San Antonio Tea Party

[Viva Las Espuelas]

jXGrQ9uiLSo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXGrQ9uiLSo

[George Gervin's Afro]

jXGrQ9uiLSo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXGrQ9uiLSo

The 4 of you have a great time.

[LnGrrrR]

The 4 of you have a great time.

:rollin

[Viva Las Espuelas]

The 4 of you have a great time.

hmm. so you just accept what you're given. keep up the good life :tu

[LnGrrrR]

hmm. so you just accept what you're given. keep up the good life :tu

And it's THAT sort of logic that keeps the Republican mind sharp! Non sequitur, thy name is Viva Las Espuelas.

[Extra Stout]

The "Tea Party" isn't the Republican Party.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

The "Tea Party" isn't the Republican Party.
yeah i really didn't see any requirements in the invite, but hey.....the louder people talk the more they feel good about themselves.

[LnGrrrR]

The "Tea Party" isn't the Republican Party.

Technically true Extra Stout. I should have said, "the majority of the Republican party". :)

[PixelPusher]

Every time I see a youtube about a Tea Party protest, I wander down a lonely railroad track, weeping at the thought of all static electrical generators that won't be invented.

[MannyIsGod]

Youtube? Check
Website? Check
T Shirts? Check
Ideas on what we stand for and how we would change what is going on? ......

They may want to put what they actually stand for on the website. I'm not even trying to trash them. Its just strikes me as a group right now that is having fun with the ancillary items while avoiding a mission statement and information supporting their core beliefs.

Also this struck me as pretty funny. The banner on the website is:

http://www.theythinkyouarestupid.com/images/header.jpg

Every single one is a Democrat

Then they say this on their about page.



Who WE are

Concerned citizens of every stripe. Old, young, evangelicals, Ron Paul supporters, Democrats, Republicans. Whatever! What unites us is the staggering money being wasted by Washington. We are using the First Amendment as citizens of the republic.

What unites them is their hatred of Democrats. The word Democrat is thrown in with those others simply for decorative purposes.

Where was the outrage over the past 8 years?

[mogrovejo]

If I could, I'd be there. Are you going to attend, Viva Las Espuelas?

[CosmicCowboy]

*Laughing at Manny's perpetual Bush Bashing*

What he doesn't seem to get is that those of us that are fiscal conservatives (more than Republicans) didn't like what Bush allowed to happen either.

[clambake]

i just hope they open with a prayer.

[MannyIsGod]

*Laughing at Manny's perpetual Bush Bashing*

What he doesn't seem to get is that those of us that are fiscal conservatives (more than Republicans) didn't like what Bush allowed to happen either.

Its not Bush bashing, its questioning the motives of a group who says they hated what Bush did but form up less than 3 months after he leaves office. Bush is gone, I could give 2 shits about bashing him. But where was the outrage while he was in office? The lack of fiscal conservatism out of DC is far from a new thing.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

If I could, I'd be there. Are you going to attend, Viva Las Espuelas?
same as you.

[ChumpDumper]

I think they are stupid.

[CosmicCowboy]

Its not Bush bashing, its questioning the motives of a group who says they hated what Bush did but form up less than 3 months after he leaves office. Bush is gone, I could give 2 shits about bashing him. But where was the outrage while he was in office? The lack of fiscal conservatism out of DC is far from a new thing.

I was fucking pissed off at the FIRST TARP! :lol

[MannyIsGod]

I'm not even sure they are stupid since I don't even know how they propose to fix things or what they even diagree with other than "Washington Waste".

[MannyIsGod]

I was fucking pissed off at the FIRST TARP! :lol

Ok? Where you pissed off at the years of deficit spending under Bush and did you form vague groups called the SA Tea Party during those years?

[mogrovejo]

Anyone who's going to this meeting?

[MannyIsGod]

Anyone who's going to this meeting?

Maybe if I actually knew what the meeting was about.

[clambake]

i hear david duke is a speaker.

[mogrovejo]

I expect the large majority of the people to attend these meetings to be democrats and leftists. They were so outraged with Bush's policies of promoting corporate welfare that there's no way they don't seize the opportunity of protesting against the continuation of those policies by the Obama administration in an even bigger scale.

--------


Maybe if I actually knew what the meeting was about.

If I understand correctly, it's too protest against the TARP, the EESA, the Recovery and Investment Act and government provided bailouts and corporate welfare in general.

[CosmicCowboy]

Ok? Where you pissed off at the years of deficit spending under Bush and did you form vague groups called the SA Tea Party during those years?

:lmao

I'm more of a limited government conservative libertarian than a Republican and yeah, I was pissed off at Bush.

I thank him for focusing on terrorism but am pissed off at him abdicating all fiscal responsibility to congress.

[MannyIsGod]

:lmao

I'm more of a limited government conservative libertarian than a Republican and yeah, I was pissed off at Bush.

I thank him for focusing on terrorism but am pissed off at him abdicating all fiscal responsibility to congress.

So where was the Tea Party in those years?

[MannyIsGod]

If I understand correctly, it's too protest against the TARP, the EESA, the Recovery and Investment Act and government provided bailouts and corporate welfare in general.

I wonder if they'll have any economists speaking.

[mogrovejo]

I wonder if they'll have any economists speaking.

Why? Only economists are apt to talk about these issues?

[MannyIsGod]

Why? Only economists are apt to talk about these issues?

I didn't say anything about only economists talking. Thats all you bud. But if you don't see the value in the opinion of economists on the actions during an economic crisis then I don't know what to say.

[ChumpDumper]

I wonder if they'll have any economists speaking.As far as I can tell, the featured speaker is the author of the book Our Grandpa Was an Alien.

[DarrinS]

Why does this get libs' panties all in a wad?


You don't agree with them, don't go. Simple as that.

[ChumpDumper]

Why does this get libs' panties all in a wad?I see bemusement, not anger.


You don't agree with them, don't go. Simple as that.If they end up in Breckenridge Park, it might be a nice day for a picnic.

[mogrovejo]

I didn't say anything about only economists talking. Thats all you bud. But if you don't see the value in the opinion of economists on the actions during an economic crisis then I don't know what to say.

Have I ever said I don't see the value in the opinion of economists? Let's keep the discussion civilized, please refrain yourself of using strawman arguments.

[CosmicCowboy]

So where was the Tea Party in those years?

That's like saying where was the American revolution in 1770. The tea tax wasn't the first tax imposed on the colonies, it was just the tipping point from passive resistance at a philosophical level to active resistance and expression.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

............But if you don't see the value in the opinion of economists on the actions during an economic crisis then I don't know what to say.
do you value opinions of economists that oppose obama's economic plan?
do you value opinions of scientists that say global warming is false?

[MannyIsGod]

do you value opinions of economists that oppose obama's economic plan?

Yes - in fact if you read my posts you'd see that.


do you value opinions of scientists that say global warming is false?Yes I do. You have no idea how I feel about climate change do you?

[MannyIsGod]

Why? Only economists are apt to talk about these issues?


Have I ever said I don't see the value in the opinion of economists? Let's keep the discussion civilized, please refrain yourself of using strawman arguments.

Um, who pulled the strawman card? If you have to ask why it would be of value to have an economist to talk at an event like this then you either don't see the value in the economists opinion or your asking questions that don't need to be asked. And as I said before, I never said anything about only economists speaking at the event so would you like you reevaluate your statement on strawman arguments?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Yes - in fact if you read my posts you'd see that.
Yes I do. You have no idea how I feel about climate change do you?
thanks. i tend to ignore you as much as possible so sorry for not being abreast of your stance on everything. hence the questions.

[MannyIsGod]

That's like saying where was the American revolution in 1770. The tea tax wasn't the first tax imposed on the colonies, it was just the tipping point from passive resistance at a philosophical level to active resistance and expression.

Except this isn't a revolutionary war, CC. Its the FIRST step anyone takes - organization. 8 years is a long time to sit around and be mad and not even organize when they cared so much. You can stop acting like this is anything but an anti democratic measure, CC. You don't have to hide it. And there's nothing wrong with that. The San Antonio Tea Party's banner tells you right away who they oppose. There's not a single GOP lawmaker on there even though many of them have made a huge effort to continue deficit spending.

[MannyIsGod]

thanks. i tend to ignore you as much as possible so sorry for not being abreast of your stance on everything. hence the questions.


