Crashtheteaparty.org

[Procrustes Stretched]

The ones without guns at the rallies will likely be liberals.

you don't know many liberals do you?

mistaking progressive students and kids for liberals will be the thing that gets you your ass handed to you in a gift wrapped package.

 

[The T]

For re-enforcement.

The Tea Party Movement: Who's In Charge? - Politics - The Atlantic

Grass roots my ass.

Enjoy being pawns to the almighty bottom line, teabagger rubes.

The only 'teabaggers' are the pro corruption shiteaters who attack the movement.

You jackasses don't get it, NOBODY is 'in charge' of the movement.

All your bullshit links and accusations is just more pissing in the wind by the useful idiots and big government stooges who try to protect corruption.

It's the typical elitist attitude. We *peons* aren't smart enough to lead anything nor know what we want. These people think we cannot do anything without a "Leader" as they cannot. For it is they that follow their marching orders very well.

These are also the same people that are against the individual.

 

[geauxtohell]

Knowing how passionate some people can be, it could go either way. For every fringer on the left willing to pull a stunt like this there's a fringer on the right wiling to make it up so they have another excuse to yell "Alinsky!"

But unlike SOME people, I tend to believe the most obvious answer is probably true until and unless there is evidence to the contrary.

I'll go with Occam's razor too.

Still, we are talking about a lot of money here......

This is where my opinions get all complicated about it.

I defend tea partiers often, and it's for real. But my opinion of the majority of the people who turn out and some of the people who are organizing and funding these things are two very, very different things. And yep, there's a lot of money involved for some of these groups - for others they're lucky to scrape together enough for their expenses to hold a rally.

I don't like the way the tea parties were coopted from the original tax day protests, for one. And for-profit groups? Backscratching with partisan think tanks and foundations? It's not every group involved in that stuff, but it makes me wonder about who's behind the curtain in some of them.

The emotions are certainly real. Can't fake that. The issue, to me, is if this group truly represents a cross section of moderate voters or a bunch of conservatives/GOP folk who are think they are formulating a grass roots movement, but are really being corralled by blue chip companies working through PACs.

 

[geauxtohell]

And IF this is TRUE... then there truly IS something HORRIBLY WRONG!

No, if it's true, this is hardly a "grass roots" organization and you are marching for someone else's margins.

If you want to do that, then fine. However, what is wrong with full disclosure?

 

[goldcatt]

I'll go with Occam's razor too.

Still, we are talking about a lot of money here......

This is where my opinions get all complicated about it.

I defend tea partiers often, and it's for real. But my opinion of the majority of the people who turn out and some of the people who are organizing and funding these things are two very, very different things. And yep, there's a lot of money involved for some of these groups - for others they're lucky to scrape together enough for their expenses to hold a rally.

I don't like the way the tea parties were coopted from the original tax day protests, for one. And for-profit groups? Backscratching with partisan think tanks and foundations? It's not every group involved in that stuff, but it makes me wonder about who's behind the curtain in some of them.

The emotions are certainly real. Can't fake that. The issue, to me, is if this group truly represents a cross section of moderate voters or a bunch of conservatives/GOP folk who are think they are formulating a grass roots movement, but are really being corralled by blue chip companies working through PACs.

IMO, as far as the protesters who show up it's both - but since the proclaimed message of the tea parties is anti-government, logically, I'd say they're conservative leaning at least. Or libertarian, although fwiw it seems there are some hard feelings between long term libertarians and tea party organizers over the conservatives coopting the libertarians' movement and message to start the tea parties in the first place. And then there are other people who aren't in either group, but are leeches drawn to them to try to coopt the message for their own purposes. That would be the racists, the birthers, the secessionists, and so on. There are reports of division in the ranks at what qualifies as the "top", with some groups opposing the leechdom. So if you ask me I'd say it all boils down to being a complicated decentralized network of local (for the most part) organizations where some are profiteers, some are patsies and some really are legit. How does that reflect on the individual protesters? Depends.

