The $10,000 difference between the tea party and the occupiers in Richmond
By Norman Leahy | Thursday, October 27th, 2011 | VirginiaEquality before the law is one of our nation’s highest principles. But principle often diverges from practice, and as an example of that, the RTD highlights the difference in treatment of the Richmond tea party rallies and the ongoing Occupy Richmond camp out:
The Richmond Tea Party is lashing out at Richmond Mayor Dwight C. Jones for what it sees as the city’s preferential treatment of the Occupy Richmond protesters encamped at Kanawha Plaza.
The tea party group is sending Jones an invoice for the charges incurred for the Tax Day rallies it has held at the plaza the past three years, arguing that the Occupy Wall Street offshoot group squatting there has been using the park illegally and free of charge since Oct. 15.
“The tea party keeps being compared to the occupiers. Well, in the way we’re treated, there’s no comparison. It’s like a slap in the face,” said Richmond Tea Party spokeswoman Colleen Owens.
Owens said her group has shelled out about $10,000 for the three rallies held there, including a rental fee for use of the park, various permits and other expenses. She added that the rallies were scheduled with the city months in advance and that the group held fundraisers to cover the required costs, which included police presence and portable toilets.
“The city of Richmond is allowing Occupy Richmond to blatantly break the law day after day while forcing other groups to strictly comply,” a news release from the tea party group said.
Given that we are talking about the Richmond city council, this should not come as a surprise.
Nor should it be odd to discover that at least one council member, Marty Jewell, wanted the city’s police force to apply the lightest of possible touches to the protesters. It was mildly shocking to see the council demur on that proposal.
Regardless of what one thinks of the tea parties, there can be no question that they obeyed every rule, followed every ordinance and addressed every quibble before staging their events on public property. And when the events were over (having a start and end point is another key difference with the occupiers), they cleaned up whatever mess was left behind. Going by Kanawha Plaza the day after the first, and largest, tea party rally, you would be very hard pressed to find evidence that around five thousand people, an array of vendors, a gaggle of pressies and a very large stage and supporting equipment had been on the site.
They paid handsomely for the privilege. That the occupiers haven’t done any of this, and are given wide leeway to keep their tent village on site in defiance of city ordinances speaks volumes about the state of equality before the law in Richmond.
Here’s hoping the tea party not only sends the city a bill for doing what’s right, but threatens to send the city to a collection agency if it refuses to pay up.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Norm Leahy has written about Virginia and national politics online since 2002, beginning with One Man's Trash (OMT), and continuing through Bacon's Rebellion (both the blog and the e-zine), Sic Semper Tyrannis, NBC12's Decision Virginia, Richmond.com and Tertium Quids. He is the chief blogger at "The Score" and a producer of "The Score" radio show as well as being a Washington Post contributor.
Comments
86 Responses to "The $10,000 difference between the tea party and the occupiers in Richmond"
They need a lawsuit brought up against the occupiers and against the city council of Richmond.
…but who are they going to sue? The organizers, perhaps? (SEIU, ACORN, etc.)
And to think that at the time, I was worried someone might step on the mulch beds and trample a pansy, and we would owe the City more money…
That probably would have earned you 30 days in the cooler, Sara.
Surround the park with concertina wire and let em stay all winter or as long as it takes them to clean up the mess and find a way to repay the citizens of Richmond. Richmond Tea Party left the place better than they found it..
Norm, I guess I am a bit surprised that you would condemn protestors, given the fact that our founders were protestors of the first order. Why would you condemn those who have lost their homes, their jobs, their income, their status in the middle class so Eric Cantor and the top 1% can see their incomes continue to rise and their tax rates to fall. Frankly, how can a nation in which 70% of GDP is consumer related do all it can to injure the status of the 99% of us who want to consume, work, and pay a fair tax rate? Your insensitivity to the 99% of the citizens in this nation who deserve support and help after supply side economics has ruined our lives, ought to get a bit more respect in the cradle of liberty.
Mike, how bout a twitter and FB feed goes up and a flash mob decends on runnymede?
Twitter #Occupy 600 22nd Street, Suite 400, Virginia Beach, VA 10-28-11
Yes James, you leave little doubt that you would have been a Tory, depending upon the King to preserve the economic, political, and social gains that you and your fellow elites had enjoyed as a citizen of England. Upon considering the revolutionaries, you would have had them jailed as rabble rousers. Why can’t these rebels realize that they are here to preserve the wealth of the elites so some benefit may trickle down someday?
Mike, in fairness, I think the condemnation was not leveled at protesting. It was aimed at both the behavior of the OWS people and the different standard of preference for OWS by Richmond City council. Either we are equal under the law law or we are not. Please tell me that you are not in favor of some people having more rights and priviledges under the law. Should Tea Partiers be allowed to vote? No, I think it is your view that apologizes for discrimination, political retribution, and is counter to America’s principles of freedom if you think this is right. Say it ain’t so.
I would agree that SOME of the OWS crowd are a symptom of a problem. For some the intent is honest. That doesn’t excuse their behavior or the behavior of council.
For Sara, thank you once again for the part you played. It takes courage to stand against a wrong and to help start any movement. I appreciate all the Tea Party organizers. Especially in the beginning of things where it is most difficult. I know we will continue to have strong disagreements on Jamie, but that doesn’t mean I won’t acknowledge your efforts.