:lol The only person who responds to more of my posts is John Smith so I pretty much laugh at that statement.

[johnsmith]

:lol The only person who responds to more of my posts is John Smith so I pretty much laugh at that statement.

Damn Straight!

[mogrovejo]

Um, who pulled the strawman card? If you have to ask why it would be of value to have an economist to talk at an event like this then you either don't see the value in the economists opinion or your asking questions that don't need to be asked. And as I said before, I never said anything about only economists speaking at the event so would you like you reevaluate your statement on strawman arguments?

But I didn't make that question, did I?

And I never accused you of saying that only economists should speak at the event.

[MannyIsGod]

But I didn't make that question, did I?

And I never accused you of saying that only economists should speak at the event.

Oh so your question was removed entirely from the context of this thread and was simply a question on the validity of economists opinions compared to anyone's in general?

Right.

[boutons_deux]

"him abdicating all fiscal responsibility to congress."

for 6 years, it was a REPUG-controlled Congress, where dubya vetoed nothing, so Exec and Congress were in perfect accord on spending.

Again, Repugs trying to remove ALL responsibility for anything from dubya.

[DarrinS]

"him abdicating all fiscal responsibility to congress."

for 6 years, it was a REPUG-controlled Congress, where dubya vetoed nothing, so Exec and Congress were in perfect accord on spending.

Again, Repugs trying to remove ALL responsibility for anything from dubya.


Yes, that REPUG spent money like a drunken liberal. I was against out-of-control spending then, and I'm against it now.

[PEP]

So where was the Tea Party in those years?

Wasnt there like some sort of anti-Bush march every other week back then?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

every day on msnbc, but it was pro-american back in the day.

[LockBeard]

I'm seeing more and more Gadsdens around and about, yet I see no actual things being done to prevent the treading on :bking

Anyways...I should get back to mailing my little tea bags to the capital so some bum off the street can make an honest buck with his broom.

[micca]

Why does this get libs' panties all in a wad?


You don't agree with them, don't go. Simple as that.

Because the silenty majority is getting politically active, they aren't supposed to do that. they are supposed to go to work build the nation pay taxes, obey the laws, and let the more intelligent more morally enlightened run the country.They are supposed to know their place, and if for one minute the thought crosses their mind that they have a right to self determination, the more intelligent more morally enlightend people ridicule and debase them,trivialize them as humans. if that fails more violent methods are deployed. The people cave.

[micca]

Except this isn't a revolutionary war, CC. Its the FIRST step anyone takes - organization. 8 years is a long time to sit around and be mad and not even organize when they cared so much. You can stop acting like this is anything but an anti democratic measure, CC. You don't have to hide it. And there's nothing wrong with that. The San Antonio Tea Party's banner tells you right away who they oppose. There's not a single GOP lawmaker on there even though many of them have made a huge effort to continue deficit spending.


How is the people exercising their right of assembly and free speech anti democratic, Democracy is not a spectator sport, it requires we all get involved. I see this as more of statement by the people that they feel the political class and the ruling elite have pushed them way to far. I was in the streets against Bush how come I am called anti democratic when I get in streets against Obama.

[MannyIsGod]

How is the people exercising their right of assembly and free speech anti democratic, Democracy is not a spectator sport, it requires we all get involved. I see this as more of statement by the people that they feel the political class and the ruling elite have pushed them way to far. I was in the streets against Bush how come I am called anti democratic when I get in streets against Obama.

:lol

Who called you anti democratic?

I'll answer for you, no one.

[MannyIsGod]

Because the silenty majority is getting politically active, they aren't supposed to do that. they are supposed to go to work build the nation pay taxes, obey the laws, and let the more intelligent more morally enlightened run the country.They are supposed to know their place, and if for one minute the thought crosses their mind that they have a right to self determination, the more intelligent more morally enlightend people ridicule and debase them,trivialize them as humans. if that fails more violent methods are deployed. The people cave.


:lmao

I don't believe you know what the world majority means.

[Nbadan]

Remember when Dubya was dumping piles (pallots actually) of $100s into Iraq? Where was the 'conservative' outrage then? hmmmmmmm....

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2007/02/07/dollarsariveiraq372ready.jpg


The US flew nearly $12bn in shrink-wrapped $100 bills into Iraq, then distributed the cash with no proper control over who was receiving it and how it was being spent.

...In the year after the invasion of Iraq in 2003 nearly 281 million notes, weighing 363 tonnes, were sent from New York to Baghdad for disbursement to Iraqi ministries and US contractors. Using C-130 planes, the deliveries took place once or twice a month with the biggest of $2,401,600,000 on June 22 2004, six days before the handover.

Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1)

[micca]

:lol

Who called you anti democratic?

I'll answer for you, no one.

You said "you can stop acting like this is anything other than an anti democratic measure"

[micca]

:lmao

I don't believe you know what the world majority means.

Enlighten me .

[MannyIsGod]

You said "you can stop acting like this is anything other than an anti democratic measure"

Yeah, go back and and reread the posts and tell me if you figure what I was talking about. Or you can pray on it if you'd like.

[micca]

Its not Bush bashing, its questioning the motives of a group who says they hated what Bush did but form up less than 3 months after he leaves office. Bush is gone, I could give 2 shits about bashing him. But where was the outrage while he was in office? The lack of fiscal conservatism out of DC is far from a new thing.
Your so chicken shit.You are totally into simple minded Bush Bashing We all are why deny it. the whole point Mc Cain lost was so many republicans voted either in protest against the neo-con party line or didn't vote in protest of eight years of lies and betrayls. There was tremendous rage by consevatives and republicans about both Bush and the Party and when Mc Cain was nominated it pushed it over the top. The RNC couldn't buy a vote. Obama didn't win shit the Neo_cons lost. and consevatives are still not trusting the RNC. Bush fucked the people who voted for him, what the hell you think Obama is doing now.

[MannyIsGod]

Its kinda funny because you actually believe everything you type.

[micca]

Its kinda funny because you actually believe everything you type.

what's even more funny is you think your clever.

[ChumpDumper]

what the hell you think Obama is doing now.Pretty much what he said he would. It's not like he pretended to be a conservative.

[baseline bum]

Funny how the conservatives never talked shit about Bush until right before the election when their party started talking shit about Bush.

[LockBeard]

Funny how the Liberals always cried about how fascist Bush was, and now TOTALLY IGNORE how authoritative and radically forceful the Obama administration is.

That's politics.

And before you say, ...they are the authority, stfu you know what I mean. Well you probably don't because you ignore anything that questions your love for the O...

[LockBeard]

Pretty much what he said he would. It's not like he pretended to be a conservative.

Actually he did once he beat Hillary.

[boutons_]

"That's politics."

If the Repug case, dickhead's Consitution-raping, power-grabbing for the Exec while emasculating the Legislature with signing statements is unique.

Let us know when Obama's team comes anywhere near the lawlessness of the Repugs, as opposed to Obama doing stuff YOU simply don't like.

[boutons_]

The San Antonio Tea Party will completely energize and transform San Antonians, and perhaps even the entire USA.

or, maybe it's just a self-congratulating circle-jerk, signifying nothing.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

"That's politics."

If the Repug case, dickhead's Consitution-raping, power-grabbing for the Exec while emasculating the Legislature with signing statements is unique.

Let us know when Obama's team comes anywhere near the lawlessness of the Repugs, as opposed to Obama doing stuff YOU simply don't like.

They're already there dumbass, you just don't have any posts on democraticunderground pointing it out for you so you don't have a fucking clue.

[Oh, Gee!!]

the video (like this thread) was a complete waste of time

[LnGrrrR]

Funny how the Liberals always cried about how fascist Bush was, and now TOTALLY IGNORE how authoritative and radically forceful the Obama administration is.


Except for, you know, the multiple threads where a few of the boards liberals have already called Obama on his FISA vote, on his state secrets privilege request, and multiple other instances.

Way to self-pwn, loser!

[Bartleby]

They're already there dumbass, you just don't have any posts on democraticunderground pointing it out for you so you don't have a fucking clue.

Do you have specific examples of the laws they have broken or are you just making shit up?

[Don Quixote]

Funny how the conservatives never talked plop about Bush until right before the election when their party started talking plop about Bush.

