Front Page  »  

North County Tea Party gaining strength

July 30, 2012

By DANIEL BLACKBURN

There’s a big party brewing, but it’s not about dancing and cocktails — the issue at hand for members of the rapidly-growing North County Tea Party is nothing less than salvation of these United States.

With its own quarterly publication and a membership list now topping 200, the two-year-old group is gaining steam in its quest for “regaining” the nation.

“We see this as a vehicle to encourage citizens to get involved, and to inform them about the threats facing our country,” said Paso Robles resident John Texiera, publisher of the Central Coast Tea Party Times. “United we stand, divided we fall — freedom made this country great, not our government.”

That’s an attitude embraced by a growing number of people, said Texiera, an assertion supported by the enthusiastic embrace of the Tea Party by county residents.

Lydia Thompson is “in charge” of the group — “I’m not president, nor chairman… it’s just that someone had to take the lead.”

She echoed the comments made by Texiera: “A lot of people have the same concerns. Our biggest issue was to figure out what needed to be done.”

The group’s inception “started with a rally a couple of years ago,” said Thompson. “I wanted to be on the mailing list, but I never got a response.”

That prompted her to take action “and it just happened..all of a sudden it just got going. Volunteers started coming forward. It wasn’t anything magic — it was just people wanting to get involved. Word of mouth was the best recruiter.”

The group’s original purpose was to educate, but people needed a way to take some action, said Thompson. “One person cannot do it all. It needs people who have the same philosophy, and who want our country back where it was, who want their freedoms back.”

She said she is “worried about people who don’t realize their freedoms are being taken away. They don’t know the difference, and they are complacent.”

She was “one of those people,” said Thompson, “comfortable, everything was fine. I was never involved in politics. But slowly, surely, that all changed.”

That is the way it was with most members of the group, said Texiera.

“It seems like most of our members are people fifty to seventy years old, who have never been involved in politics, but who are very unhappy with the way this nation is going. They have a love of country and are hoping to get it back on track. We share a desire for a constitutionally-limited government and a return of our freedoms,” he said. “The Constitution is a marvelous document, and it hasn’t changed. We have.”

When he volunteered to publish Tea Party Times, Texiera said he thought he “ could maybe be a little help. The magazine deals with core values and other issues. We get pour articles from people in the county, from other Tea Party publications, off the Internet.

A retired Department of Corrections employee, Texiera said he has experience in “writing administrative manuals, that kind of thing.”

The group distributes 1,500 copies the magazine by placing them in friendly businesses.

“Of course, it’s political, so some business folks are a little shy. But if they like it, they put it out.”

Tea Party members share another common concern, and it’s called “Agenda 21.”

“Read it, and you can see where ‘they’ are going,” Texiera said.

According to Wikipedia, Agenda 21 is “a non-binding and voluntarily implemented action plan of the United Nations (UN) related to sustainable development.  Agenda 21 is a comprehensive blueprint of action to be taken globally, nationally, and locally by organizations of the UN, governments, and major groups in every area in which humans directly affect the environment.”

Tea Party membership nationally enjoyed a rapid rise two years ago but now has leveled off somewhat.

The Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights, a national organization based in Kansas City, shows that one group, the Tea Party Patriots, enjoyed a rapid gain in numbers from the time it started in February 2010, to its peak in December of an estimated 140,000 members. It now has leveled off to about 80,000. Meanwhile, other related groups have formed, including Freedom Works, whose membership now tops that of the Patriots by about 10,000 members. Other groups of similar intent show similar numbers — the 1776 Tea Party claims 10,000 members; ResistNet, 80,000; and Tea Party Nation, 40,000.

“We used to have people with common sense, but now we listen to the fools and have lost our way,” said Texiera. “All public officials take an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. We need to demand they do what they have sworn to do.”


Loading...
Subjects:     
Related:


147 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

“We used to have people with common sense, but now we listen to the fools and have lost our way.” Yikes. LOL.


0

There will always be self-indulgent fools. That’s why Juvenal’s quote is still appropriate when referencing either the citizenry or the government:


“… Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man,

the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time

handed out military command, high civil office, legions – everything, now

restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things:

bread and circuses”


0

A membership list of 200 ?


Please….


I could go to Mudtown , Templeburgle, and Paso the guacamole in one afternoon and recruit over 200 meth-heads. Easy-Cheesy !