What… a flash mob at Mike’s crystal palace at the Beach? Mike, you might want to “redistribute” a little of your “stimulus” stash and pay them to go away before the WVEC satellite trucks show up.
Well Britt, this has been a tough month for the right wing. Every candidate put forth as their political savior has stumbled first, then simply exploded into irrelevancy as their goofy ideas do not stand up under scrutiny.
Fact is, the entire premis and mantra of the Party, that is, cut taxes, has been demonstrated to be disastrous. Even Reagan knew that and raised taxes, after which the economy did just fine, thank you. But instead, Bush doubled down, and we still face the consequences of his disastrous Presidency.
Instead of understanding that, the conservative wing of the Party is seeking another Reagan, who is actually not Reagan, but the idea they have of what he would have done e had he not strayed. In simply words, the current crop must deny historical result and economic reality to continue their mantra of cut taxes, so it is no wonder they self destruct.
Mike – The problem is the governmental double standard in Richmond. Heck, if you want to toss out Rev War analogies, Tea Party wins the revolutionary award because they are held to a stricter standard than OWS. Taxes and fees are levied on the Tea Party for simply trying to exercise the exact same rights as the OWS who have City Council trying to bend over backwards to accommodate them.
Besides, it is OWS asking the King and government to give them what is theirs at the expense of the other citizens. Tea Party is telling them to butt out.
I guess the day after the Congressional Budget Office comes out with a report that essentially vindicates the opinion of the protestors and documents the disastrous effect of the supply side economics and tax cuts on the incomes of the middle and working class, those who continue to espouse these disastrous theories must do all they can to change the subject.
Fact is, the solution to our debt crisis is so simple, yet with the republicans staunchly denying the steps required that we all take, we will face another debacle when the Super Committee fails at compromise.
The mantra of tax cuts have been a very successful political strategy but a disastrous policy for governance and prosperity for the 99% of americans who work for a living and don’t have an army of lobbyists and Congressman protecting their interests. Cantor and his ilk stopped the actions required last time; I hope they fail to stop rational steps this time.
Mike is a past master at changing the subject. The rabbit hole he’s fallen into here has nothing at all to do with the post I wrote, but hey, that’s cool. It’s kind of fun to watch him go…
Well Norm, I don’t think I changed the subject at all, I just am looking at motivation rather than the mundane aspects of permits and charges for political assembly. Further, perhaps some of your other posters who threaten retaliation instead of engaging in the discussion about protest deserve a bit of censure as well.
2 questions…
Was the Tea Party already an organization receiving donations and such before their events were planned? (clearly the answer is yes to their 2nd & 3rd events, but what of their 1st?)
and
Could the fact that the Tea Party events included a stage, paid speakers and a PA system, while the Occupy movement has none of the above, have a bearing on the different perception by authorities?
To me, there is a difference between a somewhat impromptu protest and an organized rally.
Oh, and Jason Kenney… wasn’t the complaint of the original Tea Party not about getting rid of government, but about unfair government control without representation? I seem to recall learning about “No taxation without representation” in school. One of the things that the OWS is interested in is making the taxation system more fair again. When the Warren Buffetts of the country can pay a lower percentage in taxes than a school teacher pays, there’s a problem, and Warren Buffett, himself, agrees on that point.
Laurel, the Tea Party organizers had to scramble, dot every “i” and cross every “t” to make sure they don’t get unfairly over scrutinize or give an excuse to be portrayed as violent, racist, kooks……..like they were/are treated as anyway without just cause. The Hampton Roads area Tea Parties even went so far to prepare how to react to plants sent to smear their reputation. I never saw an incident, though.
The First Amendment is the same whether you are impromptu or not. Being equal under the law is the same whether you bothered to prepare or not. Granted many Tea Partiers were already politically active and already used PA systems – that doesn’t change the law. Fair and equal is not determined by somebody’s whim. It is not determined by popularity or “mob rule”. We have natural rights as individuals for a reason.
Clearly some of the behavior and the preferenced given is wrong. Just the facts! Other than that I don’t want to condemn them as a whole. Like I said, some of them are decent folk expressing frustration and even clean after themselves. To be taken seriously, OWS needs to police themselves better and get organized.
Mike, the Tea Party movement does not equal Grover Norquist. If you think tax policy is the only thing on the table, you haven’t paid attention. Additionally and beyond taxes you will find a very large number of Tea Partiers that were angry over Bush’s last 4 years and did not think he was doing a good job. From what you have said, you probably don’t understand the Tea Party.
Britt, I’m not saying that I agree or disagree with the differences in policy. I’m just trying to understand what might be the underlying cause. If I organize a concert in Kanawha Plaza, I could call that exercising my freedom of speech, because it would be. It is clearly different, however, than the protest going on right now at the Plaza. I don’t think this is a free speech issue. I can understand the possibility that some council members might be thinking along those lines. Based on the information from the Tea Party site regarding the schedule and line-up of speakers and such, their rallies seem to have been more in line with my concert example, than with the current protest. They, themselves, differentiate between rallies and protests on their site, listing them as two different ways to engage in discourse.
I believe that is why there has been a different approach from the city.
Mike of course would be screaming bloody murder if the Occupiers were charged $10k and the Tea Party demonstrators demonstrated for free. Goes to prove my point that leftists have two poses: the Airy Dismissal and the Hysterical Outrage. Be a good leftist Mike and equalize outcomes by reimbursing the Tea Party folks the $10k.
