Palin to headline "Tea Party" convention



This is so fricking annoying. This is a movement that started in genuine frustration that government is out of control and not listening, and now it's being taken over by the existing political machines. They pay lip service to the original goals, but now it has been co-opted in the service of power.

Oh well, another generation, maybe we can try again. For now, the small government movement will be associated with what is known as "right wing extremists". Whether that's right or wrong, that's the connection now. Politics is about image, and Palin's image is of a religious nut who wants to force her views on everyone else. Again, I don't know if that's her views or not; I have not seen any evidence that's what she wants. But the problem is, that's how she will be painted, and by association, the whole Tea Party movement. There weren't a lot of ways to lose this battle; the R's found one.

Sigh.

god damnit.

haha, that 100 bucks is as good as mine akoff.

I remember when the Contract for America movement was started by Newt.

My liberal Mother said that the republicans don't really believe in any of those things, they just polled and found what the people wanted and ran on the platform of doing those things.

I asked her why that was a bad thing?


If the republican party is co-opting the Tea Party Movement, then they will be definition start to run on the same ideals that you like in the TPM, so how exactly is that a bad thing?

Because Sarah Palin is speaking at a rally?

Her approval numbers are almost as high as Obamas...

approval yes. ability to be president no. The most recent poll had her "is she qualified to be president" numbers at 28%. Henry is right on the money with this one. The keynote speaker for this event should be someone who can gather momentum and challenge Obama in 2012....not someone who has passed Hilary Clinton as the most controversial person in America in just two short years. Palin is a lightning rod....and lightning rods get hit....by lightning.

Because the R's will just use it for short term gains, to get votes in the next election, and then will return to business as usual, paying off their corporate cronies and trying to pass laws invading our private lives. And the Tea Party movement will be dead, a shell of its original intent. So no, it's not Palin in particular, I'd be just as frustrated if any of the RINOs took over the Tea Party.

Maybe she'll surprise me. The other speaker at the event is MN's Bachmann, who is controversial for saying crazy things. But if you listen to her actual positions, they are pretty good. If she (Bachmann) could think for two seconds before speaking, she'd be a politician I could cheer for. Maybe Palin will be that way too, keeping the R's honest instead of just using populist outrage to get attention before selling out. I'm not holding my breath. Her history in Alaska seems to be closer to the selling out end of the spectrum. Not that I don't agree with much of what she says, but I'm more afraid of Bush Jr taking over the Tea Party movement than I am of a second Obama term. A second Obama term would make the sides in the debate clear; a Bush Jr Tea Party movement gives us Obama Jr as far as the eye can see.

Maybe I've become jaded, but a republican party that runs on conservative ideals for one season looks a lot better than what we currently got.

I know I should expect more...but they are politicians after all. You might be asking too much.

Remember when most of the people thought Obama was qualified to be president?

Maybe we shouldn't be so confident in those 'people's' opinion of whom should or shouldn't be president.

What?? Obama is the best president we've had this millenium.

a distant second at best..

Very distant

Actually third. I put him behind Clinton as well.

Thank you for correcting me

A Distant third VB!

To be honest, I grew tired of the Tea Party concept long ago. They started with a good concept and relevant usage of the concept, but then every shouting match at "Town Halls" was somehow a "Tea Party". It turned into a sloganistic thing instead of a relevant protest. It began to feel like a "Corporate" thing instead of a grass roots "revolt". They did this to themselves and is ultimately what they wanted - to have their messages defined by nifty slogans and the number/volume of the voices shouting them rather than the rational thought on which they were based.

.

Not "evidence" - merely observation and opinion over the past year or so.

I felt like the *"Original" Tea Party concept was a valid application of the concept, but some friends of mine (some of whom consider themselves to be "Objectivists") continued sending me Political material urging attendance at "Tea Party" events being held to protest and counter-protest the "Town Halls" and other events. They asked to make signs with slogans like "Keep Your Hands Off My Healthcare" (clever). They expressed concern that the other side was expected to have X people in attendance and therefore "we" needed at least Y people to counter them. They gave stories of how certain things (ie: Obama's Speech to Schoolchildren) affected "The Children" which I feel is the archetype of Demagogeury. I began to tire of the over use of the Tea Party concept as well as relying on tactics that I find offensive no matter who uses them. Back when George Bush (41) used the term "pragmatic" these EXACT same people lambasted him because this was deviating from a core philosophy - they couldn't stand him doing something he indicated wasn't "right" just because it was expedient. Now these people are using the same tactics deployed for so long by the Left. They are letting the ends justify the means. They are relying on an approach that attacks a message instead of building and proclaiming their own BETTER message based on the strength of reason.



*Original would be 1773 of course, "Original" in this context is the recent Tea Party Movement.

.

it is pretty hard to be anti spending/tax & waste and be a fan of Obama's policies

I think the two go hand in hand...(anti spend/anti obama)

THE GOP F'ed these principles up for 8 years as well

.

Yes.

I dislike knee-jerk bias even when it is against people, policies, and principles which I too oppose. What I find to be borderline offensive is that these Tea Partiers wrap themselves in the guise of objectivism when they are really representing much of the same non-rational thought they calim to oppose.

what was the bet again? I don't even doubt it...i have been known to make a dumb bet or two.

We just have a 100 dollar bet on whether Obama gets a 2nd term.

You are correct. I have made many dumber ones then that.

Cane - Looking for more action - say another $100? payable on the next Inauguration Day, January 20, 2013 - This means he has to be sworn in a 2nd time, not just elected.

No, one long, long term bet is enough. Also, what does the last part mean? Is that in case he gets assassinated between the election and inauguration? I dont get it.

I would hope if elected he would be inaugurated.

Orange pekoe, imo