If they know about it, are in a position to address it and do nothing but blame it on lies from the "partisan marxist media" and the "evil liberal infiltrators" instead of addressing their own issues then I don't have all that much respect for them. But some are making the attempt, and as for the majority of people who show up on protest day I doubt they really think about where the money is coming from, or else belong to groups that aren't involved in that horseshit. So it just depends. I'm not comfortable with putting just one label on this kind of thing.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

This is where my opinions get all complicated about it.

I defend tea partiers often, and it's for real. But my opinion of the majority of the people who turn out and some of the people who are organizing and funding these things are two very, very different things. And yep, there's a lot of money involved for some of these groups - for others they're lucky to scrape together enough for their expenses to hold a rally.

I don't like the way the tea parties were coopted from the original tax day protests, for one. And for-profit groups? Backscratching with partisan think tanks and foundations? It's not every group involved in that stuff, but it makes me wonder about who's behind the curtain in some of them.

The emotions are certainly real. Can't fake that. The issue, to me, is if this group truly represents a cross section of moderate voters or a bunch of conservatives/GOP folk who are think they are formulating a grass roots movement, but are really being corralled by blue chip companies working through PACs.

IMO, as far as the protesters who show up it's both - but since the proclaimed message of the tea parties is anti-government, logically, I'd say they're conservative leaning at least. Or libertarian, although fwiw it seems there are some hard feelings between long term libertarians and tea party organizers over the conservatives coopting the libertarians' movement and message to start the tea parties in the first place. And then there are other people who aren't in either group, but are leeches drawn to them to try to coopt the message for their own purposes. That would be the racists, the birthers, the secessionists, and so on. There are reports of division in the ranks at what qualifies as the "top", with some groups opposing the leechdom. So if you ask me I'd say it all boils down to being a complicated decentralized network of local (for the most part) organizations where some are profiteers, some are patsies and some really are legit. How does that reflect on the individual protesters? Depends.

If they know about it, are in a position to address it and do nothing but blame it on lies from the "partisan marxist media" and the "evil liberal infiltrators" instead of addressing their own issues then I don't have all that much respect for them. But some are making the attempt, and as for the majority of people who show up on protest day I doubt they really think about where the money is coming from, or else belong to groups that aren't involved in that horseshit. So it just depends. I'm not comfortable with putting just one label on this kind of thing.

Just because you have one faction in the group with an anti-government stance doesn't mean the entire group ascribes to that train of thought. I hate it when the left picks out the absolute worst aspects of a position or group and then attempts to paint the entire position or group as that being their only position or platform. It's quite dishonest and being disrespectful to the American people by treating them like they're stupid. Now, with the Tea Party Movement this strategy is failing. There are many different belief sets and political cross sections in this movement yet as the left attempts to paint them all as conservative racists we see the American people just laugh off the stupidity displayed by the left. Now they have admitted to infiltrating the group and doing the precise things they say the Tea Party Movement is guilty of!!!!

One single thing they all have for a belief is that the country is headed in the WRONG direction.

All this shows is that the left fears the Tea Party Movement as a potent political force. That's why the left wing loon fringers are infiltrating the group and that's why the WH has backed off the rhetoric concerning them. They are afraid of the power the Tea Partyiers have.

 

[goldcatt]

The emotions are certainly real. Can't fake that. The issue, to me, is if this group truly represents a cross section of moderate voters or a bunch of conservatives/GOP folk who are think they are formulating a grass roots movement, but are really being corralled by blue chip companies working through PACs.

IMO, as far as the protesters who show up it's both - but since the proclaimed message of the tea parties is anti-government, logically, I'd say they're conservative leaning at least. Or libertarian, although fwiw it seems there are some hard feelings between long term libertarians and tea party organizers over the conservatives coopting the libertarians' movement and message to start the tea parties in the first place. And then there are other people who aren't in either group, but are leeches drawn to them to try to coopt the message for their own purposes. That would be the racists, the birthers, the secessionists, and so on. There are reports of division in the ranks at what qualifies as the "top", with some groups opposing the leechdom. So if you ask me I'd say it all boils down to being a complicated decentralized network of local (for the most part) organizations where some are profiteers, some are patsies and some really are legit. How does that reflect on the individual protesters? Depends.