Laurel on the other hand is the Clintonian parser of words and meaning. What is the meaning of permit? Is it a noun or a verb? What is the meaning of event? Is it something that we pay money to or anything that more than one person does? Should there be allowances for spontaneous labor and leftist inspired events that come up like flowers in the night as opposed to robotic events that are planned by some right wing dictator? And finally what does “mean” mean? And finally isn’t it a bit demeaning to ask why poor people got something for free. Any leftist rally is formed of really poor out of work through no fault of their own people we all know. Might it be discriminatory to even ask what people pay to do the same thing by the Dem politicians?
Laurel, there is no excuse. I am a Tea Partier. Those rallies were also protests against Obamacare, Cap and Trade, deficit spending etc. It was more than a concert. Granted the level of organization increased, but that was among other things to put large numbers of bodies speaking as a political voice. It was needed to let our elected officials know that enough people are quite unhappy.
So, you’re suggesting the balanced was in the strength and organization of ongoing protests of ongoing legislation? How many OWS occupations does it take to finally become a sloppy concert, then? Are you to tell me nobody is a paid activist? Nobody is paid to protest at OWS? There is evidence of that among those truly protesting. Are we rewarding failure because they are not doing well enough despite coaching from the Left elite? So, coaching and attempted usurping by the GOP makes it a concert, but media advice and organizational help from the Left makes it a spontaneous protest?
There were hand held protest signs at every event I went to. It was all focused on issues we held to be gross over reaches by the government.
It was a protest. That is what the Tea Party did. Obamacare is still only partially implemented. Reason to continue.
At least make OWS follow the same laws the Tea Party was expected to. Rewarding bad and at times illegal behavior is a mistake.
As one of the original organizers of the first RTP, along with Sara, Eric, Lisa and Mickey, there are a few facts that OWS needs to know.
There was not ONE permit, there was one permit simply to assemble unless the protest was constantly mobile, meaning we could not occupy the park and be stationary without that permit.
Then, as it seemed that the Tea Party movement was growing legs it became obvious that we would need a stage and amplification, which was another permit.
Thank God we did. Can you imagine 5,000 people doing that lemming like human microphone bullshit? They all sound like zombies to me. (I particularly enjoyed my visit to the Occupy Richmond event at Monroe Park when a guy wearing a bandana over his face was told…It is a crime…it is a crime…to wear a mask…to wear a mask…in the State of Virginia…in the State of Virgina. But laughing at the lunacy of these people is simply a diversion. Please forgive me…LOL.
It was the city of Richmond that insisted on the million dollar insurance policy and we had to scramble to find some sort of insurer that would do that.
Bottom line. RTP is not making this up. These were the hurdles the city placed before us and they would have disrupted or prevented the first Richmond Tea Party entirely had we not done those things. Scrambling to come up with the dough was a monumental challenge, but we did it, oftentimes digging deep into our own pockets because the mission was critical and the cause was just.
As for you apologists for OWS, you should be ashamed that you have assembled anarchists, communists, socialists and lawbreakers to head your illegal occupation. That Richmond politicians are aiding and abetting you means that the Democrat machine, along with this president and various other national Democrats are co-conspirators in an national mutiny.
As for those who dismiss the relevance of the Tea Party movement and its philosophical underpinnings, we’ll see you a week from Tuesday at the polls. We don’t need to rally anymore. We have all embarked upon individual missions.
Just like the Tea Party swept Virginia in 2009 teeing up the landslide of 2010, Virginia will flip the state Senate in 2011 leading the way for the presidential and congressional elections of 2012.
You see, Virginia has a special responsibility. We are represented twice on our national flag. One of 50 stars, yes. But one of 13 stripes.
Don’t underestimate the Tea Party. You did that in 2010 and got your clocks cleaned.
Oh, and back then it all about reckless spending and debt, TARP, the Wall Street Bailouts, the auto industry bailouts, the bowing before foreign leaders and the apologies, the ‘America sometimes acted arrogantly’ quote, the stimulus, etc.
And George W. Bush got his fair share of criticism for all of this. As did Republican members of Congress, some of whom have been shown the door since.
And unlike most of the OWS events, politicians, even ones that we liked, were told that they got to speak every day. That day was our turn. And many showed up just to listen and to be seen.
This is really interesting. As I stated above, I was not taking a side on the issue, I was trying to understand it more fully. I made an assertion based on the information I had at that point, which I presented, and waited for more information to be offered that I may have missed. I knew that some differences between the two events were the presence of a stage, scheduled speakers, and a PA system. I wanted to know if there were any other key points to consider. I thank P. Henry for providing that information, with the explanation of the mobile vs. stationary protest being a key point for a permit to be required. That, to me, would then define the difference between a protest and a rally, even though both are use to protest or express a grievance. Since the Occupy Richmond movement is remaining stationary, then I would define that as a rally, too, and would agree that a permit should have been obtained.
I am completely confused, however, at the tone of the responses. Where did the need arise to start calling me names and take a confrontational tone? I have always been taught that asking questions is a good way to learn things, and discussing an issue is a good way to discover points that you weren’t already aware of. Unfortunately, based on the responses, it seems that is not a welcomed approach here. Is this the standard operating procedure for your group? Or is civility only offered to those who don’t question your position, even if there are unanswered questions in your statements?