No, that's not true. There was plenty of conservative opposition to Bush on: Dubai Ports, delaying the Iraq surge, Medicare Part D, his budgets in general, amnesty for illegals (i.e., comprehensive reform), faith-based initiatives, the Miers nomination, Rumsfeld, and so on. I remember reading quite a lot of this sort of opposition at the conservative journals (National Review being the most important) and the think tanks. Rush opposed Bush on several points. And heaven knows I did!

That said, you're right the McCain campaign distanced themselves from Bush. I don't know if this was a smart move or not (I guess it was), but at points I wanted someone to stand up and at least express some appreciation for Bush.

(I realize this last point violates ST Politics Rule #1, which states, George W. Bush is not in any way smart, right, well-informed, or decent. Any posts violating this rule will immediately be flamed. I understand this.)

[Don Quixote]

I'm fairly sympathetic to a peaceful protest against big government and high taxes. I'm of the opinion that those things are necessary antithetical to liberty.

That said, I don't think we should call these things ""Tea Parties." There was ONE Tea Party, and it was awesome. Since something of that magnitude is not likely to happen (i.e., kicking off some sort of revolt), we're best off toning down the language, and just calling it a "low taxes" rally, or something.

And the rallies should be non-partisan. Republicans are almost as guilty of this largesse as are the Democrats. The ones still in Congress waited WAY too long to be protesting big govt (i.e. after the Messiah got elected). Perhaps they are finally feeling pressure from their constituencies.

[implacable44]

"That's politics."

If the Repug case, dickhead's Consitution-raping, power-grabbing for the Exec while emasculating the Legislature with signing statements is unique.

Let us know when Obama's team comes anywhere near the lawlessness of the Repugs, as opposed to Obama doing stuff YOU simply don't like.

Okay -- consider yourself advised. I am officially letting you know The Big O has far surpassed any damage that W did to the constitution..

[FromWayDowntown]

Okay -- consider yourself advised. I am officially letting you know The Big O has far surpassed any damage that W did to the constitution..

You stand ready, I'm sure, to give specific examples of this. But I'm guessing you don't really see the need to drop that kind of information on a board like this one.

[implacable44]

You stand ready, I'm sure, to give specific examples of this. But I'm guessing you don't really see the need to drop that kind of information on a board like this one.

You mean to say that you... an edumacated man -- well versed in the failures of W and the constitution - you are not aware of the violations and proposed violations to the constitution ? You are not aware of who Obama wants to appoint as cheif legal counsel for the US to serve in international issues --- including representation to the UN ( or his views that the USA should defer to the world court and any conflict between this country and the world court should be resolved by eliminating the law of the country in favor of the world ?)

[LnGrrrR]

You mean to say that you... an edumacated man -- well versed in the failures of W and the constitution - you are not aware of the violations and proposed violations to the constitution ? You are not aware of who Obama wants to appoint as cheif legal counsel for the US to serve in international issues --- including representation to the UN ( or his views that the USA should defer to the world court and any conflict between this country and the world court should be resolved by eliminating the law of the country in favor of the world ?)

In short, you can't provide the information he asked. Thanks!

[Viva Las Espuelas]

if you see snow melt, do you need a link to verify that it melted?

[Crookshanks]

if you see snow melt, do you need a link to verify that it melted?
I wonder at what point the kool-aid drinkers will finally see the light and see Obama for who he really is. But probably by that time our form of government and our way of life will be so far gone it won't even matter anymore. :depressed

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I wonder at what point the kool-aid drinkers will finally see the light and see Obama for who he really is. But probably by that time our form of government and our way of life will be so far gone it won't even matter anymore. :depressed
don't you realize that "we" lost. you must not have any opposing opinions whatsoever. just line up for the firmware update.

[ChumpDumper]

It's not our fault you can't think of any real examples.

[FromWayDowntown]

You mean to say that you... an edumacated man -- well versed in the failures of W and the constitution - you are not aware of the violations and proposed violations to the constitution ?

I had hoped that you could provide me a long and detailed list. I obviously had unrealistic expectations.


You are not aware of who Obama wants to appoint as cheif legal counsel for the US to serve in international issues --- including representation to the UN ( or his views that the USA should defer to the world court and any conflict between this country and the world court should be resolved by eliminating the law of the country in favor of the world ?)

I'd be interested in knowing either: (1) where the Constitution speaks of the qualifications of one who might be appointed as chief legal counsel for the US to serve in international issues (or what that position actually is); or (2) where the Constitution says that American law should govern with regard to international legal disputes.

I realize that it's really tempting to argue that Obama's pinko tendencies are as bad as they could possibly be and that encapsulating that notion for the masses is easily accomplished by coloring them as unconstitutional. But the problem with arguing that something is unconstitutional is this meddling requirement that it actually be contrary to the express language of the Constitution or the legally-accepted constructions of its terms.

While I don't think Obama is any more "socialist" than his predecessor in bailouts, Herr Bush, I don't know that the Constitution would forbid either from undertaking sweeping socialist reforms in matters of social policy -- particularly if Congress passed laws in support thereof. It might be unpalatable to voters (including me), but it wouldn't actually be unconstitutional.

[LnGrrrR]

if you see snow melt, do you need a link to verify that it melted?

Depends on the situation. Is it still less than 32 degrees outside? :D

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Depends on the situation. Is it still less than 32 degrees outside? :D
al gore will tell you it isn't. :D

[LnGrrrR]

al gore will tell you it isn't. :D

Touche :downspin:

[Ignignokt]

assaults weapon ban. second ammendment

[FromWayDowntown]

assaults weapon ban. second ammendment

Do you already have a place to store your bazooka and your howitzer?

[Ignignokt]

Do you already have a place to store your bazooka and your howitzer?

wow, snarky aren't we.

Why not an f22 and a tank , brilliance?

[Winehole23]

assaults weapon ban. second ammendmentSpeculative, but it does look likely.

Similarly, it is not yet known to a legal certainty whether the 2nd Amendment covers arms yet to be designated "dangerous or unusual", but after Holder signs point to no. We'll see.

[LnGrrrR]

wow, snarky aren't we.

Why not an f22 and a tank , brilliance?

Given your second amendment concerns, I don't see how you can complain with anyone wanting to purchase one. :)

Also, you should be allowed to stand on a public street corner and yell obscenities all day, as well as post up naked pictures of yourself. First amendment!

[Ignignokt]

Speculative, but it does look likely.

Similarly, it is not yet known to a legal certainty whether the 2nd Amendment covers arms yet to be designated "dangerous or unusual", but after Holder signs point to no. We'll see.

Wrong. The intent of the 2nd ammendment was for the citizens to be able to protect themselves from an oppressive govt. at that time that gap in weaponry between a soldier and a civilian was pretty small. It was rifle vs rifle. Now it's large. It's an M60 or tank gun vs a glock.

the principle is, that the citizens are allowed to have whatever weapons possible to protect themselves from an attack.

[ChumpDumper]

Would the founding fathers want non-landowners to posses nuclear missiles?

[Ignignokt]

Given your second amendment concerns, I don't see how you can complain with anyone wanting to purchase one. :)

Also, you should be allowed to stand on a public street corner and yell obscenities all day, as well as post up naked pictures of yourself. First amendment!

The first was intended to protect political speech, rights of assembly and ideas, aswell as protecting the right of exercising religion.

Nudity, is not what they had in mind nor inflammatory language.

I'm sorry your ignorant and you fail at using worthy examples.

[Ignignokt]

Would the founding fathers want non-landowners to posses nuclear missiles?

I already knew you were going there. and unless it could be possible to nuke 10 acres of land, either party will see it useless to fight each other since they both share the same land.

So..Um dumb question,.. unless a nucleur missile could only kill off govt people and not destroy other civilians, i don't see the point.

The founding fathers still wanted to have and advantage for the govt since they need to restore order, but they didn't see it wrong that citizens were given a fair chance to defend themselves.

[ChumpDumper]

I already knew you were going there. and unless it could be possible to nuke 10 acres of land, either party will see it useless to fight each other since they both share the same land.the US has always been much larger than ten acres, so dumb answer.


So..Um dumb question,.. unless a nucleur missile could only kill off govt people and not destroy other civilians, i don't see the point.You mean the founding fathers were this selective in determining what future arms coudl be considered? Again, dumb answer.