These teabagger dimwits think they are a force ?


0

Yea kind of reminds me of the 99%ers and their big, I mean small numbers at the county courthouse. Hmm what ever happened to that movement? Oh yea blew away in the breeze.


0

Here in SLO and elsewhere, the public face was co-opted with 1%ers paying for skinheads and other agent provocateurs to kill it.

Their method worked.

Just ask some of the naive people that were part of the start of it. They’ll tell you.


Didn’t blow away. It’s underground now, and all of the petit fascists are still scared.


0

Skinheads!!?? Really? Must have missed this in the press. You are quite the parinoid one from reading all your posts. Do you have anything other than your hearsay to back this????


0

Yea, that great press coverage of the movement. People peeing in the park. Rubbish. Yelling at cops.


Well, you’re certainly welcome to hold onto the 1%-owned media-scripted version of reality, seeing as you were (from your comments) too lazy to get off your sofa and participate in local citizen-level experiments in democracy. Lazy then, lazy now.


0

Occupy raided by thieves

http://calcoastnews.com/2011/11/occupy-slo-battle-leads-to-theft-allegations/


0

You mean the Teat party movement? It is still going on strong…those guys are still doing nothing!


0

I was hoping that someone could help me make sense of these two quotes from the article:


“. . . freedom made this country great, not our government.” –John Texiera


Exactly what freedoms would we be enjoying today without the US Constitution (a governmental document) AND without the governmental institutions (federal, state, and local) to protect/administer them? What freedoms would we be enjoying without the government-funded police forces and the armed forces to protect our freedoms from domestic and international threats?


“One person cannot do it all. It needs people who have the same philosophy, and who want our country back where it was, who want their freedoms back.” –Lydia Thompson.


Back where our country was when, exactly? Given the similarities between the Tea Party and the John Birch Society (which opposed the Civil Rights Act), I shudder to think of the era to which the Tea Party would like the US to return. And aside from freedom/due process being denied to detainees @ Gitmo and CIA sites around the world, what freedoms have law-abiding Americans in the USA been denied lately? I don’t like the government being able to spy on my activities any more than the next American does, but what evidence is there that the US government has actually used such information to usurp our freedoms in any tangible way?


Just curious.


0

See debeddebed’s responece to Maybe not a few down. Spot on responce to your question.


0

The John Birch Society wanted civil rights laws to be a State issue, not a federal issue. They were not against the idea of civil rights, just who made the rules. The way you stated it is incorrect. Correcting civil rights abuses that do exist should be accomplished at the state and local level, something The John Birch Society members – of all races, colors and ethnic backgrounds – have always supported. Civil rights legislation should have come from the states and the communities rather than being used as a steppingstone toward our present-day out-of-control federal government.


0

What a line of skunk juice ! John Birchers are phony libertarians and 100% racists .

You clowns are the same ignorant bullies that your grandparents were; and you never learn !


0

It is often suggested in the media that the John Birch Society harbors some elements of racism and anti-Semitism. That’s a curious thing, particularly since the John Birch Society is always likewise noted as staunchly ultraconservative and anti-Communist.

The John Birch Society was falsely accused of racism and anti-Semitism by an Associated Press reporter, who offered no proof. The article appeared in 125+ news outlets during the 2008 Memorial Day weekend. The lack of truth causes the truly racist to call others names, a standard progressive tactic in an attempt to discredit truth.


0

What a line of limburger pudding.

These tightie-righties sure think they can slide past everyone else, but they’re fooling no-one but themselves.


This backward clan has been on the wrong side of history for the past 250 years.

Time for them to just go away.


0

http://calcoastnews.com/2012/04/jim-patterson-and-the-california-valley-solar-ranch/comment-page-1/#comment-54427


The Rachel Maddow fact check should not be missed, last link


0

And the Birchers would have us believe that the Southern states would have passed their own civil rights legislation without the federal government making it the law of the land? Really? That’s a perfect example of why the 10th Amendment, aka “ceding rights to states” is such a bad idea when it comes to securing the blessings of liberty for all. Bottom line: without federal intervention, the South would still be segregated along color lines–by law. Hell, SLAVERY would still be legal if that “damned Lincoln and his big bad Union Army” hadn’t defeated the Confederate Army at the cost of over 600,000 American lives.