Regardless of your tone, with more information at hand, I will agree, as I said, that the Occupy Richmond group should pay for the required permits and any other pertinent expenses. I would never, however, affiliate myself with your group as a whole, or with any other group who can’t actually “ENGAGE in peaceful public discourse”.
Oh, and just for the record, since none of you know me but seem to have made assumptions simply because I asked questions…
I voted for Reagan… the first time.
I worked on John Warner’s campaign and voted for him more than once.
And I am affiliated with neither the Republican, nor the Democratic party.
Laurel, we may be answering you with a “tone” and sounding defensive. First of all, we get attacked by the Dems and the Establishment Republicans. Maybe we’re quick to assume we’re being attacked. However, you should consider a few things that may confuse the issue.
1) it is much harder to read tone online. In person contact offers more info on the motive of the speaker.
2) Read what you wrote. The part about where you compare us to the original Tea Party…..why, who knows. Seemed angled against us, though. Then you go on to make points for OWS despite your later assertions about not making judgemnts. You know, like the Buffett comment. Kinda sounds like you have your bias already. Then you sound later like a lawyer or apologist for the city arguing one group is a concert and the OWS as real protestors.
I could care less who you say you voted for. If you never become Tea Party that is fine too. That said, your words indicated bias. Which would be fine, but expect spirited debate. Your “tone” did not come across as merely curious. So, I remain suspicious. Clearly, I am not the only one.
If I misread you, that is regretable. We do see plenty of double backing on rhetoric and multiple tactics on Bearing Drift. Seemed to me you were arguing points in addition to “asking questions”.
Britt, I can see your point on the interpretation of “tone”. There is no interpretation of tone needed, however, for the words of Valentinus or some of the profanities used by P. Henry. There is a difference between spirited debate and jr. high level mud slinging. The former can convince people of your point, if it’s a good one. The latter simply convinces people that you have no substance to rely on, so you resort to name calling.
I woke up this morning with another thought. The Tea Party site says that it is non-partisan, yet P. Henry, who seems to be ‘in the know’ with the group said “Just like the Tea Party swept Virginia in 2009 teeing up the landslide of 2010, Virginia will flip the state Senate in 2011 leading the way for the presidential and congressional elections of 2012.”
I haven’t heard of any “Tea Party” candidates, and flipping the senate would indicate a change to Republican control. That seems to boil down to the TP being a wing of the GOP. Curious, for a “non-partisan” group.
laurel, may I invite you to a tea party rally to poll the participants political affiliation? Lotsa activists more furious at Gop than dems.. Just sayin
Most individual observors of the Tea Party and the OWS read their own interpretation into the attitudes and behaviors of the group members. But clearly, the large majority of both groups are in the 99% of americans who are doing much worse than the top 1%. In that sense, they have much in common.
As such, both realize they have been neglected, discarded by a political system bent on protecting wealthy international conglomerates and the super rich who “earn” their keep through investments. No wonder Cantor wants to protect their revenue stream. But in the long run, without an educated and prosperous middle and working class, this nation’s future is at risk.
So now, it comes down to fiscal and economic policy that will create a fairer deal for all. Tax policy is part of that, so is modification of entitlements. But the republicans veto of even consideration of revenue increases puts our nation once again into economic peril.
If reduction of the deficit and debt is really so important, every competent economist has said we can’t get there without a balanced approach; that is, cuts, growth, increased revenue, and entitlement reform. What we need is negotiation and compromise, not partisan rhetoric. Is that too much to ask?
**Sigh….**
James… that is a refreshing piece of information. I hope that it’s true, and not just wishful thinking. It certainly seems contrary to P. Henry’s claim regarding the upcoming election. What I have heard from OWS supporters is that they’re ready to dump ANY politician who doesn’t understand how damaged our society, economy, and government have all become, largely at the hand of big banks, investment bohemiths, huge corps. and their heads, since they have been allowed to run amuck with their businesses and their political influence. It worries me when members of groups that are supposed to be about “we the people” start painting with broad brushes and supporting one party. Clearly, there are and have been leaders of quality in both parties, and there have been leeches who need to be removed in both parties. Each candidate needs to be reviewed based on his or her record, not on the party affiliation. If we all took the time to research before voting, we would probably have a much more effective government in Washington. Ultimately, I lay more of the blame on “we the people” who go to the ballot box uninformed, than I do on Congress (although PLENTY of the blame belongs there). Far too many of us simply pull all of the Republican or Democratic levers, and pay no attention to the qualities (or lack thereof) of the person attached to that lever.
Tim J… why the sigh?
Laurel, Its the unending liberal partisan refrain over the past several years from MB who copies and pastes his posts across multiple threads that continue to blame Republicans, every flavor of the Tea Party, conservative independents, Bush, Cantor and of course Grover Norquist who Mike continues to harangue as the diabolical evil genius and who is all powerful and controlling everything from the House of Representatives down to conservative local politics. Also, Mike feigns outrage at conservatives under female pseudonyms every once in a while when he is trying to provoke us, but he’s not very good at it. However, as JR has acknowledged, Mike is also an asset to this blog because he provokes discussion, anger, disgust, sarcasm and humor from commenter’s which keeps it lively.
