Jump to content

HOUSTON TEA PARTY!


Disastro

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In light of the attendance at the last "tea party", I think that the decision to move the rally from the 14 acre Discovery Green to the 1.5 acre Jones Plza is a brilliant move.

Yeah, most conservatives have JOBS and actually work since they aren't looking for a government handout...go figure. And they aren't bohemian hoodlums who have nothing better to do than protest on street corners -- unlike the liberals, anarchists, Dems and commies. However, I would anticipate that Obama (with his plummeting approval ratings) would inspire more to attend this time.

Also, Tea Parties will be taking place across the country on April 15th...not just in Houston. In Texas, there are parties scheduled for Dallas and San Antonio (at least) on the same day.

However, unless the turn out is vastly overwhelming, I doubt the Obamamedia will cover it.

Edited by Disastro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny how you group anarchists democrats and communists together as bohemian hoodlums. I hope you know that you're making your event seem like a joke by alienating us bohemian hoodlums. You would have done your cause a service if you didn't make yourself sound like an extremist who can't tolerate those with a different opinion.

Edited by Jax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny how you group anarchists democrats and communists together as bohemian hoodlums. I hope you know that you're making your event seem like a joke by alienating us bohemian hoodlums. You would have done your cause a service if you didn't make yourself sound like an extremist who can't tolerate those with a different opinion.

"Tolerating" every harebrained opinion is what is destroying our country.

Not all opinions are equal. Not all lifestyles are equal. And not all dissent is equal.

Some -- I would say those from the ultra-left side -- are flat out dangerous.

Tolerance is overrated and isn't always necessary...or wise.

Doesn't look like it's really plummeting.

It's sort of oscillated between 69 and 59 with a margin of error of at least a few percent.

The trend is people are starting to wake up and the honeymoon is coming to a close. And the more people wake up to what this narcissist lunatic Socialist wants to do to the country (and the people's pocketbooks), I predict his approval ratings will sink into the toilet...

Most of the country is not as extreme as Obama's kool-aid drinkers.

Edited by Disastro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Tolerating" every harebrained opinion is what is destroying our country.

Not all opinions are equal. Not all lifestyles are equal. And not all dissent is equal.

Some -- I would say those from the ultra-left side -- are flat out dangerous.

Tolerance is overrated and isn't always necessary...or wise.

The trend is people are starting to wake up and the honeymoon is coming to a close. And the more people wake up to what this narcissist lunatic Socialist wants to do to the country (and the people's pocketbooks), I predict his approval ratings will sink into the toilet...

Most of the country is not as extreme as Obama's kool-aid drinkers.

Impressive use of buzzwords that have no meaning!

Interesting fact about the liberals, anarchists, Dems and commies. They are all well-versed in the art of producing a dynamic, well attended and news generating protest. If the "Obamamedia" fails to cover your tea party, it would likely be because they could find more people waiting for the signal to change at a Galleria instersection than at your grassroots protest. And, regardless of the reason that your tea party is sparsely attended, low attendance equals paper tiger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tea Parties Across the Country! Read it and weep left-wing lunatics! You cannot delete my voice!!!

I will not be silenced. The only way you can do that is to ban me.

tealogo.jpg

While WND has been tracking 400 individual tea parties across the nation, the American Family Association has announced its count is nearing 1,600

Edited by Disastro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trend is people are starting to wake up and the honeymoon is coming to a close. And the more people wake up to what this narcissist lunatic Socialist wants to do to the country (and the people's pocketbooks), I predict his approval ratings will sink into the toilet...

That is your opinion but you can't say the current trend is that his approval rate is plummeting, because that is a lie - it's not what the data shows. You can however say it is your prediction that in the future his approval rate will plummet, but after all the name calling I have a hard time trusting your opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why two threads on the same subject? This kind of seems like propaganda to me. Anybody want to merge or delete? If this thing is being sponsored by "World Net Daily" I can see why it most likely won't have good attendance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some -- I would say those from the ultra-left side -- are flat out dangerous.

I would agree that extreme leftism is dangerous, but I also think extreme right wing policies are equally as dangerous.

The problem here is people have a hard time recognizing what is extreme and what is not. For example people will criticize the idea that children deserve universal healthcare as "an extreme leftist agenda" while supporting more extreme ideas like cutting all government spending (including spending on children's healthcare and medical research) just so they can pay less taxes. To me that's a more dangerous form of extremism.

Edited by Jax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read it and weep left-wing lunatics! You cannot delete my voice!!!