The founding fathers still wanted to have and advantage for the govt since they need to restore order, but they didn't see it wrong that citizens were given a fair chance to defend themselves.Why wouldn't nukes be fair? Do we not use them as a deterrent and therefore a defense?

Tanks?

Assault helicopters?

Could black people be allowed to own only 3/5 of a gun?

[Ignignokt]

the US has always been much larger than ten acres, so dumb answer.

What? i was talking about the ineffectiveness of using nukes as weapons in the same nation, because nukes will cause peripheral damage. Not hard to understand.

You mean the founding fathers were this selective in determining what future arms coudl be considered? Again, dumb answer.

I don't see how this point helps you out when it comes to the citizen being allowed to have a fair fight, so if they had no distinction in mind then my point is even stronger, if they do.. well you're saying it's stupid to argue thap point which is ultimately your point anyway and your also discrediting your side.

You neither gain or win on this one.

Why wouldn't nukes be fair? Do we not use them as a deterrent and therefore a defense?

Because the govt would never use them on their own soil, nor would the people who have a common interest in this land. (see my topic on efficacy.)

Tanks?

Assault helicopters?

Owning tanks and assault helicopters would require more than a single citizen to use them and would then mean that a militia or unit is formed. The constituion doesn't speak on this.

But it does say that we as individuals have the right to bear arms. ANd what you conclude from that is that we are allowed to defend ourselves as individuals.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm sure there is a scenario or two in the military where nukes are used on US soil.

A single person can use a tank or helicopter.

A single person can fire a missile.

[Crookshanks]

Here's another example: the 10th amendment - which addresses state's rights.

Congress wrote a stipulation into the porkulus bill that says state assemblies can bypass the governor and take the stimulus money, even if the Governor refuses it.

That is unconstitutional! The powers given to the FEDERAL government are specific and enumerated in the 10th amendment - overriding state governments under these circumstances is not one!

[ChumpDumper]

But that wouldn't be the federal government overriding the state government, it would be the state legislature overriding the state executive.

If there is an actual current court case over that issue, I'd like to see it.

[Crookshanks]

But that wouldn't be the federal government overriding the state government, it would be the state legislature overriding the state executive.

If there is an actual current court case over that issue, I'd like to see it.

Actually, it would be the federal gov't overriding a state constitution set up with its own checks and balances. Each state has their way of governing and the federal gov't can't just come in and change things.

As far as an actual court case - since the stimulus money is just now being distributed, there hasn't been time for a challenge.

[ChumpDumper]

Actually, it would be the federal gov't overriding a state constitution set up with its own checks and balances. Each state has their way of governing and the federal gov't can't just come in and change things.Possbile. I'm fine with the courts deciding that one.


As far as an actual court case - since the stimulus money is just now being distributed, there hasn't been time for a challenge.
If there has been one legal business day since it has been introduced, there has been time for a challenge. If they choose to wait until one of the posturing Republican governors is overriden, that's fine too.

[FromWayDowntown]

Owning tanks and assault helicopters would require more than a single citizen to use them and would then mean that a militia or unit is formed. The constituion doesn't speak on this.

You need to re-read the Second Amendment (or Heller), since it ties the right to bear arms directly to the need for a well-regulated militia:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

So tanks and helicopters for everyone, no?

[LnGrrrR]

The first was intended to protect political speech, rights of assembly and ideas, aswell as protecting the right of exercising religion.

Nudity, is not what they had in mind nor inflammatory language.

I'm sorry your ignorant and you fail at using worthy examples.

And you fail at reading. I said nothing about being nude. I said yelling obscenities (freedom of speech!) and putting up nude pictures of myself (freedom of ideas!).

Or are you saying that pictures of nude people should be against the law now? :)

[LockBeard]

I don't blame the O.G. G Dub for shedding a tear.

"You idiots are about to get globally taxed for carbon!? when TEA was our last straw!?":wow

[Ignignokt]

And you fail at reading. I said nothing about being nude. I said yelling obscenities (freedom of speech!) and putting up nude pictures of myself (freedom of ideas!).

Or are you saying that pictures of nude people should be against the law now? :)

I think the general term i described covers what you said.

Nudity.

[LnGrrrR]

I think the general term i described covers what you said.

Nudity.

Ah, so nudity should be outlawed, eh? :D

And what of the right to shout obscenities? You didn't counter that.

[byrontx]

Spending money on an unneeded war-GOOD.
Spending money to keep the economy from totally tanking-BAD.

Republican logic (or lack thereof).

[Ignignokt]

Ah, so nudity should be outlawed, eh? :D

And what of the right to shout obscenities? You didn't counter that.

You don't have a right to shout obscenities without recourse, the supreme court has explained that.

And as far as nudity, i didn't say it should be outlawed, just that the constitution doesn't protect that.

[LnGrrrR]

You don't have a right to shout obscenities without recourse, the supreme court has explained that.

And as far as nudity, i didn't say it should be outlawed, just that the constitution doesn't protect that.

If I handed out a picture of a nude painting, would that not be covered under freedom of expression? Is not art protected by the First Amendment?

Wait, so you're saying that there CAN be Constitutional limits on our amendments? Then you'll understand the hole in your former argument.

[mogrovejo]

So, is anyone is going or not?

[Ignignokt]

If I handed out a picture of a nude painting, would that not be covered under freedom of expression? Is not art protected by the First Amendment?

Wait, so you're saying that there CAN be Constitutional limits on our amendments? Then you'll understand the hole in your former argument.

That's not my argument, and i'd appeciate if only you'd understand that my argument was that the second ammendment allows for the defense of individuals against govt tyranny.

THis has nothing to do with the first ammendment, a point you brought up. THe first ammendment protects political speech and doesn't speak on nudity or obscenities, beastiality, snuff films which should be the states job to regulate.

[Ignignokt]

btw, i want a show of hands for those for prohibition of arms while for the legalization of drugs and or marijuana.

[FromWayDowntown]

THis has nothing to do with the first ammendment, a point you brought up. THe first ammendment protects political speech and doesn't speak on nudity or obscenities, beastiality, snuff films which should be the states job to regulate.

Oh, but it does. If the words "Congress shall make NO law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . . ." implies that certain limitations upon speech are nevertheless acceptable, then why aren't there limitations implied into the words "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Neither amendment includes any textual exception; both state the restrictions on Congress in absolute terms.

[LnGrrrR]

Oh, but it does. If the words "Congress shall make NO law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . . ." implies that certain limitations upon speech are nevertheless acceptable, then why aren't there limitations implied into the words "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Neither amendment includes any textual exception; both state the restrictions on Congress in absolute terms.

Exactly. Just like there can be limits on freedom of speech, there can be limits on the right to bear arms.

Now, me personally, I think we should be able to buy tanks if we want. Just have a registration process, make sure the person's background is clean, and I'm pretty much fine with everything but nukes (since I don't agree with nukes in nearly any situation but an end-of-the-world scenario.)

[BJK]

As a UTSA Student we're having our Tea Party at 6p on April 15 at Joe Mommas Cafe, Babcock & 1604 Join US

http://www.joemomas.biz

http://www.joemommas.biz/images/I2N5RCA8890TZCAAI42JYCACPGLRSCAR10SOZCA1N42K1CA09B 1P6CAEVVQE2CAVN411XCA6OA12DCAFQR26ECA80NCMTCARASPT YCAM6DII0CAAR9S1YCAGW8H4GCALRMDNQCAI6NBUCCA0DMT35

[Ya Vez]

Glenn Beck just announced he will be at the Alamo Tea Party.

[Wild Cobra]

Glenn Beck just announced he will be at the Alamo Tea Party.

That man is a wealth of good information, but wow...

What's he on? I'd like some please...

[ChumpDumper]

I think he cuts onions on his set.

[Wild Cobra]

I think he cuts onions on his set.

I'm just too laid back most the time. I can stand to get a little hyper... Just a little... Not like him!

[ChumpDumper]

It's a schtick. If you got paid that much, you would find a way to cry regularly.

[LockBeard]

Keep making that money Beck so you can handle whatever will get thrown your way in the future because of what you say.

Rush, $500 million lulz That can hire plenty of Ninjas to keep the Clintons from getting to you.

[Winehole23]

Glenn Beck chews the scenery for sure. I would call his on air demeanor slightly tinged with mania and accented by folksy neurosis.