If they know about it, are in a position to address it and do nothing but blame it on lies from the "partisan marxist media" and the "evil liberal infiltrators" instead of addressing their own issues then I don't have all that much respect for them. But some are making the attempt, and as for the majority of people who show up on protest day I doubt they really think about where the money is coming from, or else belong to groups that aren't involved in that horseshit. So it just depends. I'm not comfortable with putting just one label on this kind of thing.

Just because you have one faction in the group with an anti-government stance doesn't mean the entire groupo ascribes to that train of thought. I hate it when the left picks out the absolute worst aspects of a position or group and then attempts to paint the entire position or group as that being their only position or platform. It's quite dishonest and being disrespectful to the American people by treating them like they're stupid. Now, with the Tea Party Movement this strategy is failing. There re many different belief sets and political cross sections in this movement yet as the left attempts to paint them all as conservative racists we see the American people just laugh off the stupidity displayed by the left. Now they have admitted to infiltrating the group and doing the precise things they say the Tea Party Movement is guilty of!!!!

All this shows is that the left fears the Tea Party Movement as a potent political force. That's why the left wing loon fringers are infiltrating the group and that's why the WH has backed off the rhetoric concerning them. They are afraid of the power the Tea Partyiers have.

Then we agree for the most part, although maybe we have different ideas of what "anti-government" means.

I don't think tea partiers can be painted with a broad brush or that they can all be gathered under one label, as I just said in the post you replied to. I do believe the fringe elements that have gotten bad press are opportunists who show up to take advantage, and I also don't believe all of the groups have been tainted by the profiteering and corruption some of the groups have gotten bad press for. In fact, where some of the groups are concerned the opposite is true and they seem to be speaking out against it.

The thing I have an issue with is the ones who do know, are in a position to fix it (which isn't your average person showing up at a rally with a sign, btw) and refuse to take responsibility for it because it's easier to say it's all somebody else's fault rather than try to police their own. Oh I know it's politics, but I don't have to respect it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The libs of the 60s would pound the wannabees from the TP today into the mud: what a bunch of whining losers.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

IMO, as far as the protesters who show up it's both - but since the proclaimed message of the tea parties is anti-government, logically, I'd say they're conservative leaning at least. Or libertarian, although fwiw it seems there are some hard feelings between long term libertarians and tea party organizers over the conservatives coopting the libertarians' movement and message to start the tea parties in the first place. And then there are other people who aren't in either group, but are leeches drawn to them to try to coopt the message for their own purposes. That would be the racists, the birthers, the secessionists, and so on. There are reports of division in the ranks at what qualifies as the "top", with some groups opposing the leechdom. So if you ask me I'd say it all boils down to being a complicated decentralized network of local (for the most part) organizations where some are profiteers, some are patsies and some really are legit. How does that reflect on the individual protesters? Depends.

If they know about it, are in a position to address it and do nothing but blame it on lies from the "partisan marxist media" and the "evil liberal infiltrators" instead of addressing their own issues then I don't have all that much respect for them. But some are making the attempt, and as for the majority of people who show up on protest day I doubt they really think about where the money is coming from, or else belong to groups that aren't involved in that horseshit. So it just depends. I'm not comfortable with putting just one label on this kind of thing.

Just because you have one faction in the group with an anti-government stance doesn't mean the entire groupo ascribes to that train of thought. I hate it when the left picks out the absolute worst aspects of a position or group and then attempts to paint the entire position or group as that being their only position or platform. It's quite dishonest and being disrespectful to the American people by treating them like they're stupid. Now, with the Tea Party Movement this strategy is failing. There re many different belief sets and political cross sections in this movement yet as the left attempts to paint them all as conservative racists we see the American people just laugh off the stupidity displayed by the left. Now they have admitted to infiltrating the group and doing the precise things they say the Tea Party Movement is guilty of!!!!

All this shows is that the left fears the Tea Party Movement as a potent political force. That's why the left wing loon fringers are infiltrating the group and that's why the WH has backed off the rhetoric concerning them. They are afraid of the power the Tea Partyiers have.

Then we agree for the most part, although maybe we have different ideas of what "anti-government" means.

I don't think tea partiers can be painted with a broad brush or that they can all be gathered under one label, as I just said in the post you replied to. I do believe the fringe elements that have gotten bad press are opportunists who show up to take advantage, and I also don't believe all of the groups have been tainted by the profiteering and corruption some of the groups have gotten bad press for. In fact, where some of the groups are concerned the opposite is true and they seem to be speaking out against it.