I hope you understand that calling everybody who disagrees with you a left-wing lunatic, communist, hoodlums etc. detracts from your cause. That just make you seem crazy, and if you want this event to be a success you need to attract more than just crazy people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Tolerating" every harebrained opinion is what is destroying our country.

Not all opinions are equal. Not all lifestyles are equal. And not all dissent is equal.

Some -- I would say those from the ultra-left side -- are flat out dangerous.

Tolerance is overrated and isn't always necessary...or wise.

The trend is people are starting to wake up and the honeymoon is coming to a close. And the more people wake up to what this narcissist lunatic Socialist wants to do to the country (and the people's pocketbooks), I predict his approval ratings will sink into the toilet...

Most of the country is not as extreme as Obama's kool-aid drinkers.

:)

Classic...

I would have thought about going to this if it wasn't run by Right-wing Nut cases. While I agree some of the tax money is being spent on stupid things, you act like its only the Democrats that do such things. What a crock of shit. Think of the Millions that were lost in Iraq by greedy people. Not the entire war its self, but the money a lot of people ran away with.

To be so Ignorant and try and preach b/s, you give Republicans a bad name. And to say "Not all opinions are equal" is exactly right. Take a good look in the mirror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody wants to silence you. We do want you to be civil and considerate, which you are obviously not. Not everybody disagrees with your underlying premise or argument. Proving yourself as somebody that only your mother could love is not the way to go about extending your message. It is always a shame when the messenger does such harm to the message they are trying to promote. Do not walk into somebody's home uninvited and call people names. Do not go out of your way to bring shame to your cause. You will win over more people if you are somebody people can respect. Your comments do not leave a lot to respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure the original post was made in the best way, but the cause is sound.

The idea that increasing taxes on those who already carry the lions share of the tax load is about as idiotic as you can get. CUTTING spending is the only logical option. Let the markets manage themselves, as they were designed to do. Not every business is meant to succeed indefinitely. Sure, letting the likes of AIG fail suck in the short term, but artificially propping them up makes no sense in the long term. In fact, it can be argued that allowing the markets to work naturally would cause economic growth in the long term.

We are all frogs in a pot of water, and they are slowly turning up the heat. Too bad most people will never notice until we're boiling. Then they will ask why someone didn't stop the government from grossly overstepping its bounds (have those in power now not ever read the Constitution?!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let the markets manage themselves, as they were designed to do.

We aren't allowed to say that anymore. We tried that, and it turns out markets manage themselves into oblivion. Businesses buy up competitors, grow too big to fail, then get rescued with tax money and impose the worst aspects of command economies on those tax payers. As soon as that money was transferred, all of the old capitalist dogma lost all credibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, how come there were no "tea parties" when "Absolute Failure of a President" Bush was in office spending lots of money. It's hard to take these people seriously when they don't stand up for the beliefs when a right-wing country hick is in office.

Perhaps because the "tea partiers" liked it better when they were being openly lied to under the previous administration. In an attempt to gain support for his war, Bush refused to include war funding in his budget. Therefore, his budgets appeared smaller than they really were. His budgets did not include the $190 Billion for costs of running the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, despite the full knowledge that the wars were ongoing and not projected to end during the budgetary year. Instead, Bush would simply ask for a 'special appropriation' for war spending. Why? Bush knew that his $3.1 Trillion budget number would be repeated often, with most people forgetting that it did not include the $190 Billion war appropriation. Therefore, Bush's $3.29 Trillion budget magically becomes $3.1 Trillion, even though it never was $3.1 Trillion.

In contrast, the current administration promised to eliminate the budget gimmicks. The $3.5 Trillion budget includes war spending. No special appropriations are planned.So, the true $3.5 Trillion budget represents a 6.3% increase over Bush's $3.29 Trillion ($3.1 Trillion + $190 Billion) budget. Coincidentally, this represents a smaller increase than Bush's last budgets. Bush's last budget of $3.29 Trillion was 8.2% larger than his previous budget ($2.9 Trillion + $140 Billion = $3.04 Trillion).

So, what does a president receive for being honest with taxpayers? He gets protests by people who intentionally ignored the true numbers, and manufactured and misplaced outrage at the current government, when they know full well that it was the previous government and its wealthy supporters that created the quagmire that we are in. They cover up their intentional dushonesty by using words and phrases like "socialism" and "out of control", neither explaining what they mean, nor how the governments policies fit the words and phrases. But, not to worry. Whereas successful protesters make it clear who the enemy is, and work to include ALL of the aggrieved citizens in its protest, this current group...as evidenced by the original poster's remarks...seeks to blame not only the government, but everyone who voted for, approves of or even listened to the current president. They seek to make their group as small as possible, only including the most committed of protesters. In so doing, they ensure that their next protest will likely be as insignificant as their last one.

