Democrats & Liberals Archives

The Tea Party is Toxic to Republicans

Ever since President Obama was inaugurated we have been hearing about the Tea Party. Frantically-agitated people, such as Sarah Palin, Glen Beck and Michele Bachmann, have been filling the airwaves with “conservative” rantings, ridiculous smears and outright lies about liberals.

Tea-partiers, we were told, represented average people who were frustrated and outraged with Obama's "socialism." This was a big phony lie. Tea Party members are not average, but mostly white, better educated, with higher-than-average incomes and very conservative. In plain language, they are far-right Republicans who are opposed to what they consider the "moderation" of currently-elected Republican officials.

And Tea-partiers are a threat to incumbent Republicans, not so much to Democrats. Take a gander at what the Washington Post says:

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll indicates that the tea party's gain is mostly the GOP's loss: the percentages of Americans seeing the Democratic Party as the most in sync with their values and as the most empathetic are about the same as in November, while the numbers siding with the GOP have dropped by nearly identical numbers now identifying with the tea party in these areas.

The Tea Party divides the conservative base and has little or no effect on Democrats. Furthermore, the enthusiasm gap between Republicans and Democrats has decreased by half. I believe that by November, Democratic enthusiasm will equal or surpass Republican enthusiasm, which, after all, is due mostly to Tea-Partiers throwing bombs at establishment Republicans.

You see, Tea-partiers drink a strong tea that is toxic to establishment Republicans but is innocuous to Democrats.

Posted by Paul Siegel at May 6, 2010 6:59 PM
Comments
Comment #300182

YOU WISH!!!

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 6, 2010 8:46 PM
Comment #300183


It is true that the tea party people would like to replace conservative Republicans with ultra conservatives but, so far, they have had very little success against the established Republican candidates in the primaries.

The only way the tea party can hurt the Republicans is if their people stay home in November and don’t support the established Republican candidates. That is not likely to happen.

Posted by: jlw at May 6, 2010 9:05 PM
Comment #300190

That’s all the tea-baggers have ever been: embarrassed Republicans.

Posted by: phx8 at May 6, 2010 10:52 PM
Comment #300192

Go figure. Its a catchy name after all we have all known of the Boston Tea Party since grade school but do you remember this. The original Tea Party participants were fakes also. They dressed up as Indians to disguise their true identities. When you think about it it fits perfectly. Palin, Beck, Limbaugh and the lefts social elite are fake too. They would have you believe they represent the people but they are way to motivated by self adoration to even be able to relate with the majority of Americans. Although I am a Liberal I know there are some well meaning and brilliant conservatives out here that wish to truly contribute to the betterment of this nation. They had better separate themselves from these right wing radicals if they dont want to go down with this ship. The American people are not so easily dooped by smooth sounding rhetoric these days. We have become a better informed electorate than in the past. MOST OF US

Posted by: R Macklin at May 6, 2010 11:41 PM
Comment #300199

Looks like the TP is not having much luck changing the Rep establishment slate. The new Gallup shows that Rep enthusiasm has plummeted to about where it was before HCR passed. Too bad in a couple ways:1. Their yahoo candidates would be easier to beat. 2.Its too bad they were mis-led from the begginning. They do know that SOMETHING is wrong. They just do not know what it is.

Posted by: bills at May 7, 2010 9:06 AM
Comment #300200

The Tea Party is Republicans. They used to vote Republican, and they will again in November, despite what the polls show. The reason is cognitive dissonance. When asked by a pollster if they will support Republican incumbents, they will say no. But, if asked if they will vote for a Democrat, they say no. If asked if they intend to vote in Nov., they say, absolutely. Bottom line is, when they go to the ballot, they will vote as they always have, Republican.

What Democrats have to be concerned with are the real Independent voters out there, the one’s who refuse to support either Party. They will be voting against the incumbent regardless of what party they belong to, and regardless of what party the challenger belongs to. They intend to make their voting presence felt, and a wave of indiscriminate anti-incumbent voting that lowers the incumbency reelection rate overall, will have precisely that effect, when the analysts are done crunching the numbers.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 7, 2010 9:12 AM
Comment #300201

This post is nothing more than a continuation of the talking points of the left. Paul, perhaps you could actually post something that was original and not just talking points.

http://biggovernment.com/sright/2010/05/06/rep-andre-carson-tea-party-protesters-are-one-of-the-largest-threats-to-our-internal-security/

I’ve always heard that the left will identify their worst fear by attacking it. It all boils down to the fact that the left HAS to result to personal attacks. If, the TP is the worst thing possible for the Republican Party, then why would the left be so eager to expose this? The truth is, the left fears the TP.

This link is an example of a democrat congressman personally attacking citizens who do not agree with the left. No proof for his accusations, just personal attacks. This isn’t the first time this has happened. At the same time, anti-Arizona protests ARE violent and yet the MSM and the left are silent. Or do you on the left believe these protestors are justified in setting fires and throwing projectiles at the police?

Final thought, if the TP is only a minority and only represents disgruntled Republicans, then it will come to naught!!

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 7, 2010 9:32 AM
Comment #300203

David said:

“The Tea Party is Republicans.”

The polls don’t prove this out. 75% of independents have a favorable view Tea Party

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=520527

Obama, who had a lot of the support on Independents when he was elected, has lost that support. Add to that, the Independents are the fastest growing voting block and add that the Democrats have fallen in the eyes of the American people. These next two links were taken a year ago, and it is without dispute, that Obama and the dems have dropped in the polls. They have passed laws that the American people do not like, and have taken America in a direction the people do not want to go.

http://people-press.org/report/517/political-values-and-core-attitudes

This poll was taken a year ago.

http://correntewire.com/independents_fastest_growing_block_voters_reflect_me

Again here fastest growing block

You said: “What Democrats have to be concerned with are the real Independent voters out there, the one’s who refuse to support either Party. They will be voting against the incumbent regardless of what party they belong to, and regardless of what party the challenger belongs to. They intend to make their voting presence felt, and a wave of indiscriminate anti-incumbent voting that lowers the incumbency reelection rate overall, will have precisely that effect, when the analysts are done crunching the numbers.”