Only on this forum would my last post be described as liberal. Fact is, I believe my views are radically centrist which on this forum are described as leftist. Most American citizens now believe that a balanced approach is feasible, possible, and necessary; only the right wing is so dogmatic that it will not act in the interest of 99% of us.
Of course, as these discussions have continued, it is only the radical right fringe that has engaged. Fact is, there are many readers and posters on Bearing Drift who by their absence on this forums, reveal their disgust with some of their conservative brethern who post such ridiculous drivel.
Most of us are pragmatic and want solutions; the republican policy of intrasigence is really getting old, and soon, Cantor and the republican study committee will be forced to compromise, which will really tee off the radical right fringe.
“Fact is, there are many readers and posters on Bearing Drift who by their absence on this forums, reveal their disgust with some of their conservative brethern who post such ridiculous drivel.” Wow, JR has made you a contributor on BD and you now have access to this “inside” info about those of us who participate? I can’t seem to find you under the “Contributors” tab on the BD Home page.
My goodness, Mike. With my extreme drivel going on, there must be something “draconian” going on somewhere. (Inside joke, Laurel)
Interesting approach though alledging that Tea Partiers and Libertarians like me are frustrating the *cough* majority of sensible, mainstream, and big government, and establishment Republicans that you so love.
Of course most people have some shame and realize how bad they look when they regurgitate talking points that are not supported by facts.
I understand why Turbo’s suggestion of “Occupy Runneymede” would disturb you,but does that not drive home the point? You seem to on one hand be ok with people protesting big business when it isn’t yours. It is ok for people to defecate on other people’s or public property……just not yours. It is ok for your potential political allies to camp out for free and never leave. I bet camping out near Runnymede must be wrong in your eyes. GE ok not paying taxes? Geithner still worthy of being Sec. Of Treasury after not paying taxes? Soros is cool with his market manipulation? Oh, but Republicans must follow rules not enforced on Left Wing interests? Again a view supporting unequal application of the law. As bad as Bush was, Obama’s and your flavor of cronyism, winner picking, and hyperspending is not the answer either.
If you want to ratchet up things and name call, we can do that too. Ad Hominem might be wrong, but as you prove, it is quite easy. You’re a commie, extremist and a very wealthy and connected meanie. See? Easy.
So…
Tea Party Protests: $8000 government enforced tax (that actually goes to an Insurance Company)
Occupy Richmond: 0$, but risking enforcement, being arrested by police for illegally staying in the park.
–
If the Tea Party is pro-Freedom of Speech and against excessive Government taxation then they should absolutely be going after Dwight Jones for regulations like these.
The Occupy Richmond movement should support them if they’re against the corrupt marriage of Companies and Government regulations.
I don’t see any reason why the RVA Tea Party and Occupy Richmond wouldn’t be united in this.
“…there are many readers and posters on Bearing Drift who by their absence on this forums (sic), reveal their disgust with some of their conservative brethern who post such ridiculous drivel…”
Dear Lord, I hope that my failure to post on this tread to date hasn’t been interpreted as revealing my disgust, etc. However, P. Henry, can you be more specific about how the Tea Party cleaned any clocks in 2010? My feeble memory is that most of the Tea Party Congressional candidates, particularly in the Senate, went down in flames, costing the Republicans control of the Senate in the process. Not hating, just asking.
HisRoc, Exhibit A: Scott Rigell Tea Party support helped him, hurt Kenny Golden and defeated Glenn Nye.
Turbo,
Exhibit B: Sharron Angle lost the chance to retire Dirty Harry Reid, the most vulnerable Democratic leader in the Congress since Tom Daschle.
Exhibit C: Christine “Bewitched” O’Donnell lost the chance to change Joe Biden’s seat to Republican.
Exhibit D: Joe Miller forced Lisa Murkowski to run a historic write-in campaign to keep her Alaska seat Republican. Unchallenged, Miller would have lost the seat to the Democrat.
Exhibit E: Ken Buck kept Michael Bennet’s seat Democratic in Colorado.
HisRoc,
To be fair, a number of prominent establishment types also went down in flames who weren’t particularly Tea Party sponsored as in CA, WA and CT. The Tea Party sponsored Marco Rubio won in FL over the establishment Crist and the Dem while Rand Paul in KY did the same. Of course Rubio did have good qualifications to run. Not here to defend unqualified Tea party candidates for Senate. The point is that electoral plausibility matters and qualified Tea Party candidates did win. I do wish more Tea Party candidates would think of politics as a ladder rather than a pole vault.
Hisroc, the 2 yr old tea party movement has its share of non establishment successes influencing the outcome of primaries. Candidates who run on a platform of giving the government back to the people found support they could not have been more greatful for. Tell me otherwise..
Val,
Yes, and even a blind squirrel gets an acorn every now and then. I don’t deny that the Tea Party had some success in 2010, but the fact is that only 32% of the Congressional candidates that they supported won in a Republican landslide mid-term. That is not a recipe for success or a harbinger of a new movement. And now Jamie Radtke wants an opportunity to get Tim Kaine elected to the Senate using the same old tired demogoguery as 2010. Hello?
Well Radtke is a pole vaulter not a ladder climber and will suffer a fall. My point is that the more qualified Tea Party candidates mostly won. Your point is that considerably less than half had the necessary qualifications. We’ll shake on that.
Why cherry-pick only the congressional races? Over 600 state seats were flipped in 2010. A *historic* election result.
