wmw999 2,589 #1 October 5, 2010 The Public Religion Research Institute conducted a survey of roughly 3000 people recently to try to characterize members of the Tea Party from within -- i.e. if someone identified with the Tea Party they were asked about their views and themselves. Top findings about the Tea Party included: they're more likely to be non-hispanic white more supportive of small government report that Fox News is their most trusted news source 81% say they are Christian 47% say they identify as conservative Christians or with the religious right the Tea Party constitutes 11% of the population they track social conservatives, not libertarians, on social issues (e.g. abortion and gay marriage) 76% either identify with or lean towards Republicans More good stuff in there, but it's not looking good for the "mass movement" thing. The founder of the Public Religion Research Institute, Dr. Robert P. Jones is one of six members of the national steering committee for the Religion and Politics Section at the American Academy of Religion and is an active member of the Society of Christian Ethics and the American Association of Public Opinion Research. He holds a Ph.D. in religion from Emory University, where he specialized in sociology of religion, politics, and religious ethics. He also holds a M.Div. from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. (quoted from website). H appears to have invested some pretty serious study time into religion, Christianity in particular, and conservative Christianity as well. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #2 October 5, 2010 Quotethey track social conservatives, not libertarians, on social issues (e.g. abortion and gay marriage) and that's why it won't work it's a repackaging of the other two parties we already have - their social agendas (i.e., where they wish to redistribute the wealth) will eventually take precedence over fiscal responsibility the rest, I don't care as long as they stick with the small government bullet - but right there, I don't believe they will stick to that bullet when the other bullets come into play - no more than I would a left wing movement ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #3 October 5, 2010 QuoteQuotethey track social conservatives, not libertarians, on social issues (e.g. abortion and gay marriage) and that's why it won't work it's a repackaging of the other two parties we already have - their social agendas (i.e., where they wish to redistribute the wealth) will eventually take precedence over fiscal responsibility the rest, I don't care as long as they stick with the small government bullet - but right there, I don't believe they will stick to that bullet when the other bullets come into play - no more than I would a left wing movement They are just fighting over the crumbs left over after a decade of the largest transfer of wealth from Main Street America to Wall Street America!!! Talk about redistribution of wealth... eeesh Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #4 October 5, 2010 I understand the value of surveys and have actually written and run a few myself. Because of that knowledge, however, I refuse to trust any pollster's findings until they show me the questions. It's just too easy to get the answers you want. [/rant] With this gentleman running the poll, well, I'm reminded of the old adage that when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem needs to be solved by smacking it. Or however it goes. (1) OK, so I'm two shades from Casper. You'd never know I've got "tan" "brown" and "red" blood in my family tree. But I do. (2) Yep, I want limited government (the constitution is a good starting point). (3) Sorry, I don't much trust any news source. But when I want to know what might be going on, I range from NYTimes to WashTimes, NPR to MSNBC to FOXNews, Al Jazeera to Jerusalem Post to Japan Today. (4) Eh, I was raised that way (5) Nope. (6) Well you can argue that some folks who identify themselves as Tea Partiers don't actually agree with Tea Party platform, and others do agree with it but wouldn't call themselves Tea Party affiliated. It's what comes with having a new movement that isn't a party that stradles lines between two established parties (only one of which is a part of the "Two Party" system) (7) Nope, and that's where the Tea Party folks need to solidify their position, rather than just generate momentum in a vaguely right side direction. I mean, look at their name. The Boston Tea Party wasn't about social policy, it was about taxes, people's voice (or lack of it) in government, and having a good time protesting a soft target and screwing with somebody else's property. (8) More often than democrats but certainly not exclusive of democrats and third party candicates, and certainly not enough to be called a loyal little Reaganite (even though one or two label slingers here have tried calling me that). edit: spelling and grammarwitty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #5 October 5, 2010 you spoke of a hammer couldnt resist Oh, and the story line is bull shit Just the song is good http://ncwatch.typepad.com/media/2010/08/could-this-be-a-tea-party-theme-song.html"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #6 October 5, 2010 The questions, along with the full report are available from their website. And I don't think they're trying to say that all are like that (obviously not -- you're by no means a down-the-line type of person -- you clearly consider issues), just that they're more so than some would like to think. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #7 October 5, 2010 Seems the name fits. White, stuffy, conservative. Wonder if they insist on a 2 hour work stoppage the middle of every afternoon? But seriously, I'll reserve judgement while waiting to see if they are looking to do something other than politics as usual. Let's see if they are capable of anything more than the usual games (if they win a few seats)." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #8 October 5, 2010 QuoteHe holds a Ph.D. in religion I've always got a kick out of that. If that's a legitimate degree, then so is the study of spells and potions at Hogwarts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #9 October 5, 2010 QuoteQuotethey track social conservatives, not libertarians, on social issues (e.g. abortion and gay marriage) and that's why it won't work it's a repackaging of the other two parties we already have - their social agendas (i.e., where they wish to redistribute the wealth) will eventually take precedence over fiscal responsibility the rest, I don't care as long as they stick with the small government bullet - but right there, I don't believe they will stick to that bullet when the other bullets come into play - no more than I would a left wing movement The only govt. programs that make a significant difference to the deficit are Medicare, Social Security and Defense. I'd like to see a real analysis of the TP's small government position, with details of exactly how they are going to cut these. I suspect a lot of their ardent supporters would defect in a hurry if the TP told the truth.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #10 October 5, 2010 >the rest, I don't care as long as they stick with the small government >bullet - but right there, I don't believe they will stick to that bullet . . . Given the common "I don't want government-run health care, I don't want socialized medicine - and don't touch my Medicare!" sentiment within the Tea Party I'd have to agree. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #11 October 5, 2010 Quote>the rest, I don't care as long as they stick with the small government >bullet - but right there, I don't believe they will stick to that bullet . . . Given the common "I don't want government-run health care, I don't want socialized medicine - and don't touch my Medicare!" sentiment within the Tea Party I'd have to agree. Actually, they don't want the COST of Obamacare - sounds like small government to me. Socialized medicine - sounds like big government to me. Seems like 2 of the 3 are congruent with 'small government' thinking rather than what you allude to.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #12 October 5, 2010 >Actually, they don't want the COST of Obamacare - sounds like small >government to me. So they want their own socialized medicine, but not a different version. To paraphrase the man, "we've already determined they're socialists - now we're just haggling over what kind." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #13 October 5, 2010 Quote Quote >the rest, I don't care as long as they stick with the small government >bullet - but right there, I don't believe they will stick to that bullet . . . Given the common "I don't want government-run health care, I don't want socialized medicine - and don't touch my Medicare!" sentiment within the Tea Party I'd have to agree. Actually, they don't want the COST of Obamacare - sounds like small government to me. Socialized medicine - sounds like big government to me. Seems like 2 of the 3 are congruent with 'small government' thinking rather than what you allude to. WHOOOSHThere was an interesting interview on NPR a couple weeks ago. (I couldn't find it with a quick search) Leaders from 2 different Tea Party groups were interviewed on their vastly different views of how far the group should intrude into people's private lives. One (from El Paso IIRC) was only interested in fiscal policy, while the other (somewhere in Montana IIRC) insisted on imposing his "moral values", including anti-abortion and anti-gay stances."There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #14 October 5, 2010 Quote Quote Quote >the rest, I don't care as long as they stick with the small government >bullet - but right there, I don't believe they will stick to that bullet . . . Given the common "I don't want government-run health care, I don't want socialized medicine - and don't touch my Medicare!" sentiment within the Tea Party I'd have to agree. Actually, they don't want the COST of Obamacare - sounds like small government to me. Socialized medicine - sounds like big government to me. Seems like 2 of the 3 are congruent with 'small government' thinking rather than what you allude to. WHOOOSHThere was an interesting interview on NPR a couple weeks ago. (I couldn't find it with a quick search) Leaders from 2 different Tea Party groups were interviewed on their vastly different views of how far the group should intrude into people's private lives. One (from El Paso IIRC) was only interested in fiscal policy, while the other (somewhere in Montana IIRC) insisted on imposing his "moral values", including anti-abortion and anti-gay stances. I don't think that good ole Montana boy wants any of them commie pinko fags ... to get any of his precious bodily fluids. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #15 October 6, 2010 Quote>Actually, they don't want the COST of Obamacare - sounds like small >government to me. So they want their own socialized medicine, but not a different version. No, they don't ANOTHER one - nice try, though.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #16 October 6, 2010 Quote Quote Quote >the rest, I don't care as long as they stick with the small government >bullet - but right there, I don't believe they will stick to that bullet . . . Given the common "I don't want government-run health care, I don't want socialized medicine - and don't touch my Medicare!" sentiment within the Tea Party I'd have to agree. Actually, they don't want the COST of Obamacare - sounds like small government to me. Socialized medicine - sounds like big government to me. Seems like 2 of the 3 are congruent with 'small government' thinking rather than what you allude to. WHOOOSH Yeah, it seemed to have sailed right over your head given your response. By all means, enlighten me - show me how a position against a trillion dollar boondoggle is somehow 'big government'. Quote There was an interesting interview on NPR a couple weeks ago. (I couldn't find it with a quick search) Leaders from 2 different Tea Party groups were interviewed on their vastly different views of how far the group should intrude into people's private lives. One (from El Paso IIRC) was only interested in fiscal policy, while the other (somewhere in Montana IIRC) insisted on imposing his "moral values", including anti-abortion and anti-gay stances. Guess it's more a grass-roots sentiment than the 'national party' that you try to allude to, then.