This is true, but with recent polls showing 75% of independents having a favorable view of the TP, I would suggest a lot of these Ind would vote Republican. There are no 3rd party independent candidates. The choice comes down to a Rep or a Dem. I will concede the TP will vote Republican, but I can tell you for a surety, the TP is involved in the primaries to vote for conservative candidates. The Republican candidates running in November will reflect the TP conservative ideals, for the most part.


Posted by: Beretta9 at May 7, 2010 10:10 AM
Comment #300208

B9
As I mentioned above, I would like more TP candidates. That being said the TP candidates have not been doing very well against Rep establishment candidates. The numbers are comming in and not rationally disputed. Add to that Palin endorsed the non-TP candidate in CA. to add insult to injury.

The TP is a flash in the pan and at least as troublesome to the Rep establishment as the Dems.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/05/a_mixed_primary_night_for_the.html

Posted by: bills at May 7, 2010 11:31 AM
Comment #300212


“Final thought, If the TP is only a minority and only represents disgruntled Republicans, then it will come to naught.”

The evidence suggests that is basically what the TP is. I have no doubt that there are independent conservative and libertarian associates but, there again, these independents almost always vote Republican and occasionally blue dog.

They have, for the most part, been running in Republican primaries and loosing. That suggests that they are a minority even among Republicans.

There was one TP candidate that ran as a Democrat in Southern Ohio. He went from the Republican convention in 2008 to the TP in 2009 and then became a Democratic candidate for Congress in 2010. He lost the primary to a corporate executive Democrat. The CED has slightly better odds of winning in November than a snow ball has of quenching the fires of hell.

If the Tea Party were to become an official political party and hang around till 2012, they could play a crucial roll in the presidential election by splitting the vote and helping Obama get reelected.

Posted by: jlw at May 7, 2010 12:24 PM
Comment #300217

baretta9, you missed the recent poll I cited a couple weeks ago of ACTUAL tea partyers in a phone survey. The vast majority vote Republican. Only 4% of those identifying themselves as Tea Partyers have ever done anything activist like attend a Tea Party demonstration or meeting.

They say they are independents, but, if I recall correctly from the posted poll, more than 80% are Republican. 5% said they vote Democrat. If they vote Republican, they are Republican, regardless of what they tell anyone else.

Your comment is wrong, as well, about no Independent candidates. VOID has already been contact by a couple and one is already registered for the ballot. An article in the MSM this last week also discusses how the independent candidates numbers are on the rise. Are you forgetting Crist? Also, an independent. Ergo, your comment is wrong about this.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 7, 2010 3:11 PM
Comment #300218

jlw, astute comments, and agree with what what I have read about the topic and in the recent polling data.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 7, 2010 3:12 PM
Comment #300219

David, I know there are Ind candidates and except for Crist none of them playing any major role. I assumed that was understood. I was talking about viable candidates. There are always non-named candidates in every election.

Perhaps you are right and perhaps wrong, only time will tell.

jlw:

Palin also endorsed McCain and he is not popular with the TP.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 7, 2010 3:44 PM
Comment #300220

Speaking of “TOXIC”, can anyone tell me where Nancy Pelosi is? I haven’t seen or heard from her since the passage of Obamacare. Any liberals want to take a shot at the question. Haven’t heard much out of the mouth of Reid either. What goes??

If they did everything for us and we are so happy about it, why aren’t they tooting their horns? Horn tooting is what liberals do best.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 7, 2010 5:03 PM
Comment #300222

“Ever since President Obama was inaugurated we have been hearing about the Tea Party”.

Mr. Seigel, You are correct in your assessment that the Tea Party is not a real threat to the Democrats. You will always have your 37%’ers no matter who you run.

Tea Party members have been mad at the Republican establishment since before Barrack Obama announced his run for office; your observation is late, weak, and only represents liberal talking points. The Conservatives you mention such as Mr. McCain and others are pseudo conservatives with progressive ideas that over spend like Democrats and place our country in jeopardy like Greece; we will purge those progressives from our party because that is not who we voted for and run real Conservatives that always win when voters are handed a real choice in an election.
Keep wishing liberalcrats-keep wishing.

Posted by: Mikee at May 7, 2010 5:06 PM
Comment #300226

There are no Tea Party candidates, period. They are not a political party. There are candidates who the Tea Party is supportive of. I am compiling a list of black leaders who support the Tea Party movement and are of course, conservative. So far my list is almost 70 strong. These are people who put their country before race, themselves, party, or frankly averything else, except God. This is to me very noteworthy. So those that can’t see the black influence in the Tea Party, it does not matter. Race does not matter. America is what matters here. The reason I am compiling the list is that when the left, liberal, establishment says “where are the blacks” “where are the hispanics” you need to keep your eyes open and your nose unplugged. They are there and they are doing well without the Godfather party there to promise them along. Just for the record my list will not include Powell or Rice. Just for a sampler it will include Herman Cain and Thomas Sowell. Look forward to sharing the list before too long.

Posted by: tom humes at May 7, 2010 6:22 PM
Comment #300231

Does anyone know the names Herman Cain or Thomas Sowell without googling?

So, Tom… I will have to ignore my lying eyes, which noted in video after video the virtually all-white Tea Party crowds. Statistically, on a random basis, about 1/8 conservatives should be black, and about the same number latino. Really, Tom, you’re wasting your time.

Oh! Don’t forget to list all the black Senators and Congressman! Again, in a racially just society, statistically something like 5 Senators should be black, along with a couple dozen Congressman. Oh wait. There are zero blacks in the House & Senate. Zero. It seems the GOP can occasionally find one to nominate, but Republican voters will NOT elect them.

Posted by: phx8 at May 7, 2010 7:38 PM
Comment #300233

Mikeee,
The Tea Partiers have no credibility because they never bothered to say anything when Bush was president and the GOP was in power. They stood by like good Germans while Bush and the GOP ran up the national debt and conducted wars on a credit card. Sorry. People who wait until a black president is elected and then get ‘angry’ about the results of their policies simply have no credibility.

Posted by: phx8 at May 7, 2010 8:12 PM
Comment #300234

phx8:

So do you vote for the person because of the color of their skin or because you think they are the best person for the job? A whole lot of Americans voted for Obama and many of them voted for him because he was black and not because he was qualified. So much for the 52.9% who voted for him, in fact more Americans voted for Obama (69 million) than any other presidential candidate in history, including Bush in ‘04 (62 million).