And for those in “the know”, Sharon Angle was not the candidate of choice of many tea party groups in AZ, for example. Just because you read in the media that a particular candidate is “THE tea party candidate”, you just might want to do some research of your own.
VA Patriot
I’ll be more polite than HisRoc. Just because a Repub even a conservative one won doesn’t mean that they were a Tea Party candidate. Tea party voters had a huge effect but they often voted for the Repub nominee whatever their lineage. Most Repubs ran on anti Obama platforms after all.
BTW Sharon Angle was in NV not AZ so that explains the lack of Tea Party support for her there.
Val,
Yes, Sharon Angle actually ran in Nevada, not Arizona. But that doesn’t stop the Tea Partiers from creating their own revisionist history of the 2010 mid-terms. These people are really pathetic–divorced from reality and believing their own bullshit at the expense of winning elections. Sad.
HisRoc, Tea Party activists are for the most part people who never got involved with politics until they felt they could not ignore the same shitty situation house dems took advantage of when the gop got its clock cleaned in 2006. The reality is they/we want a divorce from GOP/Dem establishment politics as usual. The reality is they/we want non politicians to rise from We The People to protect them/us from career politicians. Richmond Tea Party is a shining example of success because a mixture of people with both non political as well as people with some political experience who had been calling out the well financed crap that goes on out of public view but had to bite their lip.
The interesting thing about Richmond Tea Party is that is became an incubator for citizens who want We The People to challenge career politicians who for the most part own the election process that was never theirs to begin with. The irony is that Tea Party opposition are all too often house republicans.
BooHoo.. That is so unfair to you establishment types isn’t it! Quite a contrast with the OWS (willing democrat cheerleaders) taking their cues from the ruse stealth organized by some teleprompter dependent dem establishment types who are by default promoting more of the same BS promises from the dem leadership.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2010/65_now_hold_populist_or_mainstream_views
“Polling conducted from January 18 through January 24 (2010) found that 76% of voters generally trust the American people more than political leaders on important national issues. Seventy-one percent (71%) view the federal government as a special interest group, and 70% believe that the government and big business typically work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors. On each question, a majority of Republicans, Democrats and unaffiliated voters share those views.”
“Mainstream Americans tend to trust the wisdom of the crowd more than their political leaders and are skeptical of both big government and big business. While Republicans and unaffiliated voters are more likely to hold Mainstream views than Democrats, a majority of those in the president’s party (51%) hold such views.
Only four percent (4%) now support the Political Class. These voters tend to trust political leaders more than the public at large and are far less skeptical about government.” – Rasmussen
You guys are seriously underestimating the leaderless focal group inspired OWS. There’s more behind the “Mike Check” than meets the eye. Ron Paul sees it, too bad the Tea Party is still just dress up dolls.
“…They paid handsomely for the privilege. That the occupiers haven’t done any of this…”
Of course not, the occupier types are freeloaders, they’re parasites on society.
And of course, they have liberal values, just like the Dems and serve as useful idiots.
Lee,
“Liberal values” and “freeloader parasites on society” is redundant.
Turbo,
The Tea Party movement is to be commended for getting uninvolved voters interested and active. My problem with you guys all along has been your unrealistic and inflated sense of worth. You keep trotting out one statistic after another that exaggerates the success and popularity of your movement while achieving very little in tangible political goals. And, when you get right down to the basics, there isn’t much difference between the Tea Party and OWS. Both groups are angry because of a feeling of being disenfranchised and disadvantaged by “The System.” Therefore, the solution is to tear down the system and start over again. Yes, I know, the Tea Party just wants to return our country to its founding Constitutional principles. What a bunch of hooey. What the Tea Party wants to do is to rewrite or erase 220 years of Constitutional History and political evolution, just as OWS wants to fundamentally alter the Constitutional structure of our republic.
Well, guess what? Our system of government is strong enough to withstand radical fringe movements. From the anarchists bomb-throwers of the 18th Century, the Socialists, the Populists, the Communist Party of America, the John Birch Society, to the Utopians and the Hippies, our democracy has tolerated and survived assaults from all extremes. Because that is how a democracy works and, no matter how many BS polls you quote, neither the majority nor history is on your side.
Colleen Owens mentioned in this article. Sounds familiar. Who does she support for US Senate?
Oh, and Rand Paul, quite the pole vaulter. Why didn’t he just follow establishment rules while our country slides down the toilet?
Look guys, you don’t want the competition? DO YOU DAMN FV<K!N JOB AND THERE WON'T BE ANY! All this Tea Party business is just as much GOP fault as the Dems. Reap what you sew. Put up a worthy candidate that can actually beat a Tea Partier. This is your doing. Blame yourselves. Or just let the next liberal Republican like John McCain haved his turn. Just let all the big government Republicans drive us into bankruptcy, but just a little slower than Obama.
Britt,
The expression is “reap what you sow.” It is hard to harvest an embroidery.
Glad you got the point despite the improper spelling, HisRoc.
I reap what my wife sews. I like it that way, she does all the work, Grin.
Of course, you can weep what you sew.
Britt, sorry but I just can’t get my head around the concept of John McCain being a “liberal Republican.” Really?
Britt says “Oh, and Rand Paul, quite the pole vaulter. Why didn’t he just follow establishment rules while our country slides down the toilet?”
Rand Paul had the same (unfair) advantage as Bush43, Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney etc. Name recognition of a close relative. You are making my point.
