that until you understand the Tea Party movement or Ron Paul, your discussion points are meaningless.

Let's speak plainly - if Ron Paul is a supporter of ending corporate welfare, and if the vast majority of Tea Party members support Ron Paul, then the vast majority of Tea Party members are not corporatists. I can't make it any plainer than that. It is not Ron Paul's fault or the fault of Tea Party members that the message you receive from whatever media outlets you listen to or read is "The Tea Party is for less taxes and government spending" without regard for facts.

[spurgistan]

The problem with the Tea Party is twofold. First, there is no real tea party.. just people who latch onto that name because they want lower taxes or "limited government". They are meaningless terms without a plan of action.

Second, they make a pretense of "reducing government" and cutting taxes as if their policies would help everyday Americans. Its not YOUR taxes that are going to be cut! In fact, most of us will see our STATE or LOCAL taxes increased to make up for federal shortfalls. NO, the "debate" is over taxing BIG corporations and the wealthy. (note, a few others might get caught up in it... and I would say that is mostly so these tea partiers can trot out a few examples of how terrible the changes were, not becuase they need to be included). Reducing government.. just code for "don't force business' to clean up their own messes"

The results today are pretty telling. I heard several comments along the lines of "we have to give Washington a MESSAGE" .. by not boosting the debt limit!

I mean.. they have NO CONCEPT of how that will actually impact us. Its not "Washington" that will pay for their stupidity, its all of us.. for several generations. ALL of us will see interest rates rise, taxes INCREASE to pay off the increased interest our government will have to pay, etc.

AND.. the taxes they are refusing to raise have nothing to do with average Americans. They are targeting the WEALTHIEST Americans.. not the $250K group, either. THAT figure came from Obama's campaign and was grossly distorted anyway. NO, the figures being trotted around today have to do with reversing tax breaks given to large corporations and perhaps increasing income taxes on those making over 1 million a year.

Is that absolutely "fair"? No. But, it is necessary. Cutting education, healthcare not only won't balance the budget, it will put us in harms way as a society.

Its time to stop seeing "the government" as some esoteric unrelated entity. The government IS us.. if we only bother to take the reigns, intelligently instead of this stupidity that pretends to be about helping all of us, but is really just feeding more of corporate America

Dispute that? Then take a GOOD LOOK at the tax "increases" that are actually being considered.. and being blocked by so-called "Tea Partiers".

Pure rubbish. Again, the problem here is the assumption you're making without any real evidence whatsoever. You are essentially accusing the Tea Party members of being pro-corporation Republicans in the guise of a grassroots organization. If this were the case, Tea Party members would unite behind someone like Michelle Bachman or Sarah Palin. Instead, most Tea Party supporters back Ron Paul. I will continue to point out to you that until you understand the Tea Party movement or Ron Paul, your discussion points are meaningless.

Let's speak plainly - if Ron Paul is a supporter of ending corporate welfare, and if the vast majority of Tea Party members support Ron Paul, then the vast majority of Tea Party members are not corporatists. I can't make it any plainer than that. It is not Ron Paul's fault or the fault of Tea Party members that the message you receive from whatever media outlets you listen to or read is "The Tea Party is for less taxes and government spending" without regard for facts.

So, under what authority are Palinites (I didn't make that up, it was in Foreign Affairs) not Tea Partiers? They certainly think they are. Also, I raise a questioning eyebrow (not very high, I'm bad at that) that even Paulites are not totally pro-corporation, look at Rand Paul admonishing the president for "demonizing" BP after they dumped millions (billions?) of barrels of oil into the Gulf.

[PLAYER57832]

Pure rubbish. Again, the problem here is the assumption you're making without any real evidence whatsoever.

No evidence? You have even posted some of it yourself!
Begin with try to find where the "one, true" Tea Party is.. what its leadership is, what its policies are.. specifics, not just "no new taxes". You find not one, but multiple listings and all are equally "legitimate". The "tea Party" is not an entity, its just shorthand for "cut taxes,shrink government".