Many voted for him because of guilt (the evil whites) and many voted for him because they didn’t want to be called racists as a result of not voting for him. So what did these non-partisan whites get in return for voting for a black? Well they got to be called racists when they didn’t like the direction he was taking us. And they got called racists when they supported the Tea Party. And they got called racists when they were against illegal aliens crossing the border into the US. And they were called racists when they were against the Obamacare. In fact, you can’t please a liberal; if you are a white conservative, you are a racist; if you are a Christian, you are a racist, if you are a liberal who supports conservative ideas, you are a racist.

Tell me, how many blacks have run on a republican ticket in a non-democratic district?

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 7, 2010 8:31 PM
Comment #300236

phx8,

The Tea Baggies have no credibility with anyone except Bark-shooters, KKKers, Covenant Sword Swollowers, Glenn (the entertainer) Beck, and his black counterpart Thomas Sowell, who writes a column…sometimes. The rest are loony-toons, who just like to yell and spit. However, we must not take them lightly…I had no idea how many people were willing to abuse the rights granted in the 1st and 2nd Amendments, and then call themselves patriots.

It is a group that supports small government, as long as that government keeps their checks flowing.

It is a group that likes it’s tea with lots of ice, but rants about paying the taxes that pays for the ice maker.

In other words it is a study in contradiction. It may be showing some signs of exaustion…the latest gathering in Atlanta was about half the size of the same gathering a year ago…one can only hope, as it could be dangerous to the rest of us if it grows more powerful.

Posted by: Marysdude at May 7, 2010 8:49 PM
Comment #300238

You should be writing material for Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow and not on WB. I have a mental picture of you foaming at the mouth while writing these most evil, sadistic words. Your writing reeks of hatred.

DRR recently said it’s okay to critisize the writing and not the person. So I must say your writing is most hateful.

“The Tea Baggies have no credibility with anyone except Bark-shooters, KKKers, Covenant Sword Swollowers, Glenn (the entertainer) Beck, and his black counterpart Thomas Sowell, who writes a column…sometimes. The rest are loony-toons, who just like to yell and spit. However, we must not take them lightly…I had no idea how many people were willing to abuse the rights granted in the 1st and 2nd Amendments, and then call themselves patriots.”

An insult from beginning to end…

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 7, 2010 9:03 PM
Comment #300243

Beretta9,

Do you not read your own writings? Many of your posts are nothing more than partisan rants full of hate.

Perhaps if you toned some of that down, you might get more moderate responses.

Posted by: gergle at May 7, 2010 9:51 PM
Comment #300244

Paul,

I don’t think people like Bachman are innocuous to anyone. Her spastic fits with little or no connection to reality, rallies right wing fanatics and discourages moderates from political interest or activity. I think it changes the tone of discourse and hinders fact based arguments.

I think they are poisonous to us all, and I await their political demise with baited breath.

Posted by: gergle at May 7, 2010 9:55 PM
Comment #300247

Beretta9,
“Tell me, how many blacks have run on a republican ticket in a non-democratic district?”

I don’t know. What is the answer?

I voted for Obama, but it had nothing to do with race. He seemed to be a class act- smart, well educated, a man at the top of his game. For the most part he has followed through on his campaign stances, and that has not always pleased me, not at all. But I knew that at the time of the campaign. Obama is very moderate- careful and pragmatic and erudite and well-spoken, and he is generally optimistic, so I can live with the various disagreements on issues.

It’s odd to watch the GOP and Tea Party opposition to him. It’s as if almost everyone lacks the far-right conservative credentials and therefore everyone else must be a progressive/liberal. There is no room for the middle. It strikes me as a recipe for political disaster.

Marysdude,
Extra credit for knowing the name of one of the ‘leaders’ of the Tea Party movement! A columnist, you say?

Posted by: phx8 at May 7, 2010 10:46 PM
Comment #300249

“I voted for Obama, but it had nothing to do with race. He seemed to be a class act- smart, well educated, a man at the top of his game.”

Well, you certainly got fooled, didn’t you?

Let me get this straight, you are puzzled that the GOP and the TP oppose Obama, because we cannot come to the middle. And in the same breath, blather on about the socialist agenda of the left. Obama is a class act alright; we will all be in Greece’s position in a few short years.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 7, 2010 11:56 PM
Comment #300250


Beretta9 and phx8 bring a good point to mind. Would the tea party exist if McCain had won the election? I think not even though McCain is not popular with the tea party. He was popular with many of them in November of 2008.

On independent candidates, the primaries are basically a Democrat/Republican event. I wasn’t offered the opportunity to vote an independent ballot.

Independent candidates show up on the ballot in the fall general election.

tom humes said..” There are no Tea Party candidates, period. They are not a political party. There are candidates who the Tea Party is supportive of.”

Is it possible that some of the non tea party candidates who the tea party were supportive of and who lost to Republicans in the primary could show up on the ballot again in the fall as independents endorsed by the tea party movement? I bet the Democrats are hopeful that is the case.

tom humes, many of us will await your list with Great Expectations. While you are compiling the list of black leaders that support the tea party movement, why not, just for the fun of it, compile a list of black leaders that do not support the tea party movement. I guess that would be to time consuming. Don’t slight the Latino conservatives. They need to be listed as well.

There are some good ideas floating around the tea party. The problem is that the tea party has taken a Democratic Party big tent approach which has caused it to be associated with many fringe elements such as birthers and white supremacists.

When I think about black conservative leaders in the tea party movement, I see a vision of black conservatives marching in support of the tea party, arm in arm with birthers, Klansman and conservative white suburbanites. To me, that is more like a nightmare than a dream come true.

Posted by: jlw at May 8, 2010 12:05 AM
Comment #300253

Beretta,
“I voted for Obama, but it had nothing to do with race. He seemed to be a class act- smart, well educated, a man at the top of his game.”

Well, you certainly got fooled, didn’t you?

What are you trying to say?