Racists have had to be dragged into the modern, multi-cultural world, and they’re still kicking and screaming and roiling with resentment and racism, although their regressive/aggressive notions must now be masked in more subtle forms and expressions. Or not so subtle, as can clearly be seen in videos/slideshows shot at various conservative rallies.


April, 2015 will mark the sesquicentennial of the end of the Civil War. How about we, as a nation of UNITED states, set that as our target date for ending racism, once and for all? The 150 year “grace period” during which racism has been tolerated in various guises will soon be over . . . I hope.


0

The simple fact that the government is collecting data on its citizens is cause for concern. The question is for what purpose? I have no porblem with data mining if I know what the data will be used for.


Ana – Please remember these facts: The Democrats have historically held slaves and opposed all legislation prohibiting slavery. Were it not for the Republicans, Democrats would still have slaves. And actually they do. However, now the Dems hold them hostage with welfare.


Ana – The US constitution and its supporting documents are the single most profound foundation for government that we know. Freedom, self determination and belief in God are the stellar principles that will never be undermined by humanism. Sadly, one major political party is willing to try. It will fail.


Simply remember this: Democratic Party = Slavery.


0

Only the Democratic party? Is the difference between the big two really so profound as all that?


Then why does nothing ever really change?


If nothing ever really changes, then your idea can’t possibly be right!


There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,

Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.


0

Your’re correct Gimlet. I didn’t think that that the Sudan, Somalia, Liberia or Niger had any dog in this fight.


0

And furthermore my dear Gimlet, can there be anything more profoundly repugnant than a class of people dominating another class?


0

south,

As you well know, Southerners were nearly 100% Democrat until the great switcheroo in the 1960’s when they realized that the Republican party was more in alignment with their anti-civil rights philosophy. Modern-day Democrats hold nothing in common with slave owners. The social programs in place–thanks to Democrats–are intended to give people a hand up, not a hand out. Unfortunately,some programs have been abused by a few to the detriment of the many. That will always be the case. But the truth of the matter is that modern-day Republicans are, by and large, completely opposed to funding ANY program designed to help the disenfranchised, the down-trodden, “the huddling masses yearning to breathe free.” And that’s a fact.


0

Ana – You are wrong. Wrong about your party and its tenets and wrong about the R party and its goals. The R party wants self sufficiency. The D party wants government control and social welfare. Are you seriously telling me that the welfare and immigration program is not aimed at creating a class of people – mostly Black and Latino – that will be D voters as long as their check arrives twice a month?


That my friend is neo slavery. It is cynical and sick. And BTW – Democrats far out number Republicans in the South.


0

south,


1. I actually worked with people on welfare for three months, right here in SLO County, and they all expressed a desire to get back on their feet and off of welfare. When or whether they achieved that goal I do not know, since I began a full-time teaching job after that summer job. BTW, about 75% of them were white and the rest were hispanic. Do you have any actual experience working with such people? If not, what are you basing your OPINIONS on? Please name your news sources or the books you’ve read on the subject.


2. My father’s family were the recipients of welfare for many years back in the day. It saved them from the poor house, and bought my father time to finish his education and become a professional. They were always aware that they were living off the generosity of others and they were ashamed of it. Are you claiming to know that blacks and hispanics have INNATE, fundamentally different emotions about/attitudes towards governments subsidies? If so, on what do you base such an opinion? Personal experience?


3. I cannot speak for all democrats, but I have never, ever heard a democrat express in person or in writing any interest in “creating a class of people – mostly Black and Latino – that will be D voters as long as their check arrives twice a month.” What is the source of that speculation/theory? As I expressed in my previous post, the Democratic party is the ONLY party that will reach out to the disenfranchised, the down-trodden, “the huddling masses yearning to breathe free.” And that’s a fact that you have not addressed yet.


I’m waiting to hear all about your vast experience with the people/matters about which you speak so authoritatively.


0

Imagine a government program that discourages work, rewards idleness and promotes long-term government dependence. Unfortunately you don’t have to imagine. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps, is an $84 billion program that expands rapidly each year. The food stamp program was created in the 1960s to provide a safety net for low income Americans needing assistance to put food on the table. But the program has expanded, loosening eligibility standards and actually encouraging people to sign up. Today, almost one in five American households receives food stamp benefits.