You are essentially accusing the Tea Party members of being pro-corporation Republicans in the guise of a grassroots organization. If this were the case, Tea Party members would unite behind someone like Michelle Bachman or Sarah Palin. Instead, most Tea Party supporters back Ron Paul. I will continue to point out to you that until you understand the Tea Party movement or Ron Paul, your discussion points are meaningless.

LOL... a LOT of people DO see Sarah Pallin as their spokesperson. I realize you do not, many others do not, but since there is no tea party... that is my point!

Second, yes, I would like to discuss Ron Paul more, but the bottom line today is that those in congress today trotting out "tea party" are the ones making the most stupid remarks about the debt ceiling.. who think its just OK to blackmail everyone into taking draconian cuts without asking corporations, etc to pay a penny more .. or go ahead and let the US government default.

Let's speak plainly - if Ron Paul is a supporter of ending corporate welfare, and if the vast majority of Tea Party members support Ron Paul, then the vast majority of Tea Party members are not corporatists. I can't make it any plainer than that. It is not Ron Paul's fault or the fault of Tea Party members that the message you receive from whatever media outlets you listen to or read is "The Tea Party is for less taxes and government spending" without regard for facts.

You are now talkig Ron Paul. Fine, but he is not the Tea Party. Whether you wish he were or not, he is not. I did start another thread to talk about him, though.

[Night Strike]

So, under what authority are Palinites (I didn't make that up, it was in Foreign Affairs) not Tea Partiers? They certainly think they are. Also, I raise a questioning eyebrow (not very high, I'm bad at that) that even Paulites are not totally pro-corporation, look at Rand Paul admonishing the president for "demonizing" BP after they dumped millions (billions?) of barrels of oil into the Gulf.

Because BP didn't just go and dump barrels of oil into the Gulf. An accident happened because the only places they're allowed to drill are in extremely deep and dangerous areas. There is absolutely no reason a company would just dump out their primary source of income simply to destroy some ocean-life and beaches. It is expensive to get an oil well set up, especially one that hast to go that deep, so the company is not going to waste that money to then waste the asset they're trying to collect to sell.

[PLAYER57832]

So, under what authority are Palinites (I didn't make that up, it was in Foreign Affairs) not Tea Partiers? They certainly think they are. Also, I raise a questioning eyebrow (not very high, I'm bad at that) that even Paulites are not totally pro-corporation, look at Rand Paul admonishing the president for "demonizing" BP after they dumped millions (billions?) of barrels of oil into the Gulf.

Because BP didn't just go and dump barrels of oil into the Gulf. An accident happened because the only places they're allowed to drill are in extremely deep and dangerous areas. There is absolutely no reason a company would just dump out their primary source of income simply to destroy some ocean-life and beaches. It is expensive to get an oil well set up, especially one that hast to go that deep, so the company is not going to waste that money to then waste the asset they're trying to collect to sell.

You are naive. They gambled, with OUR gulf, OUR fish, and the lives of the people on the coast.

In return, they got billions. Even now, after the penalties and so forth, they are still making huge profits.... and the potential for even more damage has not been mitigated or halted one real iota.

And... the reaon they are only allowed in deep water is directly due to the damage so many oil companies have caused in nearer and onshore areas. The far off regions were less regulated, even if the potential for damage there was far greater.

[thegreekdog]

Pure rubbish. Again, the problem here is the assumption you're making without any real evidence whatsoever.

No evidence? You have even posted some of it yourself!
Begin with try to find where the "one, true" Tea Party is.. what its leadership is, what its policies are.. specifics, not just "no new taxes". You find not one, but multiple listings and all are equally "legitimate". The "tea Party" is not an entity, its just shorthand for "cut taxes,shrink government".

You are essentially accusing the Tea Party members of being pro-corporation Republicans in the guise of a grassroots organization. If this were the case, Tea Party members would unite behind someone like Michelle Bachman or Sarah Palin. Instead, most Tea Party supporters back Ron Paul. I will continue to point out to you that until you understand the Tea Party movement or Ron Paul, your discussion points are meaningless.