[CosmicCowboy]

Exactly. Just like there can be limits on freedom of speech, there can be limits on the right to bear arms.

Now, me personally, I think we should be able to buy tanks if we want. Just have a registration process, make sure the person's background is clean, and I'm pretty much fine with everything but nukes (since I don't agree with nukes in nearly any situation but an end-of-the-world scenario.)

You can own a tank. People do. They are expensive to shoot though, because every round is another $200 to register.

[Wild Cobra]

You can own a tank. People do. They are expensive to shoot though, because every round is another $200 to register.
Besides, James Garner had a Sherman Tank in the movie Tank (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088224/)!

[Viva Las Espuelas]

That man is a wealth of good information, but wow...

What's he on? I'd like some please...
yeah. i like beck, but he goes overboard a lot of times and i think that hurts him. he'd be more effective if he'd tone down his antics.

[LnGrrrR]

You can own a tank. People do. They are expensive to shoot though, because every round is another $200 to register.

Go America! That's what I'm talking about. :D

[LockBeard]

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2009/Apr/Week1/15254906.jpg

[Don Quixote]

I'm thinking of going to the one in New Orleans. Actually, it's in Metairie (which is mostly red) and not New Orleans (deep, deep blue). But I have a prior committment -- do you think they'll miss me?

[Wild Cobra]

yeah. i like beck, but he goes overboard a lot of times and i think that hurts him. he'd be more effective if he'd tone down his antics.
I don't like him for that reason. I can't stand listening to him for more than a minute or two.

[Don Quixote]

Beck is okay. I like him mainly for his solid grasp on the fundamentals -- limited govt, low taxes, secure borders, and an originalist understanding of the Constitution. He's interesting.

Hannity is okay too, but if I just got done listening to Rush, Hannity is a HUGE step down. Not that I disagree with him, but Rush is a far better off-the-cuff speaker than Hannity, Beck, or pretty much anyone on the radio today.

[LnGrrrR]

I'm thinking of going to the one in New Orleans. Actually, it's in Metairie (which is mostly red) and not New Orleans (deep, deep blue). But I have a prior committment -- do you think they'll miss me?

Probably. It's tough to play spades without that fourth person. :D

[ChumpDumper]

I'm thinking of going to the one in New Orleans. Actually, it's in Metairie (which is mostly red) and not New Orleans (deep, deep blue).Are they still pulling guns on people trying to cross the bridge?

[LifeLongSpursFan50]

So, is anyone is going or not?


Yes...I am so proud to say that I am

[PixelPusher]

Ooooookay...yeah...

kwdOwgD5OsY

[MannyIsGod]

:lmao - that seals it - I'm going on Wednesday - I'll record and maybe even live blog. If something like THAT is what is going to happen, I'd love to see it.

[MannyIsGod]

82-PLU8EuKg

[LnGrrrR]

"It's a brainwash unit!"

Is that some sort of scientific measurement? :D

[LnGrrrR]

Also, I love how it's the old fat white guy trying to represent conservatives :D

[Winehole23]

Grass-roots or astroturfing (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/09/lobbyists-planning-teaparties/)?

[jman3000]

It's gonna rock me AND it's rock solid?

Sold.

[baseline bum]

:lmao - that seals it - I'm going on Wednesday - I'll record and maybe even live blog. If something like THAT is what is going to happen, I'd love to see it.

Egg 'em on. Give a nice speech about the FEMA concentration camps and how Obama said we're not a Christian nation, and then tell them how he once gave you an iPod.

[MannyIsGod]

Egg 'em on. Give a nice speech about the FEMA concentration camps and how Obama said we're not a Christian nation, and then tell them how he once gave you an iPod.

Nah, if I do go, and I do actually want to go see it then I'm not going to do anything like that. You don't need to do it because they actually believe these things they say.

I think its ignorance and stubbornness. They think that balancing the budget in the face of a huge economic crisis is appropriate because no one is telling them thats exactly what Hoover tried to do and what it got them. They think evolution is actually false because of all the bullshit spread and how "objectively" the media covers it.

[balli]

Big bucks are pouring in to the tea party movement. Fox News reports that organizers are making a fortune (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/08/tea-party-protests-create-online-sales-boom/) in merchandise sales -- the online store for the Tax Day Tea Party website has already lodged over $48,000 in sales, according to tea partier Eric Odom.
But the big bucks aren't only in T-shirts with pithy slogans - Fox's Glenn Beck said on his radio show that he plans to attend a $500 dollar-a-plate fundraiser (http://mediamatters.org/columns/200904100001?f=h_column) for the tea party movement.
One wonders how much that fundraiser will resemble the scene in this video of a small event organized by the 9-12 Project, in which a man rouses the rabble with a conspiracy-alleging rant.
"In the early 50s our country was infiltrated by the communist party," he says, calling the Obama administration the culmination of that infiltration. "They're doing everything they can to brainwash our public...This thing they're putting on our TVs," he says, presumably referring to digital cable converters, "it's a brainwash unit!"
As his speech winds down, he exhorts his listeners to get their kids "the hell out of college. They're brainwashing 'em!"
The anti-school message resonates with one woman.
"Burn the books!" she yells from off-camera. The surprised camera man asks if she's serious, and which books she'd burn. "The ones in college, the brainwashing books, like the evolution crap."

[ChumpDumper]

Take your kids out of college?

:lol

[GuerillaBlack]

A tea party? At the Alamo? Sounds like fun.

http://www.instablogsimages.com/images/2008/01/31/tea-set_7881.jpg

[baseline bum]

It can't be a tea party if it's a bunch of dumbasses just bitching. Go and fucking do something if you want to call yourselves the tea party.

[Ignignokt]

Nah, if I do go, and I do actually want to go see it then I'm not going to do anything like that. You don't need to do it because they actually believe these things they say.

I think its ignorance and stubbornness. They think that balancing the budget in the face of a huge economic crisis is appropriate because no one is telling them thats exactly what Hoover tried to do and what it got them. They think evolution is actually false because of all the bullshit spread and how "objectively" the media covers it.


hoover increased govt spending, i don't know where you got your info.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/06/AR2009040603355.html

[Ignignokt]

maybe manny is also wrong about the new deal.

[ChumpDumper]

Through the 1920s, federal budget surpluses got as high as $689 million. Total debt was gradually reduced from $24 billion to about $17 billion. But business activity began to decline in the summer of 1929, and the stock market crash followed in October. By the early 1930s, it was apparent that a major economic crisis was in progress. President Hoover tried to balance the budget, and FDR continued this after being elected in 1932, but bad times forced the deficit up as public works efforts (to offset financial hardships) were funded. By 1933, the budget deficit was nearly $3 billion, and the debt had risen to more than $22 billion. Many economists at the time disdained the attempt to balance the budget "no matter what," and, drawing on the ideas of the English economist John Maynard Keynes, thought that a general fiscal depression was as great a national emergency as a war, and that the government should be willing to use deficits to stimulate the economy, just as it would borrow money to fight a war.

http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/history/world_wars.htm

I guess "tried to" is the significant phrase. I haven't found the numbers yet.

[Oh, Gee!!]

kwdOwgD5OsY


82-PLU8EuKg

omg--what a clusterfuck:lol

[MannyIsGod]

hoover increased govt spending, i don't know where you got your info.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/06/AR2009040603355.html

Yes, Herbert Hoover ran deficits. Thats not the issue. The point was what Hoovers intent was and how it affected his decision making coupled with why he ran those deficits and whether or not he expected them. Herbert Hoover TRIED to balance the budget but because he failed to address the economic downturn appropriately the money he was counting on never showed up. No amount of letters to the editor change this.

Logic tells you that if the economy is in the Great Depression the amount of money the government brings in through taxes (when combined with Hoover tax cuts) is going to be much lower which may lead to a deficit even with a decrease in government services.

[MannyIsGod]

maybe manny is also wrong about the new deal.

Maybe Ignignokt should read more carefully.

[Bartleby]

omg--what a clusterfuck:lol

gb_qHP7VaZE

[FaithInOne]

Words won't change anything.

[scott]

This is the most important event of our generation.

[Trainwreck2100]

This is the most important event of our generation.

will they serve scones with the tea?`

[Crookshanks]

How about you guys wait until Thursday to pass judgement on the Tea Parties? You choose to show something that is NOT representative of the vast majority of parties being planned. You look at this group of kooks and think that represents conservatives?