Means-tested welfare assistance should not be a one-way handout or an open-ended entitlement. Aid should be given on the basis of reciprocal obligation. Taxpayers should provide support to those in need, and recipients in return should engage in responsible and constructive behavior as a condition of receiving aid. Requiring welfare recipients to stop using illegal drugs is a core element of reciprocal obligation.

As welfare spending approaches $1 trillion per year, taxpayers have a right to know that their funds are being used frugally. Those who pay for the welfare state can properly insist that their aid go to those who are truly in need and not be wasted on frivolous or self-destructive activities, such as illegal drug use. In the case of food stamps, taxpayers should not be required to pay for food for individuals who waste their own money on illegal drugs.

Congress should

1. Prohibit food stamp payments to illegal immigrant families. Illegal immigrants who have children born in the United States routinely receive food stamps. This policy should be changed and brought in line with existing policy on the earned income tax credit (EITC). In order to receive the EITC, parents must provide a valid Social Security number demonstrating they are residing in the U.S. lawfully and are authorized to work. The same policy should be applied in food stamps.

2. Convert food stamps into a work activation program. Able-bodied food stamp recipients should be required to work, prepare for work, or at least look for a job as a condition of receiving aid. These work activation requirements should be phased in gradually as the current economic recession ends. Similar requirements in the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program in the 1990s led to dramatic drops in welfare caseloads, surges in employment, and a large-scale drop in child poverty among groups that were most dependent on the program.

3. Require drug testing of food stamp recipients. As the federal government faces future bankruptcy, scarce taxpayer funds should not be used to provide welfare to individuals who abuse illicit drugs. In the food stamp program, taxpayers should not be required to pay for free food for individuals who waste their own money on illegal drugs. Food stamp applicants and recipients should be tested for illegal drug use, and benefits should be terminated for those using drugs. Drug testing would reduce wasteful government spending. It would also reduce drug use among food stamp recipients, thereby increasing their future employability.

———————————————————————————————————————————

Florida did it:


I-95 and I-75 will be jammed for the next month or so with druggies and deadbeats heading North out of Florida, because this is the first state in the union to require drug testing to receive welfare!

Hooray for Florida! In signing the new law, Republican Gov. Rick Scott said, “If Floridians want welfare, they better make sure they are drug-free.”

Applicants must pay for the drug test, but are reimbursed if they test drug-free. Applicants who test positive for illicit substances, won’t be eligible for the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment. Those who fail a second time will be banned from receiving funds for three years!

Naturally, a few people are crying this is unconstitutional.

How is this unconstitutional? It’s a legal requirement that every person applying for a job has to pass drug tests in order to get the job, why not those who receive welfare?

Let’s get welfare back to the ones who need it, not to those who won’t get a job.


0

No reasonable person would argue that food stamps (aka EBT or “CalFresh”) should be tightly regulated, whether it be from abuse by undocumented / illegal inhabitants or by U.S. citizens.


Unless you have firsthand knowledge of the financial parameters in which to become qualified for these resources, will you have a true picture of how bad off one really has to be to receive this sustenance. It’s not become easier to receive food stamps; it’s actually much more difficult.


I understand the concept of the accountability measures needed to run this sort of program. However, all of the abusers of this program will cancel the reality of one simple truth: There will always be the poor among us. Look around you. The reasons why a large segment of our population are poor are as innumerable as the people who apply for these services….many of whom fall through the cracks…also for a number of reasons.


One thing is for certain about hunger…it’s easy to point fingers from across the street until you or a loved one has little or nothing to eat.


0

Someone has probably already said this, but it has to be mentioned again: The democratic party of early America is the predecessor to the modern republican party, not the modern democratic party.


0

I was privileged to be acquainted with chief counsel and speechwriter to President Lyndon Johnson, Harry McPherson Jr.


He related many times, how President Johnson Knew that by signing the Civil Rights Acts and Voting Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965, that the so-called “solid-South” that voted regularly Democratic would turn Republican …for who knows how long.

They were the Dixiecrats of Strom Thurmond, Lester Maddox, and George Wallace; among other notables.

Sure enough, in 1964, the only states that voted for Goldwater were his home state of Arizona and the deep South from S.Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, to Louisiana.

In 1968, Nixon employed the “Southern Strategy” , unabashedly appealing to the racist core of the new greycoats.