Debts and deficits are a huge problem, but our situation is very, very different from Greece. Obama and the Democrats succeeded in the first step for restoring economic health: they stabilized and resurrected the economy. All of the economic indicators have turned north. We’re in good shape, thank goodness. The next step, the second priority, will be job creation. Today’s job report was encouraging, but as virtually everyone knows, it will take at least another year for job creation to kick into gear, and it will be six or seven years just to get back to where we were when Clinton left office, because so many jobs were lost in the economic meltdown. Debt and deficits are the third priority. They are definitely a priority, and on that liberals and conservatives agree. To some extent, economic growth and job creation will alleviate the problem. The obvious answer is to restore the tax structure, the tax rates, to where it stood when Clinton left office; however, that will need to be put on hold until the economy grows more positive, since tax increases (and spending cuts) brake the economy.

Posted by: phx8 at May 8, 2010 1:31 AM
Comment #300260

phx8, I will mirror your last comment. There isn’t a president in American history who I have learned about that I don’t disagree with on at least some of the initiatives and leadership decisions. Some of Obama’s decisions irk me to no end. However, I voted for him too for the same reasons you did. And he has, so far, proven to be an effective leader on many fronts, while remaining human and thus fallible and no miracle worker.

I may vote for him again, and may not. That will depend upon who else is on the ballot and how they compare to Obama’s performance and policy directions. I don’t look for saviors in my ballot choices, I look for competence, ability, and what I believe are a majority of the right policy directions. Obama has lived up to those expectations of mine so far, though several of his decisions and positions defy logic and reason from my vantage point.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 8, 2010 7:53 AM
Comment #300261

As bile is spat…so shall bile be echoed…it’s a no-brainer.

Posted by: Marysdude at May 8, 2010 8:15 AM
Comment #300267

phx8:

“Debts and deficits are a huge problem, but our situation is very, very different from Greece. Obama and the Democrats succeeded in the first step for restoring economic health: they stabilized and resurrected the economy. All of the economic indicators have turned north. We’re in good shape, thank goodness. The next step, the second priority, will be job creation.”

Our situation is different? US entitlements have doubled in the past 20 years. Our percentage of national debt vs. GDP is not much different than Greece. Greece had to drop their national healthcare while we start one. Our situation is not much different.

Secondly, there has been no economic restoration. Unemployment 9.9 percent and Obama says this is the new norm. If you abolish the juggled figures, the unemployment rate is 17%. If you take away the newly created federal jobs, and the newly hired census workers, what would unemployment be?

What economic indicators are you using? Stock Market: down and volatile; Employment: down; Job market: no jobs created. Our national debt has far outpaced our GDP. With a national debt of $13 trillion and climbing, and the likely possibility of interest rates climbing and multiplying this debt, and you say we are in good shape? Europe’s economy falling apart and China facing a real estate bubble crisis that will make Greece look like a picnic.

http://dailycapitalist.com/2010/03/14/chinas-fragile-economy-its-housing-bubble-and-what-it-means-to-us-part-i/

I would hate to see what you think is bad shape.

These numbers are unsustainable. Obama has been in office almost 2 years and here we are. What will it be like in 2 more years? It’s his wars in the Middle East, it’s his energy policies, it’s his unemployment, it’s his economy; not George Bush’s. And far, all we hear is blame someone else and continued campaign promises. He has done nothing to help America and everything to hurt us. If he opens his mouth, he is lying.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 8, 2010 11:35 AM
Comment #300268

Marysdude
Brilliant Statement (BS). How long does it take to google something like that? Really doesn’t make sense. Of course the little dots show there is more to this. I have to take a break there is dandruff all over my keyboard from scratching my head.

Posted by: tom humes at May 8, 2010 11:37 AM
Comment #300270

“Census hiring has been going on since March 2009 and should have peaked in the last two months. Sources estimate total census hiring in the range of 1.2 million. I have not found anything near this amount added to the government category in previous reports. However, temporary workers in the Business and Professional category have ballooned during the census-hiring period. A footnote in the employment report indicates that jobs added in ‘other’ categories may be included in the Business and Professional category. We will have to see what happens there in a few months when almost all of the 1.2 million census workers are no longer employed.

To see if the job situation is actually improving, it is always a good idea to compare year over year figures. According to the BLS, the number of people ‘not in the labor force’ is over two million higher in April 2010 than it was in April 2009. This increase reduces the reported unemployment rate. The employment to population ratio is more than a percent lower today than a year earlier. The worse comparison though is for long-term unemployment (27 weeks or over). This number has grown considerably and is on its way to doubling. A year ago there were 3.7 million long-term unemployed and last month there were 6.7 million. This indicates that the unemployment rate is not just high, but a significant number of the unemployed are having trouble getting new jobs - and this will continue to be the case.

According to recent polls, just 21% of Americans consider the economy to be in good condition. The view of the average person is very different from the numbers produced by the statisticians in Washington. Even with the job increases that took place in April, there are approximately 1.5 million less people employed in the U.S. today than one year ago. When the $800 billion stimulus bill was passed in February 2009, the Obama administration claimed it would create 3.5 million additional jobs. There seems to be some inconsistency between the hype and what has actually taken place. Is it any wonder that the American people don’t trust the numbers coming out of Washington?”

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Jobs-Added-in-April-But-etfguide-3451360500.html?x=0&.v=1

Read the whole article and get your head out of the sand.

IMO, the only thing “Toxic”, is the economy. Now, it depends how much this will affect Americans and what they will do about it.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 8, 2010 11:47 AM
Comment #300271

In order to create jobs in the private sector; businesses have to flourish. Tell me, what positive thing has Obama ever said that would cause business to flourish? Simple enough question, maybe someone on the left could answer it.

When you are in a continual attack mode on business, with the threat of increased taxes, the economy will NEVER recover. Unemployment started climbing when it looked like Obama was going to win the election. It was 5.5% in June 2008. And has been climbing ever since. Why, because Obama is anti-business and cannot be trusted. Who in their right mind would want to hire people, if they are going to be penalized for doing it?