No - they just play right into your stereotypes.

[balli]

No - they just play right into the pathetic reality
fixed.


This is a column about Republicans — and I’m not sure I should even be writing it.

Today’s G.O.P. is, after all, very much a minority party. It retains some limited ability to obstruct the Democrats, but has no ability to make or even significantly shape policy.
Beyond that, Republicans have become embarrassing to watch. And it doesn’t feel right to make fun of crazy people. Better, perhaps, to focus on the real policy debates, which are all among Democrats.
But here’s the thing: the G.O.P. looked as crazy 10 or 15 years ago as it does now. That didn’t stop Republicans from taking control of both Congress and the White House. And they could return to power if the Democrats stumble. So it behooves us to look closely at the state of what is, after all, one of our nation’s two great political parties.
One way to get a good sense of the current state of the G.O.P., and also to see how little has really changed, is to look at the “tea parties” that have been held in a number of places already, and will be held across the country on Wednesday. These parties — antitaxation demonstrations that are supposed to evoke the memory of the Boston Tea Party and the American Revolution — have been the subject of considerable mockery, and rightly so.
But everything that critics mock about these parties has long been standard practice within the Republican Party.
Thus, President Obama is being called a “socialist” who seeks to destroy capitalism. Why? Because he wants to raise the tax rate on the highest-income Americans back to, um, about 10 percentage points less than it was for most of the Reagan administration. Bizarre.
But the charge of socialism is being thrown around only because “liberal” doesn’t seem to carry the punch it used to. And if you go back just a few years, you find top Republican figures making equally bizarre claims about what liberals were up to. Remember when Karl Rove declared that liberals wanted to offer “therapy and understanding” to the 9/11 terrorists?
Then there are the claims made at some recent tea-party events that Mr. Obama wasn’t born in America, which follow on earlier claims that he is a secret Muslim. Crazy stuff — but nowhere near as crazy as the claims, during the last Democratic administration, that the Clintons were murderers, claims that were supported by a campaign of innuendo on the part of big-league conservative media outlets and figures, especially Rush Limbaugh.
Speaking of Mr. Limbaugh: the most impressive thing about his role right now is the fealty he is able to demand from the rest of the right. The abject apologies he has extracted from Republican politicians who briefly dared to criticize him have been right out of Stalinist show trials. But while it’s new to have a talk-radio host in that role, ferocious party discipline has been the norm since the 1990s, when Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, became known as “The Hammer” in part because of the way he took political retribution on opponents.
Going back to those tea parties, Mr. DeLay, a fierce opponent of the theory of evolution — he famously suggested that the teaching of evolution led to the Columbine school massacre — also foreshadowed the denunciations of evolution that have emerged at some of the parties.
Last but not least: it turns out that the tea parties don’t represent a spontaneous outpouring of public sentiment. They’re AstroTurf (fake grass roots) events, manufactured by the usual suspects. In particular, a key role is being played by FreedomWorks, an organization run by Richard Armey, the former House majority leader, and supported by the usual group of right-wing billionaires. And the parties are, of course, being promoted heavily by Fox News.
But that’s nothing new, and AstroTurf has worked well for Republicans in the past. The most notable example was the “spontaneous” riot back in 2000 — actually orchestrated by G.O.P. strategists — that shut down the presidential vote recount in Florida’s Miami-Dade County.
So what’s the implication of the fact that Republicans are refusing to grow up, the fact that they are still behaving the same way they did when history seemed to be on their side? I’d say that it’s good for Democrats, at least in the short run — but it’s bad for the country. [Why do you hate America?]

For now, the Obama administration gains a substantial advantage from the fact that it has no credible opposition, especially on economic policy, where the Republicans seem particularly clueless.
But as I said, the G.O.P. remains one of America’s great parties, and events could still put that party back in power. We can only hope that Republicans have moved on by the time that happens. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/opinion/13krugman.html

[Crookshanks]

I still say wait until Thursday before you pass judgement. You can go to TeaPartyDay.com and find out about the events scheduled. There are currently 2,915 organizers, and events planned for Wednesday in 1,996 cities across America.

[ChumpDumper]

I still say wait until Thursday before you pass judgement. You can go to TeaPartyDay.com and find out about the events scheduled. There are currently 2,915 organizers, and events planned for Wednesday in 1,996 cities across America.
I expect a couple of politicians giving political speeches in Austin. Very grass-roots.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

front page of cnn.com

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-244501

[ChumpDumper]

Did they call in sick?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Did they call in sick?
they're just doing what most of the people do that are living off the government. except just for only one day.

[Oh, Gee!!]

front page of cnn.com

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-244501

omg, that's a sea of people.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

omg, that's a sea of people.funny. you should email that to cnn.com. i guess it's a slow news day. :rolleyes

[Trainwreck2100]

Did they call in sick?

Seriously this country needs a tax holiday and election holiday.

[101A]

Live feed (http://www.woai.com/mediacenter/[email protected]&navCatId=2449) from SA Tea Party

[Oh, Gee!!]

omg where will all those people fit?

[ChumpDumper]

they're just doing what most of the people do that are living off the government. except just for only one day.So they are living off the government for a day?

[JoeChalupa]

Do it LIVE!!!

[clambake]

interesting group. definitely a whiter shade of pale.

[tony09manu]

hah, "bi-partisan". Hahahahaha.

[JoeChalupa]

Reminds me of those hippies in the 60's....damn radicals.

[jman3000]

I'm too much of a homer for my city to hate on the SA tea party.

Glenn Beck is a phony imho... but I'm a sucker for people saying how great Texas is. Bleh.

I hope we have the biggest one and beat out Hannity's in Atlanta. The crowd was impressive... not sure how big, but it seemed pretty decent.

[JoeChalupa]

I'm too much of a homer for my city to hate on the SA tea party.

Glenn Beck is a phony imho... but I'm a sucker for people saying how great Texas is. Bleh.

I hope we have the biggest one and beat out Hannity's in Atlanta. The crowd was impressive... not sure how big, but it seemed pretty decent.

Joe Pags has the crowd estimated at over 15K easily.

[JoeChalupa]

Was there anybody selling those glow in the dark necklaces?

[Bartleby]

front page of cnn.com

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-244501

Reminds me of the Battle of Flowers Parade, but without all the bands and floats and cheering spectators.

[FaithInOne]

I was there between 12 and 4. Right behind the Beck stage. It was a huge crowd, people as far as I (6'1) could see being in the middle of it and all; great atmosphere.

I left right as Beck was starting. I can only stand minions of ignorant fucking people walking in front of me nonfuckingstop for so long.

[clambake]

4 hours with ignorant minions.

u da man. props.

[FaithInOne]

thanks braaah

ignorant in that there was no fucking room for a line yet hundreds kept trying to get through an area right in front of me. It was ridiculous.

I never knew people in wheelchairs feel entitled to show up at a crowd of hundreds at the last fucking minute and expect to casually wheel their way through the entire crowd. I hate people.

[clambake]

it's texas, right?

why didn't you shoot'em?

[FaithInOne]

That would be wrong and there would be no justification to use deadly force here in Texas.

[clambake]

they were infringing on your personal space. you felt threatened.

no jury in texas would find you guilty.

also, it would ease the tax burden.

[FaithInOne]

They did not infringe on my personal space through use of deadly force, therefore I cannot return the favor.

[clambake]

you ever felt the deadly force of a wheelchair hauling around 400lbs. of fat?

[Oh, Gee!!]

10K max. that's like not even a tenth of the people that are gonna pack la villita in a couple of weeks. fail.

[ChumpDumper]

Good crowd.

[LnGrrrR]

Hey, if the people attending these at least wake up politicians to the fact that they can't spend all the time, good on them.

However, if most of these people are just dogwhistle-hearing low info voters who are only attending so they can shout down anything Barack Obama does (which I think is the case).... well, they'll have as much effect on the Republican party that they do now. Jack squat.

[Wild Cobra]

Hey, if the people attending these at least wake up politicians to the fact that they can't spend all the time, good on them.