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #17 October 6, 2010 Opps The story is true Another lib killing free speech http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9B8Yc6EZR0&feature=related"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #18 October 6, 2010 >No, they don't ANOTHER one Fair enough. They prefer their own brand of socialized medicine. "Hell no to socialism! Unless it's for something I like!" Doesn't have nearly the ring to it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #19 October 6, 2010 Quote>No, they don't ANOTHER one Fair enough. They prefer their own brand of socialized medicine. "Hell no to socialism! Unless it's for something I like!" Doesn't have nearly the ring to it. "Their own brand"? Feel free to show where the Tea party is proposing a national healthcare system of their making - you know, something that would make your statement actually be TRUE instead of your normal bullshit smear attempt.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #20 October 6, 2010 >"Their own brand"? Yep. Their medicare. Their medicaid. Stuff _they_ want. Another example: ================== But in follow-up interviews, Tea Party supporters said they did not want to cut Medicare or Social Security — the biggest domestic programs, suggesting instead a focus on “waste.” Some defended being on Social Security while fighting big government by saying that since they had paid into the system, they deserved the benefits. Others could not explain the contradiction. “That’s a conundrum, isn’t it?” asked Jodine White, 62, of Rocklin, Calif. “I don’t know what to say. Maybe I don’t want smaller government. I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security.” She added, “I didn’t look at it from the perspective of losing things I need. I think I’ve changed my mind.” ================== Which just shows you why thinking can be dangerous for Tea Partyers. >something that would make your statement actually be TRUE instead of >your normal bullshit smear attempt. You can just FEEL the rage in your post! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #21 October 6, 2010 Quote There was an interesting interview on NPR a couple weeks ago. (I couldn't find it with a quick search) Leaders from 2 different Tea Party groups were interviewed on their vastly different views of how far the group should intrude into people's private lives. One (from El Paso IIRC) was only interested in fiscal policy, while the other (somewhere in Montana IIRC) insisted on imposing his "moral values", including anti-abortion and anti-gay stances. That's what I was talking about. It seems like the only consistent thing across the Tea Party is the anti-incumbent sentiment. The really is no message across the movement. Then again, maybe they took a play out of Obama's playbook: promise what sounds good in the most vague terms and let folks use their own desires to fill in the blanks. It worked for him, it looks like it'll work for them (except where they picked damaged goods as the candidate). Too bad "Hope" "Change you can believe in" and "Yes we can!" were already taken. Otherwise the Tea Party could use them. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #22 October 6, 2010 Quote>"Their own brand"? Yep. Their medicare. Their medicaid. Stuff _they_ want. Stuff already existing and not something THEY came up with, like you implied? Stuff they're already paying for that isn't going away? Yeah, imagine that. QuoteAnother example: ================== But in follow-up interviews, Tea Party supporters said they did not want to cut Medicare or Social Security — the biggest domestic programs, suggesting instead a focus on “waste.” Some defended being on Social Security while fighting big government by saying that since they had paid into the system, they deserved the benefits. Others could not explain the contradiction. “That’s a conundrum, isn’t it?” asked Jodine White, 62, of Rocklin, Calif. “I don’t know what to say. Maybe I don’t want smaller government. I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security.” She added, “I didn’t look at it from the perspective of losing things I need. I think I’ve changed my mind.” ================== Which just shows you why thinking can be dangerous for Tea Partyers. Another bill smear on conservative thought - how (un)surprising. From Tea Party Patriots: "Fiscal Responsibility: Fiscal Responsibility by government honors and respects the freedom of the individual to spend the money that is the fruit of their own labor. A constitutionally limited government, designed to protect the blessings of liberty, must be fiscally responsible or it must subject its citizenry to high levels of taxation that unjustly restrict the liberty our Constitution was designed to protect. Such runaway deficit spending as we now see in Washington D.C. compels us to take action as the increasing national debt is a grave threat to our national sovereignty and the personal and economic liberty of future generations. Constitutionally Limited Government: We, the members of The Tea Party Patriots, are inspired by our founding documents and regard the Constitution of the United States to be the supreme law of the land. We believe that it is possible to know the original intent of the government our founders set forth, and stand in support of that intent. Like the founders, we support states' rights for those powers not expressly stated in the Constitution. As the government is of the people, by the people and for the people, in all other matters we support the personal liberty of the individual, within the rule of law. Free Markets: A free market is the economic consequence of personal liberty. The founders believed that personal and economic freedom were indivisible, as do we. Our current government's interference distorts the free market and inhibits the pursuit of individual and economic liberty. Therefore, we support a return to the free market principles on which this nation was founded and oppose government intervention into the operations of private business. " Not seeing anything in there about getting rid of Medicare or SocSec. From Tea Party: "Illegal Aliens Are Here illegally. Pro-Domestic Employment Is Indispensable. Stronger Military Is Essential. Special Interests Eliminated. Gun Ownership Is Sacred. Government Must Be Downsized. National Budget Must Be Balanced. Deficit Spending Will End. Bail-out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal. Reduce Personal Income Taxes A Must. Reduce Business Income Taxes Is Mandatory. Political Offices Available To Average Citizens. Intrusive Government Stopped. English As Core Language Is Required. Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged. Common Sense Constitutional Conservative Self-Governance" Not seeing anything in there about getting rid of Medicare or SocSec, either. Gotta love leading questions about things that are evidently NOT in any platform for the Tea Party that I can see. Sorta like your post.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #23 October 6, 2010 QuoteOpps The story is true Another lib killing free speech http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9B8Yc6EZR0&feature=related I never said it wasn't, that was Wendy, but I think she meant the story in the song, not the story about the writer. But the thing is I don't think anyone stifled free speech. The guy said what he had to say. Some folks didn't like it. The cold hard truth is tht actions have consequences. Do you want a teacher in schools that has starred in pornos? Been part of hard lining Wahabi madrasa? Which actions push your buttons is dependant on the audience. Of course I didnt see or hear any racism. I don't see the big problem. But he said what he wanted to say. No one silenced him. He has a right to free speech. He doesn't have a right to keep his job of he breaks a rule or posses off the school board. Same as CNN firing dirty Ricky Sanchez. No one stopped him from saying his piece, but he has to deal with the fallout.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #24 October 6, 2010 >Stuff already existing . . . Yep. Like the Obama health care legislation. Let's take a look at the positions you list: >A constitutionally limited government, designed to protect the blessings of >liberty, must be fiscally responsible or it must subject its citizenry to high >levels of taxation that unjustly restrict the liberty our Constitution was >designed to protect. Cool idea! Let's see how tea partyers embody that: ========================== WILLIAM YARDLEY Published: September 3, 2010 FAIRBANKS, Alaska — The man with the best chance of becoming the next senator from Alaska lives at the end of a long gravel road here at the edge of the continent. Tribulation Trail is the name of his street. . . . Mr. Miller, 43, whose stunning defeat of Senator Lisa Murkowski in Alaska’s Republican primary makes him the favorite to win her seat in this heavily Republican state, has devoted much of his life to institutions and isolation. He comes across as a self-confident iconoclast but wraps his message in the Constitution, and his résumé contains elements of conformity: West Point. Yale Law School. State magistrate. Federal magistrate. . . . Even as Mr. Miller vows to drastically scale back the size and spending of the federal government, he has spent much of his life in some form of government employment or service. The military helped educate him. At one point in 2002, he worked simultaneously as an acting state district judge and a part-time federal magistrate. For seven years, until last September, he worked part time as a salaried assistant attorney for the Fairbanks North Star Borough, roughly equivalent to a county government. One of his biggest cases involved successfully extracting higher tax revenues from the companies that own the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. “I would certainly regard the work I did as successful with the Trans-Alaska Pipeline cases,” Mr. Miller said in an interview at his law office here. His work with the borough allowed him to complete a master’s degree in economics from the University of Alaska. “We paid his tuition,” said Rene Broker, the borough attorney who first hired him and later accepted his resignation. He worked 20 hours a week for the borough, enough to receive health care benefits for his family of 10, though he drew the bulk of his income from his private practice. ================== So - Joe Miller. Wants lower taxes. Unless his law firm is paid to extract higher taxes from companies. Let's look at another one: >Bail-out And Stimulus Plans Are Illegal. Fair enough. Do Tea Partyers really support this? This time let's take Glenn Beck. He's a staunch Tea Party supporter, and recently said "we've had enough. We're going to set things right. The tea party finds itself in the position where it is the beginning of the end of the establishment." Cool. So he must oppose the bailouts, right? After all, he said as much last year: "Bush started the bailouts. Yes, he did. I hated him for it." But wait - what did he actually say when Bush first started the bailouts? "I thought about it an awful lot this weekend, and while it takes me -- it takes everything in me to say this, I think the bailout is the right thing do. The 'Real Story' is that the $700 billion that you're hearing about now is not only, I believe, necessary, it is also not nearly enough, and all of the weasels in Washington know it." But keep defending them; they can use all the help they can get. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #25 October 6, 2010 QuoteQuote Not seeing anything in there about getting rid of Medicare or SocSec, either. Gotta love leading questions about things that are evidently NOT in any platform for the Tea Party that I can see. Sorta like your post. Compared with medicare, social security and defense, the rest is peanuts. They simply CAN'T cut the size of govt significantly unless they go after those. That's why they are so vague on the details. ST. Thomas Aquinas must be spinning.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 1 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0