I really wish this was a real protest, as opposed to a membership drive for the GOP. I've stated often that I love a good protest. It signifies an engaged populace. Vocal and organized protests shine a bright light on the government, forcing it to be open and honest in its dealings with the citizenry. Unfortunately, this protest is more dishonest and vague in its goals than the government that it opposes. For it to succeed would be a return to the same policies that got us in this mess in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps because the "tea partiers" liked it better when they were being openly lied to under the previous administration. In an attempt to gain support for his war, Bush refused to include war funding in his budget. Therefore, his budgets appeared smaller than they really were. His budgets did not include the $190 Billion for costs of running the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, despite the full knowledge that the wars were ongoing and not projected to end during the budgetary year. Instead, Bush would simply ask for a 'special appropriation' for war spending. Why? Bush knew that his $3.1 Trillion budget number would be repeated often, with most people forgetting that it did not include the $190 Billion war appropriation. Therefore, Bush's $3.29 Trillion budget magically becomes $3.1 Trillion, even though it never was $3.1 Trillion.

In contrast, the current administration promised to eliminate the budget gimmicks. The $3.5 Trillion budget includes war spending. No special appropriations are planned.So, the true $3.5 Trillion budget represents a 6.3% increase over Bush's $3.29 Trillion ($3.1 Trillion + $190 Billion) budget. Coincidentally, this represents a smaller increase than Bush's last budgets. Bush's last budget of $3.29 Trillion was 8.2% larger than his previous budget ($2.9 Trillion + $140 Billion = $3.04 Trillion).

So, what does a president receive for being honest with taxpayers? He gets protests by people who intentionally ignored the true numbers, and manufactured and misplaced outrage at the current government, when they know full well that it was the previous government and its wealthy supporters that created the quagmire that we are in. They cover up their intentional dushonesty by using words and phrases like "socialism" and "out of control", neither explaining what they mean, nor how the governments policies fit the words and phrases. But, not to worry. Whereas successful protesters make it clear who the enemy is, and work to include ALL of the aggrieved citizens in its protest, this current group...as evidenced by the original poster's remarks...seeks to blame not only the government, but everyone who voted for, approves of or even listened to the current president. They seek to make their group as small as possible, only including the most committed of protesters. In so doing, they ensure that their next protest will likely be as insignificant as their last one.

I really wish this was a real protest, as opposed to a membership drive for the GOP. I've stated often that I love a good protest. It signifies an engaged populace. Vocal and organized protests shine a bright light on the government, forcing it to be open and honest in its dealings with the citizenry. Unfortunately, this protest is more dishonest and vague in its goals than the government that it opposes. For it to succeed would be a return to the same policies that got us in this mess in the first place.

What Bush did with respect to the budget and the war makes my blood boil. :angry2: What a relief it is now that he's out and a real leader is in the Oval Office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, what does a president receive for being honest with taxpayers? He gets protests by people who intentionally ignored the true numbers, and manufactured and misplaced outrage at the current government, when they know full well that it was the previous government and its wealthy supporters that created the quagmire that we are in. They cover up their intentional dushonesty by using words and phrases like "socialism" and "out of control", neither explaining what they mean, nor how the governments policies fit the words and phrases.

Well.. I disagree with Obama, but I won't be going to any Tea-Parties. How lame are conservatives to fall upon re-using an idea that we memorialize as revolutionary, when those who committed the act only thought it as necessary.

I disagree with all this spending, and I disagree with the idea that it's all Bush's fault. Liberals are just as guilty as the conservatives they blame when they use that argument.

I disagree with so many things, but won't be at any Tea-Parties. If conservatives want results, they need to learn from the lessons of their counterpart liberals failed protests of the past, and instead focus on the real mountain movers - their elected officials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We aren't allowed to say that anymore. We tried that, and it turns out markets manage themselves into oblivion. Businesses buy up competitors, grow too big to fail, then get rescued with tax money and impose the worst aspects of command economies on those tax payers. As soon as that money was transferred, all of the old capitalist dogma lost all credibility.

People seem incapable of seeing the glaring similarities between this and the Soviet brand of socialism.