The thing I have an issue with is the ones who do know, are in a position to fix it (which isn't your average person showing up at a rally with a sign, btw) and refuse to take responsibility for it because it's easier to say it's all somebody else's fault rather than try to police their own. Oh I know it's politics, but I don't have to respect it.

I agree...how do you weed out infiltraters who's stated goal is to bring the Tea Party Movement down by painting them all as racist homophobes?

 

[goldcatt]

Just because you have one faction in the group with an anti-government stance doesn't mean the entire groupo ascribes to that train of thought. I hate it when the left picks out the absolute worst aspects of a position or group and then attempts to paint the entire position or group as that being their only position or platform. It's quite dishonest and being disrespectful to the American people by treating them like they're stupid. Now, with the Tea Party Movement this strategy is failing. There re many different belief sets and political cross sections in this movement yet as the left attempts to paint them all as conservative racists we see the American people just laugh off the stupidity displayed by the left. Now they have admitted to infiltrating the group and doing the precise things they say the Tea Party Movement is guilty of!!!!

All this shows is that the left fears the Tea Party Movement as a potent political force. That's why the left wing loon fringers are infiltrating the group and that's why the WH has backed off the rhetoric concerning them. They are afraid of the power the Tea Partyiers have.

Then we agree for the most part, although maybe we have different ideas of what "anti-government" means.

I don't think tea partiers can be painted with a broad brush or that they can all be gathered under one label, as I just said in the post you replied to. I do believe the fringe elements that have gotten bad press are opportunists who show up to take advantage, and I also don't believe all of the groups have been tainted by the profiteering and corruption some of the groups have gotten bad press for. In fact, where some of the groups are concerned the opposite is true and they seem to be speaking out against it.

The thing I have an issue with is the ones who do know, are in a position to fix it (which isn't your average person showing up at a rally with a sign, btw) and refuse to take responsibility for it because it's easier to say it's all somebody else's fault rather than try to police their own. Oh I know it's politics, but I don't have to respect it.

I agree...how do you weed out infiltraters who's stated goal is to bring the Tea Party Movement down by painting them all as racist homophobes?

The same way you weed out any other nutjob who shows up to coopt your message. Ask them to tone it down or leave. If they refuse, remove them or organize and drown them out. As was pointed out, the tea parties pay for the licenses and put in the effort and expense to hold the rallies - it's up to them to arrange for whatever policing or security is needed if they want to keep control of them.

 

[geauxtohell]

For re-enforcement.

The Tea Party Movement: Who's In Charge? - Politics - The Atlantic

Grass roots my ass.

Enjoy being pawns to the almighty bottom line, teabagger rubes.

The only 'teabaggers' are the pro corruption shiteaters who attack the movement.

You jackasses don't get it, NOBODY is 'in charge' of the movement.

All your bullshit links and accusations is just more pissing in the wind by the useful idiots and big government stooges who try to protect corruption.

Pfft. Someone is in charge. You guys just don't realize it.

As we pointed out, the people that think they are the "movers and shakers" in the movement probably don't realize they are dancing on somebody's string.

 

[boedicca]

Forewarned is forearmed.

The agenda for the Tea Parties has always been limited government and fiscal responsiblity. Consistently, organizers have told people to not dilute the message with other issues (i.e. abortion). The vast majority are on board with the agenda - the few who aren't (including infiltrators) will be fairly easy to identify.

The Tea Party Movement has gotten too big to paint with the Fringe Brush - and is far too decentralized to cut one neck in an attempt to discredit it.

 

[geauxtohell]

Wow? People who stand to be run out of business want to protect their livelihoods?

Say it ain't so!

Oh, I can see where they are coming from.

I just find it humorous that people don't realize that they are dancing on someone else's string.

The irony of this post is astounding, because that is EXACTLY what you are doing.

The Dirty work of the corrupt and ineffective political machines.

I am? I am not marching on Washington and carrying pitchforks. I express my opinion here, and I vote.

As I said, the legitimacy of the teabaggers would be so much more established if they didn't fire up the protests immediately after Bush left office.