Even then, Nixon would have lost if Americans had known of his treasonous bribing of South Vietnam officials that killed the peace talks that would have ended the Vietnam War.


0

I would like to see something other than hearsay about someone who spoke to a liberal speechwriter about any bribes of South Vietnam officials . Spewing hearsay is not truth.

Another favorite liberal tactic is to call someone names.


0

Dexter,


What in the world in a “tea party thinking person’. You are either Tea Party or not. I don’t know the

mural you are speaking of but I assure you, no member of our Tea Party group would discriminate

against a business for free speech. We may not agree but that’s what we are fighting for.


Quit painting everyone with a broad brush. I honestly think the conservatives are more fair mined

that the so called ” free thinking” liberals of today.


0

Too funny; in one sentence you state: “You are either Tea Party or not.” followed by: “I honestly think that conservatives are more fair mined that the so called ” free thinking ” liberals of today.” Do those two sentences conflict at all in your mind?


0

What’s a “conservative” but a fascist?


What’s a “leftist” but a mirror image of a fascist?


BOTH are totalitarians.


Since it is highly unlikely that you are a real fascist, I rather think that you are more of a Libertarian than either of the other two. What else is left?


0

I’m guessing the meeting attendees are predominately old and white, like the state republican party. If so, that’s a problem. Welcome to the graveyard.


0

This sounds racist to me


0

Honesty sounds racist to a racist.


oldandwhite ? I bet you’re stupidandscared too.


0

Ironically, they are also the most likely to get off the couch, volunteer at their precincts and actually vote.


I wouldn’t be so quick to whistle in that graveyard just yet!


0

Careful, there’s Kool-Aid in the Teapot!


0

@ maybe not – Perhaps your understanding needs more reflection: “If we are to define private property, ask yourself this – who determines how you should live your life? Is it you, as an individual, guaranteed by the United States Constitution, or is it the state [Soviet], an entity eager to violate the US Constitution by separating you from your unalienable rights?” ~ Michael Shaw, President, Freedom Advocates


For Liberals and RINOs, my favorite quote is from Voltaire: “It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere.”


0

Ms. Revere:


I thought that I should consider the source before I responded to your two “quotes.


I learned somthing about your Michael Shaw. He again professes that there are only two clear sides to any issue (as above; either you support the US Constitution or you must be a Soviet-style Socialist.) Here’s another quote of his:


“Environment is not about saving nature,” the founder of Freedom Advocates, Michael Shaw, sternly warned an audience of antigovernment “Patriots” and far-right conspiracy theorists during a mid-July conference. “It’s about a revolutionary coup in America. [Environmentalism] is to establish global governance and abandon the principles of Natural Law.” Sustainable development policies, Shaw argued, will require “a police state” and ultimately “turn America into a globally governed homeland where humans are treated as biological resources.”


Michael Shaw

Ninth Annual Freedom 21 Confrence

Addison, Texas, 2008


http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2008/winter/earth-worship


Also from this conference:


“One former popular Freedom 21er was disinvited. Bob Barr, a former conservative Republican congressman from Georgia, was asked not to return by the head of APC, Tom DeWeese, because Barr had talked to Al Gore about global warming. “This is not some nice little debate,” DeWeese said he told someone in Barr’s office. “This is war.”


Paula, don’t you see, Michael Shaw is one of the master-mixers of the “Party Tea.”.


I bet that your favorite tea flavor is Grape, or is it Fruit Punch?


0

@ maybe not – I, too, have the Freedom 21 Conference from Texas. I have also been to two venues featuring Michael Shaw and had the opportunity to speak personally with him. He has said (along with Rosa Koire) that this is not Left versus Right but Up (Liberty and Freedom) versus Down (Tyranny and Oppression). As for Tom DeWeese, I never use him as a reference because I feel he is too combative and that is not an endearing trait. May I “assume” you are an environmentalist? I believe it to be a farce and will not give in to the hype by junk scientists. Edmund Burke warned, “The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.”


0

Got a quote for everything. What’s one to respond to this?