LOL... a LOT of people DO see Sarah Pallin as their spokesperson. I realize you do not, many others do not, but since there is no tea party... that is my point!

Second, yes, I would like to discuss Ron Paul more, but the bottom line today is that those in congress today trotting out "tea party" are the ones making the most stupid remarks about the debt ceiling.. who think its just OK to blackmail everyone into taking draconian cuts without asking corporations, etc to pay a penny more .. or go ahead and let the US government default.

Let's speak plainly - if Ron Paul is a supporter of ending corporate welfare, and if the vast majority of Tea Party members support Ron Paul, then the vast majority of Tea Party members are not corporatists. I can't make it any plainer than that. It is not Ron Paul's fault or the fault of Tea Party members that the message you receive from whatever media outlets you listen to or read is "The Tea Party is for less taxes and government spending" without regard for facts.

You are now talkig Ron Paul. Fine, but he is not the Tea Party. Whether you wish he were or not, he is not. I did start another thread to talk about him, though.

Please provide evidence suggesting that "Ron Paul is not the Tea Party." Like I said, you have no idea what the Tea Party movement stands for except what you hear on the news. I'm going to stop arguing with you about the Tea Party movement until you have some more truthful and relevant knowledge.

[PLAYER57832]

Please provide evidence suggesting that "Ron Paul is not the Tea Party." Like I said, you have no idea what the Tea Party movement stands for except what you hear on the news. I'm going to stop arguing with you about the Tea Party movement until you have some more truthful and relevant knowledge.

He might be a part of it, but he is not the entire party.
Review the many Sarah Pallin references, the many congresspeople who cite the Tea Party as why they are stonewalling raising the debt ceiling, etc, e tc.

In fact, your reference is the first I have heard in all these threads, even going back to the last election, referring to Ron Paul as part of or even being in favor of the Tea Party.

But then.. since there are several Tea Parties, perhaps you need to clarify which group you refer to?

[Woodruff]

Interesting information I found, finally. Many people, many times have called me a liar for simply telling the truth that about 10-15% of the Tea Party are Democrats. Also, Independents make up 30% of the Tea Party.

I've never called you a liar for this. I know it's true.

Many people still believe to this day that the Tea Party is just a far right Republican wing

No, that's the New Tea Republican Party, of which you are solidly a member based on your posts in these fora.

[Phatscotty]

The problem with the Tea Party is twofold. First, there is no real tea party.. just people who latch onto that name because they want lower taxes or "limited government". They are meaningless terms without a plan of action.

People did not "latch onto a name" ... people united based on common principles. What qualifies you to define/judge the Tea Party?

Second, they make a pretense of "reducing government" and cutting taxes as if their policies would help everyday Americans. Its not YOUR taxes that are going to be cut! In fact, most of us will see our STATE or LOCAL taxes increased to make up for federal shortfalls. NO, the "debate" is over taxing BIG corporations and the wealthy. (note, a few others might get caught up in it... and I would say that is mostly so these tea partiers can trot out a few examples of how terrible the changes were, not becuase they need to be included). Reducing government.. just code for "don't force business' to clean up their own messes"

Not my state, and not in many other states. Speak for yourself player. My state is shut down because the Tea Party republicans won a lot of seats here(Republicans control the house and the senate) will not raise taxes and are committed to reducing government spending, as well as not budging on a principled stance that we not spend more that we take in on a state level, which also means they are committed to a balanced budget. The Tea Party is more real than it has ever been before, and if Tom Emmer were elected/Mark Dayton did not find a bunch of votes in the trunk of a car, Minnesota would be joining Wisconsin with a projected budget surplus in 2 years, all without raising a single tax.
That is a plan of Action

Ream em and weep



You are simply wrong

[Phatscotty]

So, under what authority are Palinites (I didn't make that up, it was in Foreign Affairs) not Tea Partiers? They certainly think they are. Also, I raise a questioning eyebrow (not very high, I'm bad at that) that even Paulites are not totally pro-corporation, look at Rand Paul admonishing the president for "demonizing" BP after they dumped millions (billions?) of barrels of oil into the Gulf.