 

[boedicca]

Pfft. Someone is in charge. You guys just don't realize it.

As we pointed out, the people that think they are the "movers and shakers" in the movement probably don't realize they are dancing on somebody's string.

Oh Noeeesssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!11!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!!!

Who's in charge?

Elvis?

The Bilderbergs?!?!?!!?

ALIENS??!?!?!!?!?!?!!!!!!????

 

[geauxtohell]

I agree...how do you weed out infiltraters who's stated goal is to bring the Tea Party Movement down by painting them all as racist homophobes?

How about you just weed out the actual racists and homophobes first and then worry about the infiltrators?

I would think it would be easy to expose infiltrators, but if you are claiming that every bigot in the teaparty movement is simply there to discredit the movement, you are pumping gas on mars.

 

[geauxtohell]

Pfft. Someone is in charge. You guys just don't realize it.

As we pointed out, the people that think they are the "movers and shakers" in the movement probably don't realize they are dancing on somebody's string.

Oh Noeeesssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!11!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!!!

Who's in charge?

Elvis?

The Bilderbergs?!?!?!!?

ALIENS??!?!?!!?!?!?!!!!!!????

We already linked the information for you.

 

[boedicca]

I am? I am not marching on Washington and carrying pitchforks. I express my opinion here, and I vote.

As I said, the legitimacy of the teabaggers would be so much more established if they didn't fire up the protests immediately after Bush left office.

Historically illiterate.

The Tea Parties started up in response to the Stimulus Bill. Obama was responsible for that fiscal insanity.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Then we agree for the most part, although maybe we have different ideas of what "anti-government" means.

I don't think tea partiers can be painted with a broad brush or that they can all be gathered under one label, as I just said in the post you replied to. I do believe the fringe elements that have gotten bad press are opportunists who show up to take advantage, and I also don't believe all of the groups have been tainted by the profiteering and corruption some of the groups have gotten bad press for. In fact, where some of the groups are concerned the opposite is true and they seem to be speaking out against it.

The thing I have an issue with is the ones who do know, are in a position to fix it (which isn't your average person showing up at a rally with a sign, btw) and refuse to take responsibility for it because it's easier to say it's all somebody else's fault rather than try to police their own. Oh I know it's politics, but I don't have to respect it.

I agree...how do you weed out infiltraters who's stated goal is to bring the Tea Party Movement down by painting them all as racist homophobes?

The same way you weed out any other nutjob who shows up to coopt your message. Ask them to tone it down or leave. If they refuse, remove them or organize and drown them out. As was pointed out, the tea parties pay for the licenses and put in the effort and expense to hold the rallies - it's up to them to arrange for whatever policing or security is needed if they want to keep control of them.

That's exactly what happened!!! Yet the MSM chose to cover the racist homophobe infiltrators and say "this is the Tea Party folks!!!" vice the protests AGAINST them!!!!

 

[boedicca]

Pfft. Someone is in charge. You guys just don't realize it.

As we pointed out, the people that think they are the "movers and shakers" in the movement probably don't realize they are dancing on somebody's string.

Oh Noeeesssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!11!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!!!

Who's in charge?

Elvis?

The Bilderbergs?!?!?!!?

ALIENS??!?!?!!?!?!?!!!!!!????

We already linked the information for you.

No - you are spreading misinformation.

There is not national command and control structure for the Tea Parties. There are thousands of local ones - many cooperate and coordinate with each other through various networks (Tea Party Patriots, Tea Party Express).

 

[rightwinger]

Here is the most recent statement from crashtheteaparty.org



Crash The Tea Party!


Judging from this--they'll be doing a little identity theft on the side--must be a paid volunteer group from ACORN--LOL.

You don't know the half of it..

The ENTIRE Tea Party movement is a Democratic plant to make Republicans look stupid. You don't think there are really that many people willing to go out in public and act like idiots do you?

sure there are. haven't you ever seen one of the major party conventions?

Sure have....

Do you think a legitimate convention would have Tommy Tancredo and Sarah Palin as keynote speakers?

The entire Tea Party movement is an obvious Democratic plan to make the Conservatives look like idiots. It is working too