However, if most of these people are just dogwhistle-hearing low info voters who are only attending so they can shout down anything Barack Obama does (which I think is the case).... well, they'll have as much effect on the Republican party that they do now. Jack squat.
I was very surprised here in Portland. I call Portland the "Capital of the North-West Coast" for a reason. There were only a few liberals trying to interrupt the Portland event. I'll bet there were more conservatives in downtown Portland, outside of work, in a very long time.

I've been uploading my pics that I didn't delete to my Photobucket (http://s181.photobucket.com/albums/x262/Wild_Cobra/Portland Tea Party 2009/?start=all).

Wow... 2.4 to 3.7 megabyte files are slow, even with cable, then photobucket will chop them down. Oh well. The original format is 3264 x 2448. The first (IMGP0163.jpg) was taken before the 5 PM vendor start, and the last (IMGP0278.jpg) at about 7:30 PM. The Rally itself started at 6 PM (IMGP0373.jpg).

As of posting this, a little over the first 50 are uploaded.

Enjoy.

[ChumpDumper]

Why don't you scale them down to web size first?

[Wild Cobra]

Why don't you scale them down to web size first?
I don't have a bulk scaler. I'm bulk uploading. It would take longer for me to scale 200 pics, than let photobucket automatically resize them to 1024 x 768.

[Buddy Holly]

The 4 of you have a great time.

Let me preference this by saying, all the "tea parties" held yesterday... what a bunch of dumb asses. :bang

Back to the quote:

Damn, not a good prediction. :lol

[velik_m]

I don't have a bulk scaler. I'm bulk uploading. It would take longer for me to scale 200 pics, than let photobucket automatically resize them to 1024 x 768.

Get IrfanView. (http://www.irfanview.com/)

http://www.lancelotgroup.com/tutorials/HowToResize-IrFanView-Start.asp

[SnakeBoy]

The sa tea party site claims the crowd was 16,000. Pretty good turnout.


http://taxdayteaparty.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/aerial-shot-san-antonio.jpg

[MannyIsGod]

Color me impressed if this turns into a movement. Likely these people had their done and ill be done with it. 16,000 isn't really that many people for an event like this - IMO - but even if you think it is you have to acknowledge its meaningless unless they keep it up. If one month from now the people haven't done a damn thing more then all ti was was a nice day in the sun for people to vent their frustrations over someone they don't like in office.

[RandomGuy]

Hey, if the people attending these at least wake up politicians to the fact that they can't spend all the time, good on them.

However, if most of these people are just dogwhistle-hearing low info voters who are only attending so they can shout down anything Barack Obama does (which I think is the case).... well, they'll have as much effect on the Republican party that they do now. Jack squat.

That is my feeling.

If they can morph this into a movement to force some fiscal discipline on the government, then great, I would actually support that.

[MannyIsGod]

The problem is that everyone here knows these protests weren't about fiscal discipline. They were anti Obama/left protests under the guise of fiscal conservatism and many of the pictures and videos I've seen do nothing but support this.

[Marcus Bryant]

Naturally the protesters could do themselves a favor and protest their own individual demands for increased state spending which benefits themselves. Yes, politicians are whores but its the people who they often bed down with for 30 minutes or an hour. Though I agree that increasing the national debt by however many trillions to subsidize the losses of large financial services companies is worthy of spending a day on the streets.

[FortuneCookie]

Taxation with representation ain't so hot either. ~Gerald Barzan


Lucky Numbers: 4, 9, 18, 24, 33, 39 44

[DarrinS]

The problem is that everyone here knows these protests weren't about fiscal discipline. They were anti Obama/left protests under the guise of fiscal conservatism and many of the pictures and videos I've seen do nothing but support this.

http://parentinguru.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/crying-baby.jpg

[MannyIsGod]

http://parentinguru.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/crying-baby.jpg

Ye of glass house becareful with the rocks.

[JoeChalupa]

Did anyone who went get one of these?

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y29/clintsquint/teapartyshirt.jpg

[Das Texan]

This whole tea party thing is about as hilarious as Republican Congressmen crying about fiscal conservatism after going see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil during the Bush Administration.

[DarrinS]

This whole tea party thing is about as hilarious as Republican Congressmen crying about fiscal conservatism after going see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil during the Bush Administration.


So-called fiscal conservatives that vote for bail outs are complete hypocrites.

I'm not sure I understand your point about the tea parties, however.

[implacable44]

The problem is that everyone here knows these protests weren't about fiscal discipline. They were anti Obama/left protests under the guise of fiscal conservatism and many of the pictures and videos I've seen do nothing but support this.

FAIL. It has nothing to do with the Left or Democrats or RACISM (why are you libtards still playing the race card when there is a brother in the house?) and the only reason Obama is mentioned is because he is in the white house and signing the papers. he is SPENDING and all of this spending has to be paid for by Americans - TAXES - funny how people say they have barely gone up - just wait. The money has to come from somewhere... do the math.

Taxed
Enough
Aalready

[JoeChalupa]

Where were all these whiners when the Bush administration spent us into debt?

[implacable44]

Where were all these whiners when the Bush administration spent us into debt?

I tire of this question which is both ignorant and illogical. Why do you think his approval rating was so low ? Do you think it was just the liberal left responding to polls ? His rating was so low because he sold us conservatives a fraudulent bill of goods. He was a punk on the border and he spent (ironically his spending should have increased his ratings with the libtards who love big government)....All us "whiners" were right there with you libby whiners reflected in Bush's terrible and extremely low approval ratings -- along with the ridiculously low ratings congress had.

[clambake]

really? we never heard a peep out of you guys.

[JoeChalupa]

I tire of this question which is both ignorant and illogical. Why do you think his approval rating was so low ? Do you think it was just the liberal left responding to polls ? His rating was so low because he sold us conservatives a fraudulent bill of goods. He was a punk on the border and he spent (ironically his spending should have increased his ratings with the libtards who love big government)....All us "whiners" were right there with you libby whiners reflected in Bush's terrible and extremely low approval ratings -- along with the ridiculously low ratings congress had.

Ahh...you just didn't have time for tea parties? I get it.

[angrydude]

you missed the whole "spent like a drunken sailor" line spwered about a million times by John Mccain during the republican primaries? that was 2 years ago dude.

[implacable44]

Ahh...you just didn't have time for tea parties? I get it.

I was there sir. and obviously you did hear a peep -- again -- look at those approval ratings -- Glenn Beck was killing Bush for the last 2 years of his presidency - echoed by all his callers and ratings.

How could you have heard anything the conservatives were saying with your head so far up O's tush ?

[Wild Cobra]

16,000 isn't really that many people for an event like this - IMO - but even if you think it is you have to acknowledge its meaningless unless they keep it up.
It's actually pretty good considering the job statuses of these people vs. those who you usually see protesting. Most these people have day jobs, and took time off to be there. can you say that about most protesters?

[JoeChalupa]

It's actually pretty good considering the job statuses of these people vs. those who you usually see protesting. Most these people have day jobs, and took time off to be there. can you say that about most protesters?

Yeah but the majority got PAID time off. :lol

So now we judge protesters by their employment status?

[clambake]

all i remember is a bunch of waterboys........that never made a sound.

i understand what you're attempting to do.

you'll have to be more creative to dodge your mistake.

[Trainwreck2100]

Yeah but the majority got PAID time off. :lol

So now we judge protesters by their employment status?

most people that work get paid time off, that's one of the perks of working. Also one of the perks of welfair.

[AntiChrist]

Red Eye skewers media tea party coverage

Xr02kshCZgA

[AntiChrist]

The media LOVES their teabag jokes.

i_rwLSWjq7g

[Wild Cobra]

Yeah but the majority got PAID time off. :lol

So now we judge protesters by their employment status?

Why must you twist my meaning? My point is that most the people there had day jobs. That there would have been a bigger turnout under equal employment status vs. a left rally. Myself, I work a graveyard shift. When you talk to people at protests or rallys to the left, many of the people there aren't working. I talked to several people there. Most had jobs. If this was on a Saturday or Sunday, bet there would have been a whole lot more people.

[JoeChalupa]

Why must you twist my meaning? My point is that most the people there had day jobs. That there would have been a bigger turnout under equal employment status vs. a left rally. Myself, I work a graveyard shift. When you talk to people at protests or rallys to the left, many of the people there aren't working. I talked to several people there. Most had jobs. If this was on a Saturday or Sunday, bet there would have been a whole lot more people.