No weeping involved. On those cold nights here in my truck I get to curl up under the hand made quilt she made for me. I got lucky with her. I know she didn’t marry me for my looks or for my money, so the only plausible explanation left is luck.
Valentinus,
Your point would be more cogent if you didn’t include Hillary. Bill Clinton came from humble beginnings to rise up to be (in my opinion) one fine President. Hillary was First Lady and half the marriage while Bill served in the Oval Office. Hillary is also serving as a pretty good Secretary of State in the Obama Administration.
Yes, really. Nothing that hasn’t been discussed before, HisRoc.
So, name recognition of his father is your excuse, Valentinus? Do you think Ron Paul has the political empire and influence on the party establishment as those others? I think there’s a big difference, there. Ron Paul gets nothing but disrespect. Granted he has a huge nationwide following, but if you’re saying Ron Paul can swing races that big then that is good news for other grass roots efforts like the Tea Party.
Face it, Jamie Radtke’s name ID is rising. She’ll get there. Networks of energized supporters is growing all over Virginia.
“Face it, Jamie Radtke’s name ID is rising. She’ll get there. Networks of energized supporters is growing all over Virginia.”
Now, Britt, that is exactly my point. Wild and exaggerated claims of success and support, despite all evidence to the contrary. Tell you what, let us know when she breaks through 10% in the polls and has more cash on hand than she owes. Then we will get really, really excited. But not much. Meanwhile, keep up the mantra that “establishment Republicans” are plotting against her. Bad news, Britt. What you call “establishment Republicans” is just a majority of right-of-center voters. There is no plot, just a preference. That is how democracy works.
Those Dem saints need to be protected at all costs. How stupid of me LittleDavid. A stint as First Lady and ruining her hubby’s first term was great preparation for the US Senate. I stand corrected. She was an awful Senator by the way tho in her old age she has mellowed a bit into a decent but nothing special Secretary of State. many apologies.
Valentinus,
Depends on your perspective I guess.
Perhaps Hillary provided the leadership at times that was ahead of her times, but the leadership she has provided has been pointing in the right direction.
Perhaps you have not been paying enough attention to international affairs with your judgement of her service as Secretary of State as nothing special. I describe it as brilliant, steadfast and auspicious. I have been paying attention. Others who have been paying attention might seek to condemn her, but she earns my praise.
Little David,
Just a hypothetical here. Other than sharing a bed with the President of the US, what better qualifications did Hillary Clinton have for the US Senate than Jamie Radtke? In fact, by that criteria, isn’t Monica Lewinsky more qualified for the US Senate than Jamie Radtke?
Hisroc,
Just a factual here in opposition to your hypothetical. When did I ever question Jamie Radtke’s right to run for office? I believe this is the first post I have made that includes her name.
LD,
hy·po·thet·i·cal (hp-tht-kl) also hy·po·thet·ic (-thtk)
adj.
1. Of, relating to, or based on a hypothesis: a hypothetical situation. See Synonyms at theoretical.
2.
a. Suppositional; uncertain. See Synonyms at supposed.
b. Conditional; contingent.
n.
A hypothetical circumstance, condition, scenario, or situation: “OK, let’s consider this possibility then, just as a hypothetical.”
I never suggested that you had stated a position on Radtke. I just asked you to compare her qualifications with those of former Senator Clinton whom you apparently admire so much. If you believe that Clinton was qualified to serve in the Senate, then do you consider Radtke equally qualified, given that she also has no elected office experience? How about Monica?
I support Hillary and I oppose Jamie Radtke based on the positions of both.
Any American, even the most lowly amongst us, is qualified to serve. However they can not be allowed to serve without a majority of the vote for them.
“Any American, even the most lowly amongst us, is qualified to serve. However they can not be allowed to serve without a majority of the vote for them.”
Really? Isn’t that how a former army corporal, unemployed artist, and convicted felon from Bavaria became Das Fuhrer?
Crap, I think that I might have invoked Godwin’s Law. Sorry.
I seem to have more confidence in the American electorate then you do. Perhaps the explanation is that we hope for a different outcome.
New question…. I heard that members of the Richmond Tea Party are interested in talking to the Occupy Richmond organizers about joining forces for a protest at the Federal Reserve in Richmond. Any info or thoughts on this?
A blind partisan (no matter the cause) supports their saints. Just what I said, LD.
Laurel,
How about providing the answers and we will provide the questions?
And……HisRoc pulls out the Hitler card on us common folk. Wow. Typical.
I never said anything about a plot. Nothing mysterious about a group of people reponding to competition for the power they have long had and abused.
Laurel, I imagine some would be willing. Auditing the Fed has long been a goal of many.
Valentinus… you’re quite the snarky one, aren’t you? Way to encourage progress and positive change. That IS supposed to be the goal, isn’t it? What does your statement even mean? Some people like to engage in dialogue to get information and form opinions, rather than just sticking to giving a… how did you put it?…. “blind partisan (no matter the cause)” reaction. When you have something constructive to say, feel free to chime in.
Britt… thanks. I think it would be a good thing. The Fed definitely needs a fine tooth comb pulled through it. I asked the question to get thoughts on it, and, as I said, find out if anyone here has any more info on what I heard… especially since some here have indicated a close connection to the RTP. Naturally, some Occupy Richmond folks are dead set against it, but others have the same opinion I do… that where there are common ground issues, it would be better to join forces to try to get results.