Obama told us the recession was over in 2009. And the recession was linked to the economic conditions and unemployment.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 8, 2010 12:09 PM
Comment #300272

I have to apologize for giving you too much to think about. It could very easily cause brain overload. The answers will boil down to “you are a racist” or “your grammar is incorrect”.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 8, 2010 12:13 PM
Comment #300273

Tom,

As long as your dandruff doesn’t show up on MY keyboard, I remain unimpressed with your scratching. B9 accused me of being mean spirited, hateful and smelling like smelt. I merely reminded him that crap flows both ways. Need I remind YOU as well?

This site does very well as long as we all remain civil, but it does not take much to lose that civility. I’ve lost track of the number of times I’ve been suspended here, but I don’t believe I’ve ever cast that first stone. There have been times when my stone was a little too sharp or too heavy…but…

Whether three dots are used or not, there is always more to be said by all who enter here. I just so indicate that with dots. Of course, if you’d like me to stop using them, I will, out of my deep and abiding respect for your views.

Posted by: Marysdude at May 8, 2010 12:20 PM
Comment #300276

MD:

You said, “but I don’t believe I’ve ever cast that first stone.”

Let me re-paste your previous comment.

“The Tea Baggies have no credibility with anyone except Bark-shooters, KKKers, Covenant Sword Swollowers, Glenn (the entertainer) Beck, and his black counterpart Thomas Sowell, who writes a column…sometimes. The rest are loony-toons, who just like to yell and spit. However, we must not take them lightly…I had no idea how many people were willing to abuse the rights granted in the 1st and 2nd Amendments, and then call themselves patriots.”

Except for the KKK slur, this could apply to any conservative. Therefore it offensive.

I don’t believe I said anythng about you smelling like smelt. I have seen Tea Partiers gathered together and I have seen SEIU union and anti-imigration groups gathered together. The later is always the more violent.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 8, 2010 12:36 PM
Comment #300278

Beretta,
I’d be cautious about comparing the situation with Greece with the US, and I would also suggest taking numbers like debt as a percentage of GDP seriously. Pardon the analogy, but it is a little like comparing a person with $10 million dollars having $1 million in debt, with a person with $100 dollars having $10 in debt. For the multi-millionaire, 10% debt has virtually no effect. For a poor person, 10% debt means no health care and running short of food.

By the way, a lower Euro helps the Dollar quite a bit.

I agree, the unemployment rate is too high, and every effort needs to be made to bring it down. As I said, that’s why it is so important to address this second priority. Debt and deficit reduction will follow if jobs can be created. Before you use the unemployment rate to criticize the Obama administration, remember it is a LAGGING indicator, and the trends have already turned positive, both for employment numbers (even excluding temporary blips like the hiring of census workers- remember, the number to watch is non-farm payroll- if someone uses the unemployment rate to measure the economy and the performance of an administration, you are probably hearing from someone who doesn’t know what they are talking about, or someone who wants to mislead you), and for all the other Leading Economic Indicator numbers the same is true, they have turned positive. Look at TRENDS to assess the future of the economy.

The stock market is down? What are you talking about? Are you seriously suggesting the performance of the past week is the standard on which Obama should be measured? The market has boomed since he took office. It has had a BIG run. I’m sorry if you invested for the first time last week and lost money, but you might want to pay a little closer attention in the future to predictive TRENDs. Stay away from people who base their advice on making one number a percentage of a larger one in order to make a political point. Whether liberal or conservative, they are almost certainly trying to mislead. The same holds true for the unemployment rate. It’s easily understood by people unfamiliar with economic terms, but not very useful for determining where we are going.

Posted by: phx8 at May 8, 2010 1:20 PM
Comment #300279

phx8;

I actually said the stock market was “down and volatile”. Is it not volatile? The Dow was about 12.5 when Obama was sworn in and it is barely over 10 now, so that, in my book, is down. Only a liberal could go from 12.5 to 10 and say it s going up.

You can’t continue to make business the bad guy, continue to talk taxes, continue to attack energy, and coninue to spend and expect the market and employment to is get better. It is not logical to expect the market to improve when Wall Street is continually made into the enemy.

When obamacare taxes kick in, and cap and trade is passed (whether by congress or obama’s EPA), it will be the death of what is left of the economy.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 8, 2010 1:57 PM
Comment #300283
You said, “but I don’t believe I’ve ever cast that first stone.”

Let me re-paste your previous comment.

“The Tea Baggies have no credibility with anyone except Bark-shooters, KKKers, Covenant Sword Swollowers, Glenn (the entertainer) Beck, and his black counterpart Thomas Sowell, who writes a column…sometimes. The rest are loony-toons, who just like to yell and spit. However, we must not take them lightly…I had no idea how many people were willing to abuse the rights granted in the 1st and 2nd Amendments, and then call themselves patriots.”

Except for the KKK slur, this could apply to any conservative. Therefore it offensive.

B9,

You confuse offensive with casting the first stone. What I said about the Tea Baggies was merely an observation, and while it may have been offensive to some, it is the truth as I see it. But, please show me where, in that statement, I said anything more offensive than many of the diatribes I’ve seen here that you have ranted on ‘liberals’, ‘progressives’, etc…thus not the first stone.

Posted by: Marysdude at May 8, 2010 3:13 PM
Comment #300288
I actually said the stock market was “down and volatile”. Is it not volatile? The Dow was about 12.5 when Obama was sworn in and it is barely over 10 now, so that, in my book, is down. Only a liberal could go from 12.5 to 10 and say it s going up.

On January 20, 2009 the DJIA closed at 7,949.09
On March 6, 2009 the DJIA reached a low of 6,469.95
On May 6 2010, the DJIA opened at 10,862.22

Only a liberal conservative could go from 12.5 to 10 8000 to 11000 and say it’s going up down & volatile.

ARRA wasn’t signed into law until February 17, 2009 so I don’t think it’s fair to say the drop in the DJIA in the first month and a half of the Obama administration was a result of any of his policies.

source for DJIA numbers

Please stop making numbers up; research your opinions and provide a link as evidence.


Personally, I don’t like the tone those on the Left here at WatchBlog take when describing the Tea Party Movement. I think it’d be much more productive to spend time demonstrating the errors in their thinking rather than throwing around labels such as “racist” etc…

Posted by: Warped Reality at May 8, 2010 5:43 PM
Comment #300293

I agree with WR, being called a “liberal” or “progressive” is not the same as being called a “racist”, “Tea Baggies”, “Bark-shooters”, “KKKers”, “Covenant Sword Swollowers”, or “loony-toons”.