*sigh*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People seem incapable of seeing the glaring similarities between this and the Soviet brand of socialism.

*sigh*

Nobody is seriously talking about disbanding the entire capitalist system. People are however talking about doing a better job of regulating it. Why is it whenever anybody talks about regulations and oversight, some conservative brings up the Soviet Union?

There's a lot of grey area between complete capitalist anarchy and complete totalitarian communism. It's not like you have to chose between one extreme or the other.

I think one of the biggest flaws with the current Conservative movement in the United States is this idea that if it's not exactly the way Reagan or the Bushes did it, then it must be Soviet Communism / Socialism. Most of us however are beyond McCarthyism.

Edited by Jax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it whenever anybody talks about regulations and oversight, some conservative brings up the Soviet Union?

How the words 'socialism' and 'communism' are on the lips of every moron in the land just amazes me. The average American does not know the three branches of government, and can't locate Russia on a map, but yet they magically understand 20th century international political history and comparative economies? Pardon me while I LOL.

As far as the tea party thing goes, they need another name. It is offensive to those who actually care about American history, and lazy on top of that. Be original! We could start a brainstorming session right here on HAIF for a new name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its the naive fear that we're just "one step away" from _______ism. I know that we are no where near any form of _______ism, but at the same time, giving the government more power and allowing it to go further in debt is not going to solve our problems, IMO.

On a personal level, it seems that every example of a successful comeback from bankruptcy I've ever seen has been to cut spending, save money, and slowly climb back out of the hole you got in. Many of us that are fiscally conservative in that sense, don't understand how doing the opposite (bailing out failing companies who aren't making any changes) is going to work.

I'm open to educated explanations of how the current plan is going to work though. Before you bother, please adhere to the Redscare litmus test. Thank you. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it whenever anybody talks about regulations and oversight, some conservative brings up the Soviet Union?

Conservatives like to use scare tactics. It's one of the few things they have been good at... though Americans are catching on to this and don't fall for it as much as they used to. They like to scream words like "socialism" and "communism" and "redistribution of wealth".... they scare people by telling them Blacks are going to rob them, gays are going to kidnap their children and brainwash them (funny, I always thought churches did that), Mexicans are going to take their jobs, blah blah blah. They know a large portion of the populous won't research what they are saying... they will just here "Obama... socialism" in the same sentence and they will get scared. The funny part is, the Conservatives who do this, the ones who claim they just love America, are actually playing Americans for fools. They play Americans like puppets b/c they know they can, and Americans fall for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm open to educated explanations of how the current plan is going to work though. Before you bother, please adhere to the Redscare litmus test. Thank you.

Basically the idea is that companies are doing poorly because less people are buying their products.

Less people are buying their products because many people have lost their jobs and don't have any disposable income.

When nobody is buying things, companies do poorly and they lay people off, and that creates a larger pool of people who aren't spending money, therefore leading to more layoffs in other companies.

If the government creates jobs for some of these people who are out of work, these people will make money. When people have money they will buy things from other companies thus stimulating the economy. Plus if the money is spent on something like infrastructure, we're left with tangible things that can benefit society like better public transportation, better roads, bridges, power lines, etc.

If the government simply cuts spending, then there is nothing to create jobs and the cycle of layoffs will continue. Obviously we eventually want to decrease the deficit but if we just cut off all spending now, the country will likely end up deeper in recession.

Some people claim that if we simply cut taxes, companies won't have to lay as many people off, but that doesn't help people who are already out of work. And if companies use the money they save from tax cuts to give out bonuses or buy corporate jets or send people on fancy vacations, it might not even prevent layoffs. It might just be wasted.

A combination of targeted tax cuts and spending is most likely the best solution in my opinion.

Spending is basically how we got out of the great depression. Besides the New Deal there was a world war in which the government spent vast amounts of money to buy warplanes, bombs, guns, boats etc from companies. These companies employed people who built the planes, bombs, guns, boats etc and they used the money they earned to buy stuff from other companies thus stimulating the economy and ending the depression.

The idea now (like during the great depression) is to spend in the short term (similar to what was done during World War 2 and the New Deal), and once the economy shows signs of recovery, to begin cutting the deficit.

You're right that a person or a company has to cut spending and save money to come out of bankruptcy, but that's a completely different situation than trying to bring an economy out of recession. If the government just completely shuts down and stops spending, do you think that will help anybody who is out of a job? Most likely not. It might stop the deficit but it won't help the economy.