0

Libertarian funded scientist UH-OH http://letfreedomrain.blogspot.com/2012/07/koch-scientist-climate-change-is-real.html


0

I’m naturally suspicious of people who can so deftly describe our world in terms of polarity: Up-Down, Left-Right, etc. Life is never that simple. But it is an effective form of persuasion, because our culture places higher value in thinking than in feeling. Social manipulation requires the creation of opposites, the artificial exaggeration of polarities, to create bugaboos, demons and devils.


To me, Shaw represents someone who has not spent quality time investigating what it means to be a human being, a member of a community, or a spiritual being capable of transcending suffering and strife.


Quite the opposite. It represents someone who personally profits from strife and discord. Someone trying to “better” himself at the expense of someone else.


0

“Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.”


– Voltaire


0

I wish people like you would secede from the union. Personal liberties require some form of organization. Financial liberties are an illusion, the dollar is a debt trap.


0

The thing that worries me is your paradigm that “conservatives” are good, “liberals” are bad.


Is it really as simple as all that?


I’m not going to go through a big spiel about my Libertarianism, you can research that any time you like and you are free to draw your own conclusions.


I’m sure that there must be good people among the Tea Partiers. There are also good people among both the D’s and the R’s.


The problem in the case of the D’s and R’s is that they PRETEND to differ profoundly on key issues. THEY DO NOT. That’s the hurdle that people have so much difficulty getting over.


0

“A witty saying proves nothing.”


– Voltaire


0

The TEA Party philosophy is based on limiting the intervention of government as a catalyst of individual prosperity. Government should only intervene in specific cases where society cannot effectively act at the individual level. With the core belief that individual destiny should be in the individual’s hands, governmental power and resources should be kept close to the people, through their state and community leaders, and not centralized in distant federal government agencies. Conservatives believe that each person is responsible for his or her own place in society. Government should enable each person the ability to secure the benefits of society for themselves, their families and for those who are unable to care for themselves.

Liberals believe it is the responsibility of government to care for all individuals, even if it means giving up some individual rights and/or subordinating enterprise and initiative.

Both liberal & conservative administrations have pushed for the centralization of power in Washington D.C., with only secondary consideration for the rights of both individuals and communities. Liberals have favored federal-level interventions that replace community-based solutions to community problems. These tactics have created federal regulations and controls that are often in the hands of unelected bureaucrats, causing a severe erosion of local authority.

Over the years BOTH parties have shifted to the left. Democrats are now at the edge of Socialism and Republicans are now to the left of center where the Democrats once were.

The Progressive march has been to enact rules, laws, and executive orders that governs nearly every aspect of life. Our government is now controlling much of what we can eat, drink, learn, drive, speak, work, or live.

At what point does it stop? According to the progressive liberals not until the government controls everything. If you don’t believe me check out the UN agenda 21, also called Sustainable Development, also called Smart Growth. The TEA Party is not anti-government, we just want to limit its control.


It is the TEA party’s goal to restore a Constitutionally Limited, Fiscally Responsible Government with free market conditions.


0

@ debeddebed – Even Thomas Jefferson (my favorite orator) could not have said that better. Kudos!!


0

Thomas Jefferson was a slave holder.


0

Yes, Jefferson was a slaveholder as he lived in a slave society. However, Jefferson also made profoundly significant contributions to the rise of anti-slavery constitutionalism in the United States. In writings he called it “an abominable crime” and “moral depravity. In the Virginia Assembly, in the 1780s Jefferson supported a bill to prohibit the state from importing slaves. In the 1784 Congress, Jefferson proposed federal legislation banning slavery in the New Territories of the Northwest, but it was not passed. In 1804 as president, he refused to recognize Haiti, a new republic established by a slave rebellion, and in 1805 and 1806 enacted an arms and trade embargo against them. In 1807 he signed a bill prohibiting the US from participating in the international slave trade; it had been protected from federal regulation for 20 years under compromises of the United States Constitution


0

The “free market” is a right wing fiction !


Without government , or ‘collectivism’ if you please; exploiters would have the rest of us living as slaves or serfs.

You lamebrained Republicans would seem to like that …the freedom of not having choices. The Republican freedom of dictatorial determination and therefore no personal responsibility.

That’s what you lazy Republican teabaggers want .


0

This plutocracy has the baby boomers convinced that they are protecting their own rights when all they’re doing is cementing the 1% in it’s place.