Palinites are part of a larger group of Americans that think taxes are too high and the gov't spends/wastes too much money.

To me, Palin is one of the strongest supporters of 2nd and 10th Amendmenters (I did make that up) as well as the Christian right. Just because people who like Palin also think it's stupid to raise the debt ceiling and fund bailouts and stimulus does not make Sarah Palin the strongest supporter of the Tea Party, or anything fiscal at that.

Bringing up Palinites in a Tea Party thread = fail
Understanding that establishment republicans also dislike/hate the Tea Party = win

[Phatscotty]

Please provide evidence suggesting that "Ron Paul is not the Tea Party." Like I said, you have no idea what the Tea Party movement stands for except what you hear on the news. I'm going to stop arguing with you about the Tea Party movement until you have some more truthful and relevant knowledge.

He might be a part of it, but he is not the entire party.
Review the many Sarah Pallin references, the many congresspeople who cite the Tea Party as why they are stonewalling raising the debt ceiling, etc, e tc.

In fact, your reference is the first I have heard in all these threads, even going back to the last election, referring to Ron Paul as part of or even being in favor of the Tea Party.

But then.. since there are several Tea Parties, perhaps you need to clarify which group you refer to?

Ron Paul is THEE Godfather of the Tea Party. If you know that I love the Tea Party, and you know that I love Ron Paul, then put 1 and 1 together...I don't even believe you that it's the first time you heard Ron Paul is the tea party. Do a Tea Party + Ron Paul search, and catch a huge glimpse of what appears to go in one of your ears and right out the other. I can only guess the ridiculous line of "but the Tea Party doesn't even have a leader" mantra The Tea Party is a large movement, and if anyone is the leader of it it's Ron Paul.

I mean, you pretty much admit here that you have ZERO knowledge of the Tea Party, yet you have no problem spending hours and hours railing against it and spreading outright lies and slanders.

You could not be more confused. It looks like you are trying to understand, but in reality you don't want to understand. And that is okay

[thegreekdog]

So, under what authority are Palinites (I didn't make that up, it was in Foreign Affairs) not Tea Partiers? They certainly think they are. Also, I raise a questioning eyebrow (not very high, I'm bad at that) that even Paulites are not totally pro-corporation, look at Rand Paul admonishing the president for "demonizing" BP after they dumped millions (billions?) of barrels of oil into the Gulf.

Some Palinites may be Tea Partiers. Sarah Palin herself is a Johnny-come-lately to the Tea Party movement and she has come because of the potential political clout of the Tea Party (post 2010 election of course). Not all Palinites are Tea Partiers (including Sarah Palin). I think the confusion comes from Republican leaders identifying with the Tea Party movement.
Frankly, if spurgistan wanted to be a Tea Party member, he could. You merely need to indicate it. It doesn't mean you actually support what the Tea Party movement is supposed to support. The Tea Party also doesn't deal with all issues. There is, for example, a vast difference of opinion in my own local Tea Party with respect to abortion. Some people are hardened Christian Coalition types. Some people are like me (or are former Democrats). But abortion is not really something we talk about.

Let's think about it another way. What was the Tea Party a response to? The election of President Obama? Maybe (unless you wish to marginalize, then the answer is an emphatic "yes" with a "you're racist" thrown in). The corporate bailouts? That's the reason for my support. When did the bailouts happen? Before the election of President Obama, right?

As for Ron Paul and his criticism of President Obama... Ron Paul was elucidating the president's attempt to score cheap points by demonizing BP. I don't recall the situation exactly, but I'm pretty sure BP didn't purposefully dump oil in the Gulf. President Obama was right to be criticized (and so was BP). President Obama's demonization was most assuredly misplaced and (although Ron Paul probably wouldn't say this) certainly took attention away to the administration's mishandling of the entire situation (in the vein of the Bush administration's mishandling of Katrina). In any event, I'm totally digressing now.