Edited by Jax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that seems to make sense on a certain level, but the stimulus package seemed riddled with pork, and not job creation. I guess this would seem like a more viable solution had it better been enacted?

Once again, politicians got in the way with their agendas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not even sure what pork is, but it seems to have a lot of job creation in it. Whether there is enough to make a big impact is a matter of opinion, and only time will tell.

Many liberals and progressives wish there was more job creation (spending) and less tax cuts.

Many conservatives wish there was less job creation and more tax cuts. Their counter proposal was basically zero job creation and 100% tax cuts. Obviously nobody took that very seriously.

It seems to be hard to come to a good compromise, and I think the stimulus package got watered down a bit too much. Anyways, only time will tell...

This diagram shows what we ended up with. Definitely more tax cuts than infrastructure spending (which is the primary source of job creation I think).

investmentbubble.jpg

Edited by Jax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously... also sad they are using American kids as pawns... sick. <_<

I guess were just taking extreme photos and calling that mainstream now. You work for the Chronicle dont you?

Every "conservative" is for tea bagging the gays clearly - the sign says so. And really I dont see why the gays are against it - seems to me to be something they should enjoy.

Edited by Marksmu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over 300 in Friendswood:

FRIENDSWOOD — More than 300 people gathered in a city park Tuesday to rally against “out of control” government spending and to ship protest tea bags to Washington, D.C. Whether the first of what will be a series of tea party protests across the country is the start of a grass-roots political movement or just another form of political theater is yet to be determined.

“I think it is too early to say,” said Rice University political science professor Bob Stein. “There is a good deal of partisanship, but for an event the Republican Party would normally put its stamp on as the loyal opposition there really isn’t a (party) spokesperson on this.

“To me, the story is why the Republican Party is not jumping on this. (Republicans) are supportive of this, but not sounding the trumpet.”

In fact, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele was denied a request to speak at the Chicago Tea Party by organizers who said he had “ignored” the movement until it had garnered national attention, primarily through the Fox News Channel and conservative radio talk show hosts.

On the county level, though, Republican Party Chairman John LeCour was front and center at Tuesday’s rally in Centennial Park in Friendswood.

“We are having a revolution against taxes and out of control spending,” LeCour said. “It is not a Republican event. It should be an event for everybody.”

http://www.galvestondailynews.com/story.la...62a478418677815

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And ~450 in Pearland:

At today's "tea party" rally against government spending in Pearland, speaker Cliff Schoeffler took his cue from the setting at Independence Park.

"Today I renounce all political labels," the Vietnam War veteran said. "I will no longer claim to be a Democrat, I will no longer claim to be a Republican, I will no longer claim to be a Libertarian. I'm an independnet citizen with a mind of my own. I'm simply tired of what's happend to us as a nation."

Many of the estimated 450 people in attendance applauded.

The hourlong tax-day gathering was one of many designed to invoke the spirit of the Boston Tea Party set at parks, state Capitols and other places across the nation and around the Houston area. The main event locally was set for 4 p.m. at Jones Plaza in downtown Houston.

Demonstrators particularly focused on government spending under President Barack Obama.

Carolyn Rainwater, of Pearland, said the flow of tax dollars out Washington, D.C., is alarming.

"I'm just tired of government spending our money, taxation without representation," she said. "We can't spend our way out of a recession."

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6374948.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Setting aside the presentation of this cause by the OP, I believe this is a worthy cause. This is the only place I've seen it presented in such a right-wing, nutjob fashion. When I've heard interviews on the radio, all are invited and the event is purported to be party agnostic. It's simply to bring attention to the over spending in Washington that doesn't appear to be in line with what Americans are saying. It's also good news that the media appears to be covering this story and not covering it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the news is reporting that in over 2000 cities "large" groups gathered today. So what does that mean? Is this an isolated conservative event, or is it a nationwide movement now?

Edited by Jeebus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Setting aside the presentation of this cause by the OP, I believe this is a worthy cause. This is the only place I've seen it presented in such a right-wing, nutjob fashion. When I've heard interviews on the radio, all are invited and the event is purported to be party agnostic. It's simply to bring attention to the over spending in Washington that doesn't appear to be in line with what Americans are saying. It's also good news that the media appears to be covering this story and not covering it up.

A co-worker noted this morning that the Chronicle had no coverage of these events Stories did turn up during the day, though. The TV stations (online) covered it from the get-go, this morning.

I just walked over. Jones Plaza is packed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...