I went back to the time of the election of Obama. The DOW at the “◦Begin the month: 10,850.66 points”:

http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/dow-jones-in-october-2008-by-the-numbers/

The DOW began to drop after Obam’s election:

“A case of post-election nerves has sent stocks plunging as investors, again anxious about a recession, are wondering what impact a Barack Obama presidency will have on business and the overall economy. Volatility has returned on Wall Street, with the Dow Jones industrials falling 486 points to the 9,139 level, and all the major indexes tumbling more than 5 percent.”

http://cbs13.com/breakingnews/stocks.wall.street.2.857283.html

I hold to the fact that the drop was because Obama was elected and the market was worried about what he would do and what his policies would be. The market has continued to be volatile as a result of Obama’s policies. Employment will continue to low as a result of Obama’s policies.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 8, 2010 6:57 PM
Comment #300296

Beretta,
Obama was elected in November, not October. He took office in January. In the fall of 2008, the markets were reacting to a severe credit crunch and on-going asset deflation. The financial sector- specifically, the investment banks- collapsed, and it took a massive infusion by the Federal Reserve to keep the US economy from going into a depression.

If you would like a link for employment trends and leading economic indicators, let me know. They are easily available by simply googling for the info, and anyone who invests knows the score.

No one thinks the national debt and deficits are a good thing. These are problems the Obama administration inherited. They have followed classic Keynsian economics to combat the immediate problems, and the solution worked. The situation is stabilized, and the economy is growing. Now the question is this: how do we create job creation on a big scale?

Posted by: phx8 at May 8, 2010 7:12 PM
Comment #300298

I know when he was elected and I know when he took office. The point of the link was when he was elected the DOW dropped 486 points as a result of post election nerves. Meaning the market was nervous.

Now, if you would like to check the employment numbers, you will find unemployement began to rise when Obama won the nomination. Which showed that business had pre-election nervousness of an anti-business president being elected. And rightfully so, because he is the most anti-business president we have ever had. So at what point do you think business will have the confidence to expand and hire?

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 8, 2010 7:24 PM
Comment #300299

Beretta,
The collapse of the financial sector in the fall of 2008 took YEARS to develop, not weeks or months. The market decline and job losses started long before Obama was even the Democratic candidate. The stock market started its decline in 2007, and the recession officially started in December 2007.

Also, you can’t have it both ways: you cannot blame Obama for stock market declines, and refuse to give credit for advances. It comes across as unfocused partisan anger, which reinforces my general impression of the Tea Party movement.

Why do you think Obama is an anti-business president? I do not understand.

Posted by: phx8 at May 8, 2010 7:48 PM
Comment #300300

B9,

You said “The Dow was about 12.5 when Obama was sworn in” and now you try to backpedal to election day?

I fail to see how Obama is responsible for the drop that happened before the ARRA was signed into law. Between election day and the week after the ARRA, the market continued the downward trend that had existed since the market peaked in the Autumn of 2007. The biggest drops came in September 2008 when Congress failed to pass the TARP bill and also in May/June of 2008.

unemployement began to rise when Obama won the nomination.
I think we have a case of the cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy here. Posted by: Warped Reality at May 8, 2010 7:53 PM
Comment #300302

B9 wrote: “I hold to the fact that the drop was because Obama was elected and the market was worried about what he would do and what his policies would be”

That’s hardly “a fact” now is it?

Posted by: boomxtwo at May 8, 2010 8:08 PM
Comment #300331

The topic of this post is, “The Tea Party is Toxic to Republicans”. A lot has been said pro and con, concerning whether the TP is good or bad for conservatism. That remains to be seen. But Bob Bennett suffered a shocking defeat in Utah, because he was not conservative enough, and he did not have the support of the TP. Although he did have the support of the NRA (which is very conservative), and Mitt Romney (who is a moderate/conservative).

“SALT LAKE CITY— Once-popular Sen. Bob Bennett fell victim to a growing national conservative movement with his stunning defeat at Utah’s GOP convention.
Delegates voted Saturday to bar the 76-year-old senator from seeking a fourth term, making him the first congressional incumbent to be ousted this year and demonstrates the challenges candidates face from the right in 2010.
Bennett was under fire for voting to bail out Wall Street, co-sponsoring a bipartisan bill mandating health insurance coverage and for aggressively pursuing earmarks.
“The political atmosphere obviously has been toxic, and it’s very clear that some of the votes that I have cast have added to the toxic environment,” Bennett told reporters Saturday, choking back tears.”

http://www.rr.com/news/topic/article/rr/9008/11178379/US_Sen_Bob_Bennett_ousted_at_Utah_GOP_convention

Bennett had 2 strikes against him:

1. He promised to serve only 2 terms in 1992 and he didn’t keep the promise.

2. He voted for bailouts, that his constituents did not support.

It remains to be seen what his replacement will do in the general election, but this is clearly a case of the TP having an influence on an election. Also, it doesn’t say much for Romney’s influence on conservatives. It is interesting to note Bennett’s comment, “The political atmosphere obviously has been toxic, and it’s very clear that some of the votes that I have cast have added to the toxic environment,” considering the title of this post.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 9, 2010 1:17 PM
Comment #300338

Regarding Bennett and the Tea Party Movement, I must note that Bennett was the favorite amongst Utah Republican voters. The people who ousted him were delegates. I think this sheds light on the fact that the Tea Party Movement at best remains a very vocal minority, but does not resonate much with the electorate as a whole. Of course, very vocal minorities can be very influential, especially in a low-turnout Congressional election.

http://www.sltrib.com/utahpolitics/ci_14999322

Posted by: Warped Reality at May 9, 2010 3:34 PM
Comment #300360

WR
Do you call that logic or just talk?
The TP did not support Bennett. The Delegates did not support Bennett. Bennett is thrown out as the Republican candidate. And you say the TP is a voice of the minority. I googled to see where you came up with such, well what do you call it. I must conclude it is original with you. I am wondering what it all means. To me Bennett did not live up to what the people of Utah thought he should live up to and as a consequence he is going to be one more number in the unemployment ranks.