There are folks in both camps who are incapable of putting aside biases in order to be constructive, but I think the opposite is true, too. I hope that the more level heads will prevail. Our biggest problem in Congress right now is that too many politicians are behaving like jr. high kids and are incapable of leaving the name calling to the actual 8th graders and participating in civil discourse. Kind of like a few folks I see here.
The tea party started out bashing wall street and their influence on our government. Then they decided to let the AFP do their thinking for them. Now they are back to being good little republicans instead of Americans.
Darrel you ignorant slut http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k80nW6AOhTs , that is false reporting son.
Really? What’s false about it?
Did they not come out against Wall Street and the GOP caving in to the bailouts? Wasn’t that the election year fuss the establishment GOP was freaking out about?
Did the TP not become led around by the nose by the AFP, Freedomworks, and other Koch bottled agendas? Seems I distinctly remember a bunch of old geezers carrying around signs saying “Hands off my social security.” Where are those folks now, in Zuccotti Park?
Hasn’t the tea party finally decided that Cantor, Boner and the boys are right? So right that they are willing to vote for a hard core party insider like George Allen? Face it, the tea party is finished. Otherwise they would be walking the streets against the GOP’s continuing big business BS instead of passively writing patriotic pap on TP blogs no one reads anymore.
Here ya go Darrell.. https://www.facebook.com/pages/TEA-Party-for-George-Allen/193758604035967?ref=ts&sk=wall
I have decided to fall in line like a good republican and drink the koolaid. Thanks for lighting the path bud.
Darrell, either you’re not a Tea Partier or you just have a beef with AFP. If you think Tea Partiers are in love with establishment and not for reform, you haven’t been reading all the fiesty battles here on BD.
The “Too Big to Fail” was a big issue. However, that is over and we can’t fix it. We can occassionally point back at it and we do. What? We should ignore all the current problems we can do something about. We do talk about the Fed, spending, cronyism, not incresing the debt limit, Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae etc. Not sure why you’re having that perception.
Which problems can you fix? The one where state AG’s are pushing a get out of jail card for the banks? The one where 200 years of US property law is being thrown in the trash? How about the one where our bail out money is going to Europe to keep France from going down the tubes? Haven’t seen those on any blog.
Nah, can’t fix those because they are just too big to fail. Houses? Too Big. Jobs? Nope. Cut the deficit? Still bailing out banks.
Well, maybe it’s teeny tiny problems you can fix. Like killing Social Security, or any other item that the GOP thinks are ‘entitlements’. No? Still too big? Maybe get Radtke elected? Fat chance of that. George invented the Tea Party after all. So what relevancy is left for the invincible Tea Party? Can’t be conventions because those are being canceled all over the place now that the deep pockets have changed their funding focus.
I know. They can write an essay on each of their blogs about how they had the chance to effect real change in America. But they blew it.
Ok, property rights isn’t talked about like it was. That doesn’t mean the Tea Party stopped caring. There is some talk about the constitutional amendment on eminent domain, but admittedly national issues are taking center stage.
Bank bailouts and bailout are still an issue. One of Radtke’s issues.
Foreign Aid, to include the bailouts of Europe is always an issue for the Tea Party. Maybe they aren’t barking enough on that for you.
I would think there would be more conventions. As far as rallies, yes they want to go beyond that. Law of diminishing returns and the desire to influence election and run candidates. Ok, if you want to put down Radtke for only raising over 100k last quarter, fine. Still that is still serious money. Certainly better than my Libertarians pull in. Maybe operational focus and financial applications have just changed. I think you’re being overly negative here and paying attention to people posing as Tea Partiers.
The zealots and party extremists on both sides of the aisle just continue on as if the world has not really changed, trying to figure out how they can win and influence change. Meanwhile, the public is getting increasingly agitated that the current system is failing to serve the public interest. Now that corporations rule, and as persons can contribute to campaigns and influence policy, and as money continues to infect media and the body politic, one has to contemplate that fundamental change may be required. With beneficiaries representing 1%, and 99% on the receiving end of declining possibilities, something else is necessary.
So let me get this straight, the Tea Party, which, tea stands for Taxed enough already paid someone how much money? to use a PUBLIC park? ya, that makes sense, and Tea partiers, I just wanna ask, if you are in fact taxed enough already, how do you manage to muster up the money for such rallies in the first place, if you can forge over that much money, I don’t think you have truly been “taxed enough” and really? the Tea party? Pretty sure when tea was thrown off a boat in Boston, they didn’t pay the King money to do it. The occupiers, nor the tea party, should have to pay that much money to take advantages of using a park that they already pay taxes on. While I do not think the occupiers should have created a big mess, they were given 15 minutes to gather up and collect their things before police came and started taking it and then later were greeted with bulldozers. Did the Tea party rally have 15 minutes to clean up? I HIGHLY doubt it. The occupiers are standing up to people like Major Jones, not paying him more money to use a park we pay for anyways in tax dollars, they are standing up for things similar to the teaparty, like justice for people, justice for people who work and and work and work to only make ends meat if that. “School for 12 years, college for 4 years, work till you die, for what? whats not to love?”
Tea party, next time, take a risk, like the founding fathers your name con notates did,and just rally like the occupiers did, you have the right to- see the first amendment.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.