0

deb,


Very informative post. I agree with many of the basic tenets of your movement, in particular:


“Government should only intervene in specific cases where society cannot effectively act at the individual level. With the core belief that individual destiny should be in the individual’s hands, governmental power and resources should be kept close to the people, through their state and community leaders, and not centralized in distant federal government agencies.”


Although I completely agree with that goal, it is disheartening to see that state and community leaders are as apt to be corrupt as national leaders.


“Liberals believe it is the responsibility of government to care for all individuals, even if it means giving up some individual rights and/or subordinating enterprise and initiative.”


No, not “all individuals,” just those who need a hand up, not a hand out, as the saying goes. And exactly what individual rights do liberals require citizens to give up? I will grant that the “subordinating enterprise and initiative” issue is a real problem when it comes to people feeling “entitled” to government handouts. There should always be some incentive to pursue personal improvement attached to a taxpayer-funded “free-bee.” One summer I worked as a tutor/teacher for men and women on welfare. In order to remain eligible for the $, they had to attend tutoring sessions for at least 15 hours a week.That experience was a real eye-opener.


Thanks for taking the time to explain your positions.


0

The best “hand up” is a job in a free market.


Better to teach a man to fish than to give him one.


0

What do you suggest if it’s a four year old that is starving ?


What about a veteran that has had both arms blown off by an I.E.D. ?


What about your grandmother that is Alzheimer’s ?


0

“Democrats are now at the edge of Socialism and Republicans are now to the left of center where the Democrats once were.”


Thanks so much for helping my feeble mind understand the Tea Party “thought process.” Indeed, your rhetoric is meteoric making such a weird claim when the Democrats are now to the right of Nixon and Eisenhower, and the Republicans are charting new ground to the right of anything that’s ever previously existed in America. Where in the world do you get your history lessons? Are you perhaps home schooled? Or do you really not know the difference between socialism and capitalism?


0

Do you have a problem telling the left from the right?


Let me explain; Originally (in the 1950’s) between the extremes of total government control, (left), & no government at all (right), was a central point.


Total government control is called Communism, No government would be Anarchy.


Each party’s “ideal” were just a bit to the left or right of center.


A Democrat is considered to be a liberal, or progressive, one who leans to the left.

A Republican is considered to be a Conservative, one who leaned to the right


0

My problem with the Tea Party is that for every one that has his head screwed on right there are two who don’t. Take Palin and Bachman for example … in my opinion they are as wacky as they come.


Here is a link that may be of interest


http://www.businessinsider.com/tea-party-beliefs-quotes-2010-9?op=1


I also find it interesting that in the north county there is an art store that has a mural of an oak treee on their wall yet certain Tea Party thinking people are making it difficult on the store owners.


Where are the Tea Party property rights people on this one? They sure seem silent. I’ll bet if the mural depicted an American soldier clutching an assault weapon with a background of the stars and stripes, well then the Tea Party folks would be lining up to support the property rights of the art store owners.


Is there a bit of hypocrisy here?


0

Hope they sponsor a link on CCN so many more can find their website and subscribe like I just did!!!! Thanks CCN….


0

.

What the Brother Ted loves about the Tea Party Movement, is the fact that they’re a Christian conservative movement. Even the number one Tea Partier, Republican Senator Jim Demint, he states in his book entitled “The Great American Awakening,” that with a big government, there is a little God. This has to change according to him where our Christian God, as opposed to the Islamic God, Allah, has to be bigger in the U.S. government. Praise!


“(The Tea Party) is as much a spiritual awakening as a political awakening. The concern about our country…has awakened the faith of many people.”


Once we gain superiority, our Christian God will once again take hold in many of the decisions our government has to make. Especially in the area of how ungodly gay marriage is, and abortion. Hey, wait a minute! We Christian conservatives have already initiated these entities with our bringing forth bills against these ungodly actions!


Yes, I know, our 2010 mantra was “jobs, jobs, jobs.” But, once the populace took the bait in this promise, we changed directions in a godly way to bypass jobs, and became uterus monitors and gay bashers. What did you expect from a Christian Conservative view? Suckers!


0

Ted!!! You did survive your TJ chicken salad!


0

danika,


Yes dear, since I am a TRUE Christian, and truly believe and accept ALL of the bible, all I had to do was to pray to Jesus before I blacked out. In doing so, He obviously had more plans for me since I awoke two hours later.


0
1 2 3 4