Posted by: tom humes at May 9, 2010 11:18 PM
Comment #300365

B9,
Is it possible that you don’t see the sweeping condescending, sarcastic remarks which color your ‘rational’ criticisms of the opposition? If you do not think you convey this attitude in your posts, let me assure you… you do.

Furthermore, your communication of how misguided and morally bankrupt you find the progressive or liberal point of view should allow you to understand that many of us on the ‘other’ side feel much the same way about many of the far right stances and ideology.

Last, but not least, it is certainly true that regardless of one’s particular point of view, a party or association who posits the opposition as a Nazi, a full blown Soviet style socialist, a racist, a non-citizen, and/or a person who has an interest in the demise of America by design is now unable to compromise in any way with the demonized opponent. BTW, all the labels listed above have been used and demonstrated by some factions in the Tea Party movement - some by the members (followers) use of language or signs and some by speakers at the rallies. In fact, some popular Tea Party proponents on national television have engaged in such speech. This is documented fact. The video and text exist to demonstrate it. The movement as a whole has not denounced these horrid accusations and portrayals by its proponents therefore they by default endorse the ideas to some degree. All this dictates that any work by the opposition has to be done unilaterally as any attempt at compromise or bilateral agreement would subject those who reached across the aisle as being labeled traitors at best and treasonous at worst.

Is this the new American way?

Posted by: LibRick at May 9, 2010 11:39 PM
Comment #300366

B9,

My point was merely this:

While the Tea Party Movement is quite strong enough among the activist base of the GOP (the delegates in UT for example), it’s influence on the electorate as a whole is less.

If Bennett could stand for election against the wishes of the GOP delegates, he’d most likely win. Apparently, he is widely favored amongst Utah Republican voters. He even is better than his opponents at beating potential Democratic challengers.

It is true that my assertion that the Tea Party is a vocal minority is mere opinion that has not been established in fact yet. However, the assertion that the Tea Party represents a dominant majority is in the same position. I just have trouble seeing the Tea Party Movement being anything more than the 46% of the electorate that voted for McCain. We will discover the truth in November. Incumbent parties usually lose seats in a midterm; we will see if the Democrats do better or worse than their historical peers.

Posted by: Warped Reality at May 9, 2010 11:53 PM
Comment #300367

Oops!

I just realized it was tom humes that responded to my earlier comment and not Beretta9. My most recent comment should be addressed to him and not B9. I apologize for the mix-up.

Posted by: Warped Reality at May 9, 2010 11:56 PM
Comment #300371

That’s alright WR, it appears Tom and I see eye to eye on a lot of points.

Posted by: Beretta9 at May 10, 2010 4:12 AM
Comment #300386

Thanks Baretta9

WR
The important part of your post is present tense or past tense. Bennett was very popular with his republican base. Today Bennett is not popular with the republican base. Huge difference. He is still going to be part of a big class of unemployed congresspersons (yes hes’ and shes’).
The TP will have a significant say in the election this fall. You can then make the determination as to their influence from your perspective. Personally I feel they have already had a great influence and it is growing.

Maybe this is the place to post the names of some black conservative leaders. I continue to work on the list but here is a partial list.

LAST NAME FIRST NAME
ADAMS EDDIE
AKINYEMI AKINDELE
ALMASI DAVID
ARRINGTON JOHN
BAKER MARTIN
BARBER LA SHAWN
BERNARD MICHELLE
BLACKWELL KENNETH
BOWEN MICHAEL D. COBB
BROADUS ROBERT
BRODEN STEPHEN
BROWN JANICE ROGERS
BROWN PRINCE
CAIN HERMAN
CASTILLO DAVID
CHRISTIE RON
CONNERLY WARD
DURDEN KENNETH
ELDER LARRY
FAULKNER MICHAEL
FRAZIER RYAN
FULLER VIRGINIA
GRIMES JERRY
HARDIMAN BILL
HAROLD ERIKA
HARRIS JAMES T.
HAYES ISAAC
HICKS JOE
HINKLE II LAWRENCE C
HOLMES AMY
HONEYCUTT DEBORAH
HOWARD-HILL JEAN
HUDDLESTON LOU
HURD WILLIAM
INNIS NIGER
JACKSON KEVIN
KEYES ALAN
KING ALVEDA
KING MICHAEL H
LOLLAR CHARLES
LONG DEON
MALKIN MICHELLE (non-negroid, Philippino)
MARCUS LLOYD
MASSIE MYCHAL
McGLOWAN ANGELA
McWHORTER JOHN
NELSON SOPHIA
OCHIENG JULIETTE
PARCHMENT RUPERT
PARKER VERNON
PARKER STAR
PARKER JAY
PETERSON JESSIE LEE
PHILIPS JOSEPH C
PHILLIP LES
PIERCE SAMANTHA
POITIER COREY
RACHEL ALFONZO
RANDALL BILL
RICE FRANCES
RIGMAIDEN MAHNDISA S
RILEY SHAY
RISING BOOKER
RIVERS BYRON
ROSS KEVIN
RUTH CORY
SCHMIDT SONJA
SCOTT MARVIN
SCOTT TIM
SEWELL THOMAS
SMITH PRINCELLA
SMITH CHRYSTOPHER
STEELE SHELBY
THOMAS CLARENCE
TOOLEY AVERY
UNDERWOOD SHERYL
WATTS JC
WEST ALAN
WHITE BARB DAVIS
WICKHAM SCOTT
WILLIAMS WALTER
WILLIAMS ARMSTRONG
WILLIAMS MICHAEL
WRIGHT SHANNON

Posted by: tom humes at May 10, 2010 2:50 PM
Comment #300390

Did you even read the Salt Lake City Tribune link I posted?

Senator Bennett remains popular amongst Utahans according to recent polling (April 26-28) which means he still has widespread support today. Only 38% of Utahans identify as part of the Tea Party Movement and Utah is an extremely conservative state; it was GWB’s best state in 2004 and McCain beat Obama 62% to 36%. In contrast, 68% of Utah GOP delegates identified with the Tea Party Movement; clearly the Tea Party Movement is overrepresented amongst GOP delegates in Utah. I have a feeling the same may be true elsewhere.