I didn't have to twist anything around as your response proves and that is that you feel that "righties" have jobs and that "lefties" don't. Believe me, there are plenty of "righties" who are unemployed right now. When I was volunteering for the Obama campaign almost everyone I spoke to had jobs. Don't get upset just because I pointed out the obvious.

[clambake]

Why must you twist my meaning? My point is that most the people there had day jobs. That there would have been a bigger turnout under equal employment status vs. a left rally. Myself, I work a graveyard shift. When you talk to people at protests or rallys to the left, many of the people there aren't working. I talked to several people there. Most had jobs. If this was on a Saturday or Sunday, bet there would have been a whole lot more people.

the graveyard shift of appliance repair?

that must suck.

[MannyIsGod]

It's actually pretty good considering the job statuses of these people vs. those who you usually see protesting. Most these people have day jobs, and took time off to be there. can you say that about most protesters?

16,000 vs. the millions that came out for the Iraq War protests and all you have is "they don't have jobs"?

[Oh, Gee!!]

the number of people at the s.a. rally was probably equal to the number of talk radio listeners in south texas

[clambake]

If this was on a Saturday or Sunday, bet there would have been a whole lot more people.

so.....you're saying you guys are too stupid to figure that out?

[ChumpDumper]

When you talk to people at protests or rallys to the left, many of the people there aren't working.When did you ever talk to them?

I have to call bullshit here.

[JoeChalupa]

when did you ever talk to them?

I have to call bullshit here.

+1

[angrydude]

I think, considering the right's disinclination to do things like this, that the turnout all over the country, especially the number of protests in so many different cities, was pretty good.

[smeagol]

I'm having my friends for tea at 5 o´clock.

[implacable44]

the number of people at the s.a. rally was probably equal to the number of talk radio listeners in south texas

mmmhhh check those ratings and shares again sir... it was probably more equivalent to the amount of Bill Maher / Colbert / Olberman watchers -- If it would have reflected the listening audience it would have been 10 to 20 times the size

[MannyIsGod]

You thinkn the talk radio listening audience in SA is 160,000 to 320,000?????

[ChumpDumper]

With any luck it might come close to the turnout for McCain/Palin.

[Nbadan]

16,000 vs. the millions that came out for the Iraq War protests and all you have is "they don't have jobs"?

Don't you love how the Reich-wing media is all of the sudden on the M$M = evil bandwagon? Shiiittt.....welcome to the world of Progressives circa 2000....

[Oh, Gee!!]

mmmhhh check those ratings and shares again sir... it was probably more equivalent to the amount of Bill Maher / Colbert / Olberman watchers -- If it would have reflected the listening audience it would have been 10 to 20 times the size

if you let all the protestors nationwide vote twice for mccain, he'd still lose by a landslide. they were a tiny fraction of the citizenry--like the green party.

[Nbadan]

if you let all the protestors nationwide vote twice for mccain, he'd still lose by a landslide. they were a tiny fraction of the citizenry--like the green party.

...at least they are anti-Bush now too though....

[Winehole23]

...at least they are anti-Bush now too though....That's not much of a silver lining. The GOP has been running full speed from Bush for close on to two years now.

[PEP]

16,000 vs. the millions that came out for the Iraq War protests and all you have is "they don't have jobs"?

How did those Iraq War protests go? Didnt accomplish anything either.

[PEP]

When did you ever talk to them?

I have to call bullshit here.
From the pictures I've seen of lefty rallies, they dont look like the 9-5 job types, more like the tree hugging/20 year college plan type.

[Nbadan]

That's not much of a silver lining. The GOP has been running full speed from Bush for close on to two years now.

....what's really funny is that the same wing-nut media that sponsored these events yesterday marched right behind Dubya's spending in Iraq and the do-nothing's record level of earmarks just a few years ago.....

[DarrinS]

16,000 vs. the millions that came out for the Iraq War protests and all you have is "they don't have jobs"?


So, half of San Antonio was at an antiwar protest? Color me skeptical.

[PEP]

So, half of San Antonio was at an antiwar protest? Color me skeptical.

Well manny was probably there, his mass is worth about 16,000 people.

[Spurminator]

I find protests in general to be overrated. Basically "squeaky wheel gets the grease" en masse.

But most protests seem to have some kind of purpose and sigular message. All these "tea parties" are is an excuse to vent your anger about Obama winning the election. Nothing more.

Glad you guys could get it out of your system.

[ChumpDumper]

From the pictures I've seen of lefty rallies, they dont look like the 9-5 job types, more like the tree hugging/20 year college plan type.So you never talked to any of them either. :tu

[Viva Las Espuelas]

How did those Iraq War protests go? Didnt accomplish anything either.
exactly. they were simply a nice day in the sun for people to vent their frustrations over someone they don't like in office.

[LnGrrrR]

exactly. they were simply a nice day in the sun for people to vent their frustrations over someone they don't like in office.

So is that what you did at the Tea Party? :D lol

[Viva Las Espuelas]

So is that what you did at the Tea Party? :D lol
in a word. no.

[LnGrrrR]

in a word. no.

I'll put down vbookie money that those "tea party" protests will do just as much as the anti-war protests did.

[implacable44]

....what's really funny is that the same wing-nut media that sponsored these events yesterday marched right behind Dubya's spending in Iraq and the do-nothing's record level of earmarks just a few years ago.....

those records didnt last very long now did they ?

[Marcus Bryant]

I think the main problem with these protests is that the complaint is ill-defined. 'End the wasteful spending' is a generality of the first rank. We'd be much better served with a campaign against the myriad of recent bailouts for private interests by the feds through fiscal and monetary policy. 'No Bailouts for Billionaires' would seem to have appeal to those on the left and right and would get us past the routine partisan shit-throwing. As it stands, members of the masses shout at each other and the true "socialism" continues unabated.

[LnGrrrR]

I think the main problem with these protests is that the complaint is ill-defined. 'End the wasteful spending' is a generality of the first rank. We'd be much better served with a campaign against the myriad of recent bailouts for private interests by the feds through fiscal and monetary policy. 'No Bailouts for Billionaires' would seem to have appeal to those on the left and right and would get us past the routine partisan shit-throwing. As it stands, members of the masses shout at each other and the true "socialism" continues unabated.

Well said. See, THIS is what I want to hear from board Republicans. Thanks for being a sane voice Marcus, even if I don't agree with you all the time. :toast

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I'll put down vbookie money that those "tea party" protests will do just as much as the anti-war protests did.and why is that?.........'cause everyone not in office, be it left, middle, right, doesn't have the power to really make anything happen, and i'm not talking about just getting someone elected. if anything it will make people more aware of who we elect from the lowest office to the top and hopefully it makes themselves run for some sort of office and do something. we have enough lawyers in control. initially, yes, these parties won't blow the fuzz off a peach, but hopefully it will carry on and not be dismissed so easily in the long run.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I'll put down vbookie money that those "tea party" protests will do just as much as the anti-war protests did.
oh and to be fair they were "anti-war" protests. how can you say they were anti-war protests when really they were anti-bush protests? "anti-war" protests,i say.

[Marcus Bryant]

Well said. See, THIS is what I want to hear from board Republicans. Thanks for being a sane voice Marcus, even if I don't agree with you all the time. :toast

Well, I wouldn't say that I'm a member of the party. Do I generally caucus with "Republicans" as it relates to fiscal policy? Sure. Then, again, my views on defense spending don't seem to jive with the majority who have found a way to make support of every weapons system and 100 bases in 100 countries (or whatever it is) a test of one's patriotism.

[LnGrrrR]

oh and to be fair they were "anti-war" protests. how can you say they were anti-war protests when really they were anti-bush protests? "anti-war" protests,i say.

Tomato, tomahto...*shrug*

[LnGrrrR]

Well, I wouldn't say that I'm a member of the party. Do I generally caucus with "Republicans" as it relates to fiscal policy? Sure. Then, again, my views on defense spending don't seem to jive with the majority who have found a way to make support of every weapons system and 100 bases in 100 countries (or whatever it is) a test of one's patriotism.

Agreed, and I'm IN the military. I just find many of the spokespeople on the right to be shallow, both in personality and depth of argumentation.

Also, the demonization of atheists (and yes right-wing posters, I'm using hyperbole) doesn't sit well with me.