That being said, the Tea Party could still be very influential because it is very enthusiastic about its cause. However, it will be a case of a vocal minority trumping a silent majority.

Posted by: Warped Reality at May 10, 2010 4:11 PM
Comment #300391

BTW, I don’t understand why you making that list of rightist African-Americans. George Bush won 11% of the African-American vote so it doesn’t surprise me that you can list dozens of rightist African-Americans (11%*12.4%*122 Million voters = 1.7 million African-Americans voted for Bush). I think the criticism that has been leveled at conservatism is that African-Americans make up far less than 12.4% of conservatives while they do make up 12.4% of the population hence they are underrepresented in conservatism.

Posted by: Warped Reality at May 10, 2010 4:38 PM
Comment #300396

The message is pretty heavy for some people to handle. The acknowledgement that there are a substantial number of Conservative Black Americans is noteworthy. This is only a sample list. The research being done will probably not be shared on this blog. It is for other purposes. There should be enough names for people to dig in and call them what they want. One example that has already come up is Thomas Sowell. A brilliant economist. A former Marxist. He has been called something akin to an idiot in these blogs. Only a person of ignorance concerning Thomas Sowell would call him that. So bring it on!!!

Posted by: tom humes at May 10, 2010 6:59 PM
Comment #300398

tome humes-
Impressive list. But how much space would we require for the Democrat’s list? The gesture is sort of, “hey, we got black people, too!”, just like the elevation of Michael Steele was a transparent response to Obama’s ascendance to the top of the Democratic Party.

The Difference between Democrats and Republicans is that Democrats have a record of actually standing up for the constituents there, while the Republicans have a record of attacking their interests as driven by laziness and hatred for Whites. There’s a price to be paid for having made such appeal to racial divides, and it’s not a debt that can be satisfied by the listing of a relatively few names.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 10, 2010 7:55 PM
Comment #300402

SD
The question came up as to the number of conservative black leaders there were. The question came up after I had started my research. This is is only about 90, if I recall. The list I have is quite larger at this point and is growing. Michael Steele is not on the list. The quantity is not the strength, it is the quality.

Posted by: tom humes at May 10, 2010 10:12 PM
Comment #300404

Warped Reality,

Well if they keep calling everyone RINOS, maybe they’ll get to 12% by attrition. :) I mean how much further is it to the 2000 needed to make this list the 12% ?

I hear they are overrepresented by SS recipients telling kids to get off their lawn, and reduce government ….except their SS check.

You know, Michele Malkin and Clarence Thomas means your really having to stretch your list. I was unaware Michele was black, (I guess Pinay is close enough) or that Clarence had an opinion before Roberts or Kennedy give him one. I do agree that one less supreme might be useful in reducing government.

Posted by: gergle at May 10, 2010 10:49 PM
Comment #300413


“The message is pretty heavy for some people to handle.”

33% of the whites, 11% of the blacks, stop already, your breaking my back.

I don’t know a lot of the people on the list but, if the tea party will promise to keep Ken Crookedastheycome Blackwell alias Ken Hangingchad Blackwell out of Ohio, they are welcome to him.

Posted by: jlw at May 11, 2010 1:33 AM
Comment #300421

I like the inclusion of lobbysit JC Watts on the list. He was the last black actually ELECTED by voters to be a black leader. That was in 2003, seven years ago.

Thomas Sowell is not really a leader. He is more of a follower; specifically, a follower of the Chicago School of Economics. Perhaps you remember- these are the semi-libertarian acolytes of Milton Friedman. Their economic policies brought disaster to other countries, such as Chile, and terrible repression when 30,000 leftists were executed by a right wing, Chicago School fascist regime; that, after the leftists won a fair, democratic election. The policies of Friedman (and the members of the Friedman/Stigler wannabe echo chamber, such as Sowell) brought economic disaster to the US. Thank goodness no one listens to them anymore.

Unintentional hilarity of the day: Sowell influenced the thinking of Clarence Thomas.

So, Tom, let me know if white conservative Tea Partiers and Republicans ever actually VOTE for a so-called black leader to be an actual leader.

Posted by: phx8 at May 11, 2010 10:54 AM
Comment #300425

By the way, when I referred to elected leaders, I was referring to Congress. Conservatives do not elect blacks to Congress. Gaffe machine Michael Steele was elected Lt Gov of Maryland and served from 2003 - 2007. You might remember him: he noted Limbaugh was “incendiary” and “ugly,” and then apologized to the de facto leader of the conservative movement.

Posted by: phx8 at May 11, 2010 1:45 PM
Comment #300430

Issac Hayes?

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at May 11, 2010 8:36 PM
Comment #300434

Isaac Hayes is dead.

One other note on Michael Steele- he is credited with coining the chant “drill, baby, drill.”

Posted by: phx8 at May 11, 2010 9:29 PM
Comment #300436

phx8,

“Isaac Hayes is dead.”

Yet he somehow made Tom’s list.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at May 11, 2010 9:45 PM
Comment #300442

Isaac Hayes IL 2nd dist is alive and well
Isaac Hayes musician is dead

Posted by: tom humes at May 12, 2010 12:23 AM
Comment #300452

Curiouser and curiouser.

Posted by: gergle at May 12, 2010 1:34 PM
Comment #348986

ZY-The gala polly lace dress coast online must be chosen with great wedding turquoise full length dress uk and after weighing quietly. It is crucial that michael kors watches rose gold form fitting dresses polly lace dress coast headgear http://www.coastdressesonline.com/ came by galas. the fari frill coat red can be split into several sections. Quinceanera sale michael kors watches mercer and wedding dresses can be panthea cover up as evening dresses. They are divided into long tamara maxi dress blue and short dresses. The robes are for mk5478 watch special gala events while short dresses are used for the gala occasion Ivory dress usual. There are many catalogs symphony maxi dress dresses gala on http://www.coastuk.org/ the websites michael michael kors watches clothing online stores. At reasonable maxi dresses sites, you will find the best deals on gowns petunia gowns a wide range of photos gala dresses. Among all these michael kors watches sale find model dresses filled with all sizes http://www.michaelkors-sale.biz/ .

Posted by: coast abi fascinator at July 20, 2012 10:30